Hey on Article XX: Of the Authority of the Church

At the time of the Reformation, some of our countrymen were desirous (as we have often oc- casion to observe) of departing farther from the Church of Rome than we have done, and others wished not to go so far. The Reformers had, on this account, a difficult task to execute. The Puritans hated the Church of Rome, and every thing that seemed to characterize it; but some, though they saw the errors of Popery, retained their prejudices in favour of those things, which implied no error or impiety. The Reformers wished to comply with both, as far as they might

lawfully. The difficulties arising in this mn; di

did not relate so much to important matters, as to things indifferent in their own nature, as cere- monies and habits, or what might be called ceremonies, in a large sense.

The aversion of the Puritans to appointed cere- monies, &c. seems to have been on two grounds ; as Popish, and as profaning worship by the intro- duction of the fine“ arts. Indeed the application of music, painting, &c. to religious worship, is itself rather Popish ; but independently of that, the Puritans were void of what we call taste and elegance. The three ceremonies they chiefly ob- jected to, were, the sign of the Cross in Baptism, the wearing of surplices, and kneeling at the Sacra- ment of the Lord’s Supper. These have been called the three“ nocent ceremonies; only by way of opposition, I suppose, to innocent. Indeed all these savoured of Popery; the last, as keeping up the 1dea of the Mass. But the Puritans always petitioned against Organs*, and were enemies, I think, to pictures and images. The rights of Toleration were not allowed till the Revolution“; and therefore Puritans, though enemies to the Church of England in many respects, were mem- bers of it, and Ministers: they were forced to complain and dispute; separation was not a thin ealy to be accomplished ; otherwise disputes would have been more rare.

One dispute related immediately to this twen- tieth Article: the question was, whether the ir/ | clause

2 Book 111. Chap, xv. Sect. x.

d See John Burges, page 28. mentioned in Hampton Court Conference. Neal. Index.

© Convocation of 1562; in Neal, 1. 119, &c. Strype, and others. |

4 Book 111. Chap. x1v. Sect. xv.

ö ; [ [ £ ! j

84 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT, 1.

clause was genuine or surreptitious*©? It is a curious question : to read Neal’s account, one would think it must be spurious ; yet Bennet, in his Essay, has arguments on the other fide, which appear to me the stronger. In King Edward’s articles the clause is not; but in the fifth of those articles there is something relating to the subject, which is omitted if our sixth ; (the corresponding Article). When the Bishops in 1562 were to sign the Articles re- vised, a copy seems to have been prepared for them to sign before they met, from King Edward’s; but when they met, they seem to have made several alterations in it, and then to have signed it. Yet, though they signed it, they did not make it a Record, because after the signature, they agreed upon the clause in question : And as it was not a record, the Archbishop kept it in his own private custody, and left it to Benet College, —Ar last a fresh paper was signed, which had the clause in question; and this was lodged regularly, as a Record, in the Register’s Court of Canterbury, from whence Archbishop Land had a copy on his trial, in 1637.

The Bishops also ordered the Articles with the Clause to be printed: yet there are some printed copies which have not the clause; but Bennet argues, that such are spurious, if in English, and that those in which it is found, are genuine: the

Records

© See Neal, 1. 118. and Bennet’s E ay, passim. — Also © Priest» craft in Perfection, Cambr. Bb—19—47. and Bennet’s Answer

to it in his Preface to his Essay: addressed to Anthony Collins,

_ Efq. the Infidel.

From the Life of Peter Heylin it appears, that he kept his at for D. D. at Oxford on the clause, taking its genuineness for granted. —Strype’s Annals, Chap. 28.

Heylin’s short account (page 19, Life of Laud) agrees, I think, with this, 0 MN | f |

BOOK IV. 1. 85

Records were burnt in the* great Fire of London in 1666,—This question is now merely historical ; for by an Act of Parliament made in 1662, all the Clergy are obliged to sign a copy, in which this clause is contained.

The matter about the power of the Church, with regard to ceremonies, got mixed with a disput$ how far the Civil Magistrate“ could enjoin ob- servances for religious societies, in matters indif- ferent : the Puritans Aways held, that the Church was independent of the state; and few saw, that when the Magistrate used a coercive power in spi- ritual matters he used it as the Ally of the Church, as far as he acted without any view of securing the State. However in this twentieth Article we have nothing about the Civil Magistrate: nor has the thirty-seventh, Of the Civil Magistrates,” any mention of rites and ceremonies.

In the time of King Edward VI. there was a great controversy about the Habits of the Priests and Bilhops. The Puritans found them Popish and fine, others thought them recommendatory of religion; and considering the poverty of some of the Clergy, almost necessary for decency. Bishop Hooper had lived at Zurich, and perhaps had there contracted a love of plainness and simplicity ; and Swiss ideas of Church-government. He refused the Bishopric of Gloucester because he could not be consecrated and appear at Court, and in his Diocese, without wearing some habits which he esteemed to be Popish; but his refusal was not ad- mitted ; he was imprisoned some months: either in his own House or in the Fleet Prison, and treated with great rigour; at last a compromise

was

E Vol. 2. page 209.—Introd. to Book 1v. Sect. Iv. * Neal, 1. 95—98. always quarto.

F 3

—

LY [ :

— —— I

j ,

86 BOOK IV. 1.

was adopted, and he became a Prelate. He was a person of great worth, and very instrumental in completing the Reformation.

It is not to be concluded from what has been said, that the Puritans really wished religious society to have little power ; their view was rather, to pre- went those particular ceremonies from being en- joined, which they saw the Church of England was, at the time, most likely to adopt; and to make Scripture a guide in! every thing: though, think, scripture was, at bottom, rather a pre- text for refusing, than the ground of making re-

ulations.

The Romanists, however, were for requiring an implicit obedience to the Church: such an obe- dience, as if the Church of Rome was in fact, what the Church of Christ is in Theory, without spot, or wrinkle, or any * such thing.” Dr. Mid- dleton, in the Preface! to his Letter from Rome, gives us a passage from a Popish writing called ‘the Catholic Christian,” which may answer our purpole : the subject is Transubstantiation. The unerring authority of the Church has declared it to be true, and enjoined the belief of it;“ after such a decision—“ it is the part of an Infidel rat her than a Christian, to ask, how can this be?” —The Papists have said, that the Church is even superior to® Scripture : how? because the Church judges what is scripture; there have been many spurious writings pretending to be Scripture; these the Church rejects, keeping only such as are ge- nuine and authentic : but have they any right to

settle

i Warburton’s Alliance, 1. 4. page 46, Svo. Edit. 1766.

Note. | « Eph. v. 27. 1 P. bexvii. m Gilpin’s Life of Wickliff, page 61, 62,

BOOK Iv. ART. xx. s Er. II. 87

settle those as scripture which are not genuine and authentic ?—and when they have accepted any thing as scripture, does it govern them, or they it?—the moment any writing has an existence as scripture, it is superior to them.—Here we close - our History.

11. Our first remark in the way of Explanation, 15, that we should conceive our Article to be di- vided into wo paragraphs, the first against Puri- tans, the second against Papisis. Puritans are oppoled as setting aside all use of human prudence | in Mg the means of exercising social reli-

gion; Papists, as aiming to advance human au- thority above the word of God. In this matter, our Church seems to say, let us avoid both ex- Iremes. |

&* The Church,” —how does this expression suit what was said under the preceding Article? does it mean wvi/ible, catholic, particular, church? or what ?—that is left to be decided by the state of things. If all Christians are united, it means the Catholic church, of one generation; if not, it means any particular church, which can properly be called a church; it means any society of Chris- tians, as far as they constitute a legitimate church. In what part of such society the government {should be lodged, whether it should be of a mo- narchical or democratical form, 1s left undeter- mined.

« Hath power.” — Power here means rightful power; no uncommon ule of the word; what is more commonly called authority, and perhaps more accurately; for a Tyrant may often have power to do that, which he has no right to do; that is, no authority: but © authority” comes immediately afterwards in another sense,

| F 4 | & Tg

88 BOOK IV. ART. xx. SECT. 11.

; * To decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in . controversies of faith.” Here * authority” means only weight or influence; which is not a wrong use of the word. — This latter influence, here called authority, is much less than the former, here called power. It may be proper for you to respect a per- son’s judgment, when he has no right to insist on your obedience. The expression, ** 1n controver- fees of faith,” —1mplies, that you are not expected to give up your judgment to the judgment of the Church, except in doubtful and difficult points. But is the meaning, that your church is to com- mand you with regard to a/l ceremonies whatever? —yes, it seems as 1f private judgment should com- ply, in matters indifferent: and if fo, you are not accountable while you think it right to continue a member. Respectful expostulations might be made; and if at last, much folly or superstition” remained, a separation might be allowed : but the effect of ceremonies depends upon unifor- mity* :—and you should be sure you can meet with better ceremonies than those you quit. Cere- monies might be taken in a large sense, including Liturgies, &c, —Though the Governors of the church are not to submit to your judgment im- mediately, yet after you have obeyed, they are finally to be accountable to the ordinary members, for the use of any discretionary power entrusted to them. What tollows, limits the power of ap- pointing ceremonies ; | And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s word written ;”— some things that next occur in our Article seem self. evident; but they probably mean to guard against abule, and against excess of that deference, which

• „

—

} k j { [ U

— —

• • 1 2 * p , LE «

„ . HEE

, — — vc ——— * : * a GEE ITT

2 See Powell, page 27. top. © Book 111. Chap. Iv. Set, 13.

BOOK IV. AR r. xx. SECT. 111. 89

which ought to be paid to the Church in difficult doctrines.

Indeed, if each private man is to judge whether an ordinance recommended by the Church is con- trary to scripture, or whether any doctrine makes one part of scripture to contradict another, or is over and above scripture, there is but little danger of abuse :—but the meaning seems to be, that the Church has no right, © ought” not to decree such things; though, if it does, it should be respected, and perhaps sometimes obeyed; still the rules here laid down might be the ground of calling eccle- siastical governors to account, and, in the end, of proposing and effecting a Reformation.

A keeper of Holy writ,” refers to Rom. iii. 2. and ix. 4.—lI conceive them to be allusions; but the only thing of any moment is, that * , the scriptures, the Church ought * not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of Salvation,” ceremonies are generally something ** beides“ the {criptures, and the church can enforce them; but then they are not “anything to be believed.” — Some motions too may be implied in ceremonies ?, or forms, but then they are not to be enforced as necessary d to Salvation. Puritans would have no- thing to be enforced, either to be believed or done,

which is © besides” the Scriptures. —It should be

recollected, that we had a great deal about Tradi-

tions under the sixth Article.

111. The next thing is the Proof. — We might have three propolitions,

Iv. Each

This seems the meaning of that part of the 5th Article of 1552, which is omitted in our 6th Article.

4 Necessary to Salvation; the thing to which this was opposed, seems to be, received of the faithful as godly, and profitable for comeliness.” Article 5 of 1552, |

al # 4 ‘s ’*

— EI—_

—ü—ü— >

—

— q — —

—

[…] 2 […] —

[1 a i” ’ #

90 BOOK IV. v.

Iv. Each society must provide means of an- fwering the ends of its institution.—In religious Society the general end 1s the promoting of reli- gious sentiments”, In Christian society some means are prescribed by divine authority; namely, scrip- tural doctriues and sacraments : but means are to be devised of using these means; something must at last be left to the wisdom of the Church. I can- not but consider this as self-evident. The puri- tanical idea, that a church 1 is not like other Socie- ties, or that nothing 1s to be settled and fixed for a church but what is found in Scripture, seems totally impracticable; no meeting of Disfenters* could ever be carried on without arranging several things not specified in Scripture. The directions are general, as 1 Cor. xiv. 40.—lt is impossible that this precept should be obeyed without the 1nter- vention of many other observances not mentioned. Tell a set of men to write themes for a prize; there must be pens, ink and paper, &c. and the art of writing and spelling must have been learned. If the Zews* had some liberty, whose religion was confined to one people, and the ceremonials of which made so essential a part of it, what liberty may not Christians expect, whole religion is to be exercised amidst all the variety of customs of all Nations!

v. In dofrines, to be believed, the judgment of the Church ought to have great weight, espe- cially with all its ordinary members.—This was insisted on in the second * book, where men were divided into Philosophers and People and it seems

unavoidable.

r Book 111. Chap. 111.

Tucker to Kippis, page 19.

t Burnet, Matt. xxiil. 2 3. the things not to be left undone, were not Mosaical: mostly, if not all, traditional.

u Book 11, Chap. iv, Sect. 111, Iv.

BOOK IV, vI. vII. 91

unavoidable. Those who pretend to avoid it, do“ not, and cannot“.

vi. In doctrines, if anything is imposed by the Church as necessary to salvation, it need not be received as such, if it be not contained in Scripture. — This was in the sixth Article.

VII. What remains must be proposed as Ap- plication.

A new form of Asent seems unnecessary :—But mutual concessious may be worth considering.— Some Diflenters have declared, that whilst the first clause of our twentieth Article continues in force, there is no possibility of a reconciliation *: Yet, let not anything be neglected which seems likely to weigh with, a man of real candour.— Mistakes seem to have been made, both by those in power, and those out of power. The first have taken for granted that things indifferent in their nature might be enforced without difficulty; the second, that because an aversion was real, it was rational and invincible. —But in the first place men in power should be aware of the strength of prejudice; or of association of ideas: to lee its force, we need only ask any man whether he should chuse to see any of the vessels which com- monly receive the evacuations of the human Body, used at a feast to drink out of; or, if he be a man of piety, in the most solemn rites of reli- gion? Yet what more indifferent, as to right and wrong, than shape ?—And in the next place, those who are called to comply and obey, are not always without blame: they are too apt to neglect the

result

• Tucker to Kippis, page 43, 44.

One chief reason urged by a Fellow of a College, for turn- ing Papist, was, I have heard, that so little respect was paid to the Church of England by its ordinary members,

= Tucker to Kippis, page q.

92 BOOK Iv. ART, XX. SECT. VII.

[…] —

result of experience with regard to curing preju- dices which at first feel incurable. To raise a prejudice in favour of anything, affociate it with some good. I have hated a certain kind of food; in very great hunger I eat of it; my pain was relieved, and that kind of food got associated in my mind with the pleasure of the relief; J have relished it ever since. Now mutual concessions in case of ceremonies, &c. should consist in mutual compliances; thole who have authority should be tender about enforcing; those who are to obey, should labour to lessen their averfions; so might the contending parties meet in fome middle point,

This is applicable to fine arts: those who have a taste for them, ought not to act as if all men had the same: and those who are insensible to them, ought to be aware, that men may differ in imaginations as well as in senses or intellects; and therefore ought in some measure to comply; for the fake of others.

Bishop Warburton, in his Alliance“ of Church and State, mentions the judgment of foreign divines in the question about habits. It was this. That the Puritans ought to conform, rather than make a schism: and that the Church-men ought to indulge the others scruples, rather than hazard one.” —* A wile decision,” adds Warbur- ton, “and reaching much farther, in religious matters, than to the single case to which it was applied.” He means, probably, that the prin- ciples of mutual concessions respecting ceremonies, ought to make men candid in matters of faith.

With regard to matters of faith, Dr. Du Pin“ says, that the Church certainly has not * the

power

• Warburton’s Alliance, page 314, octavo, B. iii. Chap. z. d Appendix to Mosheim, as before.

EEE. = 66 ap = vc

a _—— = ow 4 […] . U —— ——

—— —

« — ER […] —

—

F

BOOK IV. ART. xx. SECT. VII. 93

power of ordaining anything that 1s contrary to the word of God; but he says, it must be taken for granted that the Church will never do this in matters, quæ fidei Substantiam evertant.”

I need not endeavour to suggest any Improve- ment, after what has been said on the subject of improving religious Societies 1n the last chapter of the third Book®,

© Book 111. Chap. xv. Sect. x11.

— . […] ey […] Ä

— cv a —

CAE - 3

_

—

— CY

—

a ! b | L q = U 144 by » . ;