Maclear and Williams on Article XXVI: Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacrament

Neuertheless, it apparteyneth to the discipline of the Churche, that en- quirie be made of euyl ministres, and that they be accused by those that haue knowledge of their offences : and finally, beyng founde gyltie by iust iudgement, be deposed.

i. Connection. If the Sacraments are ” not only

badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession,” but “sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace,” the important question arises, ” Does their efficacy depend on the worthi- ness of him who ministers them ” ? It is to this question

30Q

that the Article, which we have now to consider, contains an answer.

ii. Object. It was necessary to give an answer to it, for not a few in the sixteenth century1 made the validity of the Sacraments depend on the worthiness of those who ministered them, and some Anabaptists declined to come to the celebration of the Holy Eucharist on the ground of the questionable lives of those who celebrated at the altar2. This, however, was only a revival of early errors, for the Novatians ascribed the efficacy of the Sacraments to the character of the Minister, and the Donatists3 refused to recognise the Ordination of Caecilian by Felix of Apthonga on the ground that he had during persecution delivered up the sacred books and vessels. These ideas were revived again and again during the Middle Ages in consequence of the corrupt lives of many ecclesiastics, and were held by the adherents of Arnold of Brescia, the Vaudois4 and the less informed followers of Wiclif and Huss5.

iii. Origin. In its original shape the present Article formed the conclusion of the Fifth of the Thirteen Articles of 1538, and is expressed almost in the selfsame words. The Fifth of these Thirteen Articles in its turn derived6 at

2 The Reformatio Legit7ii speaks of the hand of the unworthy celebrator, Anabaptists, who separated from the but in the mouth of the worthy Lord’s Table on the plea that they communicant ; that a bad priest could were deterred “vel ministroram im- not absolve; that it was better to probitate vel aliorum fratrum.” Cf. confess to a pious laic than to a Alley, Poore Man’s Librarie, i. 242 b. wicked clergyman.” Bp Forbes, On

specially mentions the Donatists and 5 Their views led at the time of the

others like them, “qui negabant Iicere Reformation to the idea not that the

populo uti ministerio malorum in beneficial effect only, but the reality

Ecclesia, et sentiebant ministerium also of the Sacrament depended on

malorum inutile et inefficax esse.” the interior disposition, and the faith

Syllo^e Confusionum, p. 171. of him to whom the Sacrament was

• ” The Vaudois maintained that administered,

priests in mortal sin could not con- 6 The Fifth of the Thirteen Articles

least some expressions from the Sixth and Seventh of the Augsburg series, though in other respects it departed considerably from that confession1.

iv. Analysis. The Article lays down the following propositions : — That

(a) The Sacraments have an objective value in virtue of their institution by Christ and the promise He has annexed to them, and therefore they do not depend for their efficacy on the character of the Minister ;

(/3) The Clergy, who minister them, do so, not in their own name, but in the name of Christ ;

(7) The Grace of God’s gifts is not “diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them ; which be effectual, because of Christ’s institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men2” ;

(8) Nevertheless the exercise of godly discipline as regards evil ministers is an absolute duty on the part of the Church, which she cannot put aside.

v. The Teaching of Holy Scripture in reference to the above points is quite clear. Our Lord Himself, the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls (1 Pet. ii. 25), laid it

of 1538 runs, ” Et quamvis in Ecclesia promissionem et ordinationem Christi,

…mali sint bonis admixti, atque etiam etiamsi per waAwexhibeantur.” Hard-

ministeriis verbi et sacramentorum wick, Hist. Art. p. 264. Ed. 1859.

[…]

minislrent non suo sed Chr

[…]

ministerio uti, tarn in verbo audiendo Can. 7. “Si quis dixerit, non dari

quam in rccipiendis sacramentis, juxta gratiam per hujusmodi sacramenta

illud: ‘Qui vos audit, me audit.’ Nec semper et omnibus, quantum est ex

per eorum ma/itiam minuitur effectus, parte Dei, etiam si rite ea suscipiant,

aut gratia donorum Christi rite acci- sed aliquando et aliquibus: anathema

pientibus; sunt enim efficacia propter sit.”

31!

down again and again that in the visible Church the evil would ever be mingled with the good. He warned His Apostles that the tares would be mixed with the wheat (Matt. xiii. 30), the sheep with the goats (Matt. xxv. 32), the good fish with the bad (Matt. xiii. 47, 48), the good grain with the chaff (Matt. iii. 12), the fruitful with the un- fruitful branches of the vine1 (John xv. I sqq.). To expect therefore perfection of the Ministers of Christ’s Sacraments is to expect what cannot be realized in this mortal life2, and no care and pains will infallibly prevent evil and depraved men from joining the most holy societies. More- over our Lord Himself bade His disciples do whatever the Scribes and Pharisees bade them, not because they were themselves good men, but because they sat in Moses’s seat (Matt, xxiii. 2, 3), and thus held an acknowledged official position, and He Himself had to bear with a Judas amongst His own Apostles. But as no one would be justified in refusing to accept Apostolic doctrine because one traitor was found in the original Apostolic College, so to reject the Sacraments because of the personal short- coming of the Minister thereof, would be to acknowledge that they did minister in their own name, and not by Christ’s institution, commission, and authority, and to introduce disastrous confusion. In direct opposition to this the Apostles teach not that holiness in the Minister, but that God’s blessing on his Ministry, is the cause of blessing to the Church and to human souls. They remind their

1 S. Paul also compares the Church Baptism at all impaired by the life of to a great house, in which are not the priest.” Horn. viii. in i Cor. only vessels of gold and of silver, but Gregory of Nazianzum maintains that also of wood and of earth, and some “the Baptism of Peter is no better unto honour, and some unto dishonour than that of Judas, and he illustrates (2 Tim. ii. 20). his assertion by the fact that a seal

2 ” God sometimes works,” writes of iron gives as perfect an impression S. Chrysostom, “even by those who as a seal of gold.” Oral, de Baft. are unworthy ; nor is the Grace of

converts that Paul may plant and Apollos water’1, but it is God that giveth tlie increase (i Cor. iii. 6, 7), and that, great and glorious as is the Christian Ministry, yet the treasure is in earthen vessels, to the intent that the greatness of the power way be of God and not of men2 (2 Cor. iv. 7).

vi. Ecclesiastical Discipline. Still, while the Article has a side of comfort3, for it would indeed be overwhelming if the validity of the Sacraments were to depend upon the personal character of the Minister, yet it has also a side of warning as to the necessity of seeing that those, who minister in holy things,. be themselves men of holiness, and as to the need of godly discipline to secure this end. The Scripture testimony on this point is unmistakeable. (a) The Old Testament teaches us that even under a typical Dis- pensation the Lord would be sanctified in them that come nigh Him (Lev. x. 3), and would have His priests clotlted with righteousness (Ps. cxxxii. 9), and the judgments which fell upon two of the sons of Aaron (Lev. x. 1, 2) for offering strange fire before the Lord, and on the sons of Eli for their immoral living (1 Sam. iv. 10, 11), attest the purity of life required of those who ministered to the Lord in holy things even under the Old Covenant. (/3) Similarly the New Testament gives special instructions as regards the disci- pline of the Clergy, and S. Paul in the Pastoral Epistles enforces stringent rules as to laying hands hastily on no

1 ‘Eyw {(purei’tra, ‘AttoXXus (Trbriaev, progress; we dispense it to the AW 6 debs Ti}$(ive)i = (God was giving people ; but we bear it, not in vessels the increase). “Observe the force of of gold and silver— like those in the imperfect, implying a continual which the treasures of earthly con- bestowing of divine grace, as dis- querors is borne — but in vessels of tinguished from the transitory acts of clay ; in order that the excellency of His Ministers, Paul and Apollos, the power of what we dispense in the whose operations are described by Ministry of the Word and Sacraments the aorists, iQvrevaa., ivbTiaev.” Bp may be, and be seen to be, of God, C. Wordsworth in loc. and not of men.” Bp C. Wordsworth

2 “We,” says the Apostle, “carry on 2 Cor. iv. 7.

the treasure of Christ; we bear it 3 F. D. Maurice, Sermon on the through the world in its triumphal xxxix. Articles.

man1 (1 Tim. v. 22). He also directs that, while Timothy must not rashly receive an accusation against an elder, yet he must reprove in the sight of all, them that sin2, that the rest also may be in fear (1 Tim. v. 19, 20), and thus exercise that ecclesiastical discipline, which all ages of the Church have acknowledged to be part of her duty.

vii. The Doctrine of Intention. As regards the doctrine laid down by the Council of Trent that on the part of the Minister of any Sacrament ” there is required the intention at least of doing what the Church does3,” it will be sufficient to quote the words of Hooker. ” What a man’s private mind is,” he writes, ” as we cannot know, so neither are we bound to examine ; therefore always in these cases the known intent of the Church generally doth suffice, and where the contrary is not manifest, we may presume that he which outwardly doth the work, hath inwardly the purpose of the Church of God4.” The “known intent ” of the English Church to do what the Church does is plain from the words of the preface to our services of Ordination5. Where we have the external conditions of validity for a Sacrament6, a right form and matter, and

1 Xeipas rax^ws jt?j5eei imrlBei, Concil. Trident. Sess. vii. Can. 1 1. I Tim. v. 22. Manns cilo nemini 4 Hooker, Eccl. Pol. v. 58, 3. iwposueris, Vu\g. ” Indisputably the b “And therefore, to the intent most ancient interpretation of these that these orders (the old orders of words is the imposition of hands in Or- the Church, Bishops, Priests, and dination, 7repi \upoTovovvTuv, Chrys., Deacons) may be continued, and Bp Ellicott in loc. So also Bp Pear- reverently used and esteemed in the son, Minor Works, ii. p. 385, and the Church of England,” the English first collect for the Ember Weeks, Church provided a proper Minister, ” lay hands suddenly on no man.” and a proper rite, valid in “matter

2 Toi)s atiapT&vovTas, persislentes in and form.” See below under Article peccato. “Those irpeafifrrepoi, who xxxvi.

sin and continue in sin, and are known 6 Canon Estcourt allows that “the to continue in sin ; rebuke them before intention requisite for the valid ad- all.” Bp C. Wordsworth in loc. ministration of a sacrament is the

[…]

3M

Minister, there “no spiritual disqualification, whether in understanding or morals, on the part of the administrator, is a bar to the validity of the rite, and this because of the great principle that the giver of the grace is not the minister, but the Holy Spirit1.” To go beyond the known intent of the Church, and to enquire into the Minister’s private mind, is, in the words of Bishop Jewel, to venture into “the very dungeon of uncertainty2,” an uncertainty which would make all Orders and all Sacraments precarious. We may well be content with the dictum of S. Thomas Aquinas himself3, when he says, “The Minister of a Sacra- ment acts as the representative {in persona) of the whole Church of which he is the Minister; in the words which he utters the intention of the Church is expressed, which suffices to the perfection of a Sacrament, ttnless the contrary be expressed otitwardly on the part of the Minister, or the re- cipient of the Sacrament4.”

2 See Jewel, Reply to Harding, Art. 1, sect. 12. Ed. Parker Soc. “The heart of man,” he adds, “is unsearchable. If we stay upon the intention of a mortal man, we may stand in doubt of our own baptism.”

3 S. Thorn. Aquin. Summa, Pars iii., Qu. lxiv., Art. 8, ad. 2. S. Thomas prefers this view on the ground “quia character nunquam imprimitur nisi per sacramentum,” meaning by “cha- racter” the “effectus qui est res et sacramentum,” as distinct from the Virtus Sacramcnti. See Denny and

Lacey, De Hierarchia Anglicana, p. 87, sect. 133; Denny, Anglican Orders and Jurisdiction, pp. 93 — 98, S.P.C.K. 1893.

4 Bellarmine says, ” It is not neces- sary to intend to do what the Roman Church does, but what the true Church does, whatever it may be ; or what Christ instituted. ..He who intends to do what the Church of Geneva does intends to do what the Church Uni- versal does… the error of the Minister as to the Chufch does not take away the efficacy of the Sacrament.” Bell- armine, Disputationes de Controversiis. De Sacram. in gen. i. c 27.

Notes

• See Hardwick, Hist. Art. p. 103, secrate the Eucharist, and that the n. 2. transubstantiation took place not in
• The Confession of Augsburg the Articles, p. 480.
• See Gore’s Rom. Cath. Claims, pp. 147, 148.