Lectures in divinity

LIBRARY

11' Tin:

Theo. logical Seniinary

PRINCETON. N. J.

Cnsc Division

^helf ^3/ ( Section

Bonk /' T r-

/

LECTURES

I N

DIVINITY,

DELIVERED IN THE

UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE,

BY

JOHN HEY, D. D.

AS NORRISIAN PROFESSOR.

^=S5S3^55ss^

VOLUME THE FOURTH.

CAMBRIDGE,

PRINTED BY JOHN BURGES PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY I

AND SOLD BY J. DEIGHTON, CAMBRIDGE; LEIGH & SOTHEBY,

YORK-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN, RIVINGTONS, ST. PAUL's

CHURCH-YARD, PAYNE, MEWS-GATE, SHEPPERSON

& REYNOLDS, NO. 137, AND W. H. LUNN,

NO. 332, OXFORD-STREET, LONDON ; AND

COOKE, OXFORD.

M D C C X C V I I I .

LECTURES

I N

DIVINITY, &c.

BOOK IV

CONTINUATLON ©F ARTICLE XVIl.
SECT. XVII.

QUEEN Mary's court does not feem to have
intermeddled much with Predeftination j they
had other matters to engage their attention j their
chief view was, to bring the nation back to
Popery; as we have given the decifion of the
Council of ^rent^ we need take no more notice
of the popilli part of our countrymen.

The reformed fell into difputes amongft them-
felves even in prifon, where they were confined as
Heretics, expefting, many of them, to be brought
to the ftake; *• they wrote againft each other, and
difperfed their writings abroad in the world*."—
The dodtrine of Predeftination was even now gaining
flrength amongft the generality of plain divines,

though
» Neal, Vol i. 4to. page 69. Oxf. page 67. Heylin.
VOL. IV. A

2 BOOK IV. ART. XVII, SECT. XVIII.

thongb it was cliecked by fome ofthe mofl. improved
minds. Sonie/>;7;/j were drawn up ior the priloners
tofign, in order to reduce them to amity; but they
are not extant: it leenis probable, ihat though they
did not run into the extreme of Calvinlfm, they ap-
proached too near it to be encouraged by the prin-
cipal'' Reformers. Bradford and Carlejs arc named
on this occafion ; both mart}Ts ; as were many
otiiers engaged in the difpute.

xvni. £//2tfi't7/^ came to the throne in 1558.
In the beginning of her reign the more liberal and
polite fort of divines wiflied to lower the dodtrine of
Predeftination, or to avoid it. The Icfs liberal and
refined pufhed it forward very (loutly i nay tyran-
nirnily, fo as ro oblige (bme to fcek for flielter and
proteftion. Both thcfe things appear, I think,
from Strypes^ Anx\2\s. Bcfidcs, the Puritans^ who
were Calvinifls, got confidcrable power in the Houfe
of CommonSy and made the Queen (o jealous, that
their propohng to ratify by acl of Parliament the
Reformatio Le^uniy was realbn lulHcienf* with her
to let it afide.

Much of the growth of Calvinifm has been
afcribed to i\\z flight of the Proteflant divines from
England during the reign of Q^ieen Mary : fome
went to Geneva, others to Switzerland, &c. — But"

Jewel

>> Oxford Pamph. pnge 67, &c.

«: Annals 1559, page 116. 118, Vol. i. and page 294, (in
fome editions I think page 331) : my old references to the/r/?
Vol. of Strype's Annals, feem all wron<^: what Edit, did I ufe ?
the reference in this Scdlion to the fccond Vol. is right, for
Sid. Coll. Library.

^ Oxford, page 47, from Collier 2. t;3o.

« Some where I have mentioned the bad reception which
thefe Refugees met with from the Lutherans, on account of their
being what was called Saaamcntariatis, that is, denying the
corporal prefcncc of Chrift in the Eucharift : the cruelty of the
Lutherans made them take refuge with the Calviniils, who ufed

them

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XVIII. ^

Jewel went to Italy; and others to other places^,
where they rather grew weaker than ftronger in the
doftrine about the divine decrees. Much would
depend upon th.e notions they found alibciated
with kindnefs and hofpitality : but Calvinifm Teems
to me to have been firovvino in England even be-
fore, or during, the reign of Queen Mary,

I gave the Hiftory of the Lambeth Articles under
the fixteenth Article°i I have now only to read
fuch of them as belong to our prefent lubjed:* —
The cordial aflent to them all, of that profelTed
divine Matthew Hutton, Archbilliop of Tork^ may
amufe the curious''. The remarks of the Bifhops
and Divines, leem to be ingenious^ and to have
drawn the JJing of fome of them very expertly, —
I fuppofe Archbilliop Whitgift was at the head of
thefe' remarkcrs. He is faid to have a6ted '•'-faci-
litate'*- et metu." Though he encouraged Ibme
eminent preachers againfh Reprobation, he might
not think Profellbr Whitaker a man to be bluntly
oppofed : but his condud' feems to prove what
has been already obferved,

I. That men of Improved minds, were endea-
vouring to foften the rigours of Predeftination.

2. That

them kindly : they were indeed of the fame opinion in regard
to the Sacrament, — See Mofheiin, Vol. 4. 8vo. page 87, or
Cent. 16. 3. 2. 2. 16.

^ Strype's Annals, 1562, Vol. Linage 294. (Sid.) or near
that page; perhaps 293.

8 Art. XVI. Sed. viu. ^ Strype's Whitgift, p. 478.

' P. S. I cannot find, from Strype's Life of Whitgift, who
thefe remarkers were; Strype contradifts this writer of the
Lambeth Articles ; and reprefents Whitgift, more than that
writer does, as favouring Whitaker and Calvinifm. Ytt I
thought he did not quite prove what he undertook. Whitgift
leemed to me, even from Stryi^e's account, to be guided much by
prudence, and to diilike Whitaker 's zeal.

^ Hift. Art. Lamb. F- 1 <; - 1 8, Cambr,

^ Waterland's Suppl. to Arian Subfcr. page 44, Sec,
A 2

4 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XIX.

2. That the Icfs refined were very flreniious in
heightening the doftrine, and were very iiard to
rcftrain.

One fentenceof iV^'^/™ may make fludents aware
of the language of Puritans in whatever books
they meet with it. ** Though the Pelagian doc-
trine was efpoufcd by very few of tlic KngHfli
Reformers'*—'* it revived the latter end of Queen
Elizabeth's reign under the name of Armimamfm",
and within the compafs of a few years funplanted
the received doctrine of the Reformation."

Before we pafs to another reign, it may not be
amifs to mention the idea of Predeftination enter-
tained by the Fnmilifs". *' There are two, with
their members, that are predcftined, or pre-or-
dained ; the one unto prelervation, and the other
unto condemnation, from the beginning : the one
is Chrijly the man of God, predeftined unto pre-
fcrvation, and with him, all his incorporated mem-
bers : the other is the man of Sin, Antkhriji-y
predeftinatcd unto condemnation; and in him all
his incorporated members'*: as for any other pre-
deftination than this (come it out of Turkey, or
elfevvhcre) I know not of it."

XIX. In the reign of James I. there feems to
have been an odd mixture of Calvinifm and Armi-
nianifm. He was bred in the Kirk, and was, at
one time, calviniflic; and he favoured Prince
Maurice at the Synod of Dort, who favoured the
Calvinifts : yet in the conference at Hampton
Court, in the beginning of his reign, he dif-
couraged them, and never chofe to prefer them in

the

•n Hlft. of Puritans, Vol. i.page 70, 410.

° Eliz. died in 1603. Arminius in 1609 (st, 49)— —it was
early for the name ot ^irminianifm.

" Art. VII. Seft. iii.

P Stry[:>e's Annals, Vol. 2. page 378 This paflage is given
bv Strype from an Afolo^y of the Familifls, but it ii not marked
with inverted commas.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XX. r

the Church. He preferred Arminians, yet kept
up decency, and reftrained the Puritans in an
artful manner. He gave his preferments to men
of abilities and good lives. He forbade the Puri-
tans to rail againft the Papifts; but then every one
was forbidden to rail at the Puritans; this founded
fair, but was really a great reftraint. The Jive
points were too myfterious and nice for the ordinary
Clergy to preach upon ; reafonable enough ; there-
fore only Bi/Iiops and Deans muft preach upon them ^
but James made Arminians Bilhops and Deans I
and lo the Puritans were filenced on thofe points
which they wanted moft to propagate. — And
fometimes laws appearing perfectly equal, were fo
executed as to make the Puritans complain. It
leem.s as if James, though a Pedant, confidered
thmgs more as a ftatefman than as a divine;
favoured thofe men whofe manners were the moft
courtly, and checked, as imperceptibly as he could,
thofe who were more rigid and uncomplying.

XX. In the reign of Charles I. Calviniim grew
headllrong ; but ftill it was not in favour at Court :
there Arminianifm flourilhed : indeed with too
great opennefs to be confiftent with prudence. One
charge againft Archbifliop Laud, when he was im-
peached, was Arminianiiin ; the oppofition to that
was ftronger than to anything d{t.

Mr. Hume'^ remarks, that perhaps the only thing
m which all the Sedaries agreed, was the notion,
that the docflrines of Fate and Deftiny were eflen-
tial to all religion. Dr. Balgiiy^ fpeaks of their
overturning the Monarchy, as being only ^ijiep to
overturning the Church.— If we have time, I will

read

..? ^lP'}^H' Vol. 5. 4to. p. 371, near the bottom: Chap.
vm.-Thefe are not the very words of Hume, but taken from

two lentences.

Page 6k a

3

O BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXI.

read fome of Mr. Roufe's Speech in the Holi(c of
Commons : and a Protejl of the Houfe aoauiil'
Armlnianifm, in 1628.

In 1643 the ParHament, by ordinance, ap-
pointed an Ajjembly of Divines who Ihould reform
the Church of England, bring it nearer Calvinifm,
and make a coahtion with the Church of Scot-
land: we have their Catechijms^ and the Articles
which they reformed ; but after debating ten weeks
on the nrft fifteen, they flopped fliort, and dcfifled
from' the taik.

XXI. The turn which rehgious opinions took
in the rei^n of Charles 11. has been mentioned
under the eleventh Article. — x'^nd the notions of
Jntinomians with regard to Election, fufficiently,
under the fixteenth. It has been hinted, that
Methodijls"" are divided into Calviniftic and Ar-
minian : and that the generality of the Englifli
Clergy"" are reputed Arminians. The firft Earl of
Chatham faid, in Parliament, that we have a Cal-
viniftic Creed, and an Arminian Clergy''; I Ihould
be more willing to acknowledge the latter than the
former.— Dr. Jortin fays% " Our Diflenters, in the
lafl Century, were generally ablolute Predcflina-
rians ;" — they are now, I take it, moflly Sociuians \
— The ^takers are faid to profels Arminianifm :
and fome Prefbyterians, 1 have been told, continue
Calvinifls.

XXII. The

' See Ntal's Pur. Vol. i. 4to. page 530, 532, 534. from
Rufliworth.

' Ncal 1643, \o\. 2. 48. 4to, The articles are in the
Appendix.

" An. xvi.ScS.. X. " .^rt. xvi.Std vni.

y See Be'ftiam's Memoirs of the reign of George III, "\'o]. i.
page 362. Ed. 1796.

* Second Diflcrtation, page 1 12.

" I do not perceive that t)r. Piieflley allows .nny decree at all.
Famil. Illullr.

BO(yK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT. XXI I— XXI V. 7

XXII. The moil formidable Calvinift oi modei-n
times I take to be Jonathan Edwards. He died in
1758; The modern Baptijis are reprefented by
Wali, in his Hiftory of Infant- baptifm, (Part 2.
Chap. 8. Sedl. 6. Subfe6t. 16), as more carneit
about Predeftmation than any other people in
England : As being anxious to know whether any^
one is a FreewUler or a Freegracer. They have alfo
amongft them a divifion of perfons into General
men^ and Partiadar men, from their holdino: a
general or a partial Redemption.

XXIII. In Scotland ]o\\n Knox eftablifhed Cal-
vinifmj and in 1643 ^^^^ affembly of Divines had
in view the Reformation of the Church of England,
but only the Prefer-vaiion of the Church of Scot-
land; which fhews how calviniflic it was, — and
puritanical in difcipline. The Confeffio Scotica
feems to conceive the true Church '° of Chrift to be
the ele5i^ and others reprobates. What are now
the notions of the eftabliflied prefbyterian Kirk,
or of the tolerated epifcopal Church, I have not'
been well informed.

XXIV. The Irijlf Articles were drawn in 1615 '
by Archbifliop UJJier^ when Provofl of Dublin
College ; the Lambeth Articles were incorporated
into them. But in 1634 Archbifhop Laud got
our XXXIX accepted ; Neal fays, in the room of the
others ; but Waterland fays the Lambeth Articles
were never formally laid afide. Uflier was then
Primate : his Body of Divinity is very Calviniftic,
but Waterland fays, " he renounced his Calvinian
principles, as is well attefted by Three good
Hands^"

Archbifhop

'' Syntagma, page 141. 148. Art. Eledio, et de Ecclefia.
«= Neal 1.475. Waterland Suppl. Ar. Subfcr. p. 51.
•• In a MS. note in the Library of Magdalen College, Cam-
bridge, are mentioned Bryan Walton, Peter Gunning;, and

A 4 Herbert

8 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXV XXlTTI.

Archbidiop King has left a very good dncourfc
on Predellination.

XXV. Having in the tenth Article referv^d the

notion of God's caufing evil, I do the lame here.

»— He has been fuppoled to caule it either by in-

jiuence, or by decree ; the former belonged to the

tenth Article, the latter to this.

Vice is afcribed to Fate in Homer. Agamem-
non excufes himfelf for robbing Achilles of his
prize by laying*", Eyw <}''tf>c a,nt,o<; £»jU,t, AxAx Zcuj xai
Mor^a — Agathias mentions it as a common notion,
that wars and battles were imputed to the ftars and
fate: fee Laidner's account of Simplicus in his
Heathen teftimonies^

XXVI. With regard to the Jc-wj-, I know not
that 1 ne.d add anything to what was faid under
Sedion iii. — As Jewilh expreffions, arifing from
Jewifh ideas, are the very things which caule our
difficulties, they will appear of courfe in the
folotion.

XXVII. Some early Chriftians have been faid to
run into no'aons of fin being caufed by decrees of
powers above i but the accounts feem fcarcely to
be depended ^ upon. They are mentioned by
Heylin at the opening of his Hiftory of the five
Articles. Chap. i. Sect. 4 — 6. — But Colarbajus

feems,

Herbert Thorndike : with reference to Smith's Life of Ufher,
and Collier's Ecclef. Hid. Vol. z. page 868. — And Neal owns
thefadt, in a degree. Hill. Pur. Index. — All the Calvinilb ftill
fpeak refpeftfuily (I am told) of Arcnbilhop Ufher.

= Iliadj Book 19 1. 86. Tliis exprcllion ib quoted by Heylin,
p. 507 ; but a lc\. other expreffions miglitbi rcau : Agamemnon
fays, what could he do ? a divine power made him offend.

^ This was mentioned before as an inftance of afcribiiig
events in general to Fate, Sed. 11. but it ought alfo to appear
as an inflance of afcribing evih to Fate. Natural evil may be
diilinguifhcd from moral, but though war is natural evil, it is
ufually caufed by moral.

P Art. XV. Seft. 11. and Art. XVI. Se>5l. n.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXVIII. XXIX. 9

feems, in Ang. dc Hcer. only to have believed
in jEons. Of the PrifcillianiJIs Auguftin fays,
*' Aftruunt etiam jatalibus ftellis homines colli-
gatos," occ.

XXVIII. In Atigtidin's time the Monks o^ Adm^
metum are faid to have held, that God predeftinated-
the wicked, not only to punifhment bur to ^/////, '
— And all thofe who came into this notion were
called Predeflinarians. But difp^tes have irifen
concerning this part ^ of Hifiory. What I have
feen of Auguflin's writings to Valentinus and
others of that Monafhery at Adrumetum, has not
given me an' idea that they held fo ftrange a
dodirine.

XXIX. Some have alloived 3. foreknozvkdge of
Jin m God as a motive for reprobation, who would

not allow 2i foreknowledge ^ of merits, as a motive to
Ele6tion. Peter Lc?nbard^ fays, " pr^edeftinavic
eos quos elegit, reliquos vero reprobavir, id eft ad
mortem et.rnam prasfj'.vit peccaturos." — Some
have made Reprobation to confift merely in not
eleding. — The Rhemifts on Rom. ix 14, ipeak of
an illuftratioa of Auguftin's, v*^ho compares the
eleft and reprobate to two debtors^ one of which is
forgiven all, and the other made to pay all, by the
fame creditor.

Some ftiong expreflions of Calvin may be found
in the firft feventeen pages of the Oxford Dilfer-
tation : but in thofe expreffions we fee that defire
before-mentioned of making Reprobation, thouo-h

proceeding

'' Mofhelm, Vol. 2. page 90, odavo, orCenr 5,2. 5. 2-.

' Thefe Monks were for Grace excluding Free-will; which
is rather a Jympio?n of their being for Predellination excluding
Y\n\ie. — Jan/en felt as I did ; fee opening of Sirmond's Hiftoiia
Predeftinatiana.— Voflius's Hift. PeJag. Lib. 7. is about Repro-
bation : and I think he is of my mind: -See Index to Hiil.
Pelag. " PnedejUnationem," kc.

^ Sed. vii. end. 1 Lib, 1. DiH. 40.

lO EOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXIX.

proceeding from the good plcafure of God, an aA
oi jiift puniflimcnt.

At Trent the Dominicans founded reprobation
on the mere pleafure of God, alledging the initance
of EJau reprobated before he was born.

There has been a diflinction between Supralap-
y Jnrians and Sublapfarians, from Lapfus the Fall of
Man. The former held, or have been charged
with holding, that God decreed the Fall of Man,
and all its fatal confequences ; the latter, that
God's decree prefuppofed the Fall, or only per*
mitted it, and determined tiie ftate of different
men in confeqiience of it. — One Twife has l:>ecn
reckoned a Supralapfarian" ; he was Prolocutor to
the AlTembly of Divines in 164'?.

This gives an idea of all ManJiind taken col-
ledively , with regard to a particular injlance,
Mafter Ftdke fpeaks plainly in his aniwer to the
Rhemifts on Rom. ix. 17.

*' The purpofe for which God fet up Pharao is
manifeft in the text, that in him he might Jliew his
power ^ &c. God made all things for him [elf ^ even
the zvicked unto the evil day. Thertore was Pharao,
a veffel of wrath ordained to dcflruftion, verf. 22.
— His reprobation therefore was for the Glorie of
God, his condemnation mofty//y?, for his obftinate
contempt of God and his word."

In reading the Lambeth Articles it was not eafy
to avoid reading the part about reprobation with
that about eledtion : becaufe one wiihed not to
leave a ientence unfmillied. As this remark may
apply to leveral inllances, I will here doje the
Htjlory of Reprobation, and of the Article,

XXX. We

■" Turretin, Locus 4 Qiieft. q. Sec^. 23.— Turretin wasa
PrcdeftinaiiaH himfelf.— — ^Va/ gives a good charadcr of
Twifle.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXX. XXXI. II

XXX. AVe come then to the Explanation.

The title is, " Of Predeftination and Eleclion."
. — Predeftination is ibmetimes a generic term, in-
cluding Ele6lion" and Reprobation; ibmetimes it
fignifies only predeftination to happincfs, which is
its fenfe here, as appears from its being joined
with Eledion.^ — And aUb from the fir ft expref- «
fion of the Article, " Predeftination to Life:' —
Uooo^KxiJ-oc; is not in Scripture, but -zzr^oo^i^M is, and

xxxi. The fir ft paragraph of our Article ex-
hibits nothing more than a Jeries of texts, with a
word or two connedring them together. To make
fuch a feries feems fair, yet it occafions fome im-
ped hxient to that conception of the Article, wdiich
I think the right one. The texts of fcripture, on
which the doctrine of Predeftination has been
built, feem to me chiefty expreffions o^ fentimenty
or eloquence, or even oi formality and decontm. —
Now to put fuch exprellions into a feries, muft
give them more appearance of fyftem and theory
than they would have if each was read, with a
right feeling, in its place.

When fuch expreffions occur as, " O King° live
for ever y' — "the mofi excellent Governor^ Felix,"
*' moft noble "^ Feftus," &c. how ftrange it would
feem, if an Hiftorian was to hold, that Darius
was immortal, or that Felix excelled all other men
as a Governor; yet when fuch fayings are con-
nected together, the connexion gives each more
fpeculative meaning than it was intended to have. W
'. — I would not be underftood to fay, that ^a// the.

texts

" UiTier's Body of Divinity under God's Kingciotn, page 73,

7th Edit. Arniinius's Works, Difp. 15. page 226. but Ar-

miniiis prefers our feufe.

° Dan. vi. 21. p A<5l3xxiii. 26.

9 Acrtsxxvi. 25.

12 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXXII ^XXXV.

texts introduced have an indefinite meaning; but
only, that when the things they mc^ntion, are re-
ferred to the -preddtrmination of God, thci the
meaning is indefinite.

Nor would 1 infinuate, that even then the mean-
ing is as indefinite, as the meaning of the phrafes
juft now mentioned, *•* O K.ing live for ever^^ &c. ;
they are only mentioned to Ihew the nature of the
inconvenience complained of, not to mark out the
degree of it.

Still, however, it will be proper to fliew, that the
Compilers of our Article did follow Script ure^

XXX II. " PredeJUnation to Life^ implies that
there is fuch a thing fuppofed, at leaft, as Fredefli-
nation to Z)t'rt///. — Which is not here denied^ but
waveci, or omitted. — The Reformatio Legum fays,
that wicked men ufed frequently to alledge Repro-
hatiott, as an excufe for their wickednefs.

XXXIII. " Is the tverlajling fwpoje of God*'-'
we have "eternal purpofe" Eph. iii. ii. — and
fwrfofe, in this fenfe, occurs feveral times. Rom.
viii. 28. — ix. 1 1. — And Eph. i. 1 1.— '* everlajling'*
is to be taken \n 2. ncgafive'' (cnfe, as that which
has continued during a time to which we can con-
ceive no limit.

" Whereby^^ will be allowed as a conneding
word, not fcriptural.

XXXIV. '* Before the fotindaiions of the world
were laid-"-^Sec Matt. xxv. 34. — Eph. i. 4. —
2 Tim. i. 9. — This expreflion feems indefinite^ and
meant to be fo taken.

xxxv. " He hath conflantly decreed y — " Co«-
flantlyy* feems again a negative term, fignifying a de-
cree 7iot interrupted \n any way alTignable by man : —
decreed might be ufed as implied in predeftination

and

» See Oxf. page 20, he. and bottom of page 74.
» Introd. to fecond Pait, Sed. v 1 1,

BOOK JV. ART. XVII. SECT. XXXVI— XL. 13

and purpofe; but it may be referred to Jer. v. 22.;
in Lxx. Turpo^xyy-x sciccviov. God's decree is a fort of
technical term in Theology.

XXXVI. " By his confenty^ ^mXri Acts ii. 23. —
Rom. xi. 34. — Heb. vi. 17.

XXXVII. ^'Secret to us" Deut. xxix. 29.—
Amos iii. 7.— The fecrecy is alio implied in Rom.

xi. 33' 34-

Secret feems to imply here that which belongs to
Gods part, in the Government of the world: to
be oppofed to revealed^ for the guidance of Man ;
if what is called fecret ever appear, it is by the
event'", or at moft by faint intimation.

xxxviii. ** To deliver from curfe'* — Gal. iii.
10, 13. with reference to Deut. xxi. 23. and
xxvii. 26.

xxxix. *' Aiid darrmation" x«T«x^ijw.a Rom. v.
16. 18. — but of tliis enough under the nintii
Article.

XL. '* Tkofe whom he hath c ho fen in Chrift^'* —
we have " chfen' in him" Eph, i. 4. — the words
" in Chrijl" were added to the Article in 1562,
though they make what comes after ieem rather
an harfli repetition ; in order, probably, to keep
clofe to words'' of Scripture. — The terra ^'- chofen"
is one of thofe which were originally ufed of the
Jews, and applied to Chriftians in the way of com-
parifon or '^ aliulion. — The expreffion, " thofe
whom he hath chofen," or, whom he \i2i'A\ fine e
chofen, feems to me to imply, that the fecret pur-
pofe of God is only to be looked upon as opened
by the event: the publication of Chriftianity is

an

^ "Made manifeft by the efFeas." " thea" (when a matter
is come to pafs) " it is manifeft what luas God's will before
concerning the matter." -This is Calviniftic Uilier-: Body of
Divinity, page 41, j-th Edit.

» Oxi. page 20. * Taylor on Romaos, Key, Par. 9a.

14 KOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XLI. XLII.

an event which ought to be referred to the Divine
Government, not limited bv time. Whoever en-
tered fully into this remark, would allow me to
fay, that prcdcfli nation of men to be Chriftians,
ought not to be mentioned, or thought of, till
they are become Chriftians : agreeably to what was'
laid under the tenth Article of preventing Grace ;
nay, that any heathen who pleafes, may to-morrow
have'^ been " chofen^ from all eternity ; that is, who-
ever becomes a Chriftian in the common way,
may, when he does become one, afcribe his con-
veriion to the goodn>:fs ot God, acting before all
time that can be limited.

*' Out of mankind'^ — thefe words feem only for
connexion. — They might have been omitted.

XLI. " And to brii!^ them by C'lnfi to ever la/ling
Sah'atio/i.'' — Kph.'\. 7, 10, 1 r, fay the fame thing,
only in a manner not fo fuitable to the courfe of
expreffion in the Article : that true Chriilians are
to be y^^r^ eternally, is not a thing likety to be
queftioned by any let oi Chriilians. Salvation
was one of the terms explained in the Appendix
to the eleventh Article \ The word " ei'erlajiing,^
is not ufelefs, as men are fometimes laid to be
faved when they are only admiHed into Chriili-
anity.

XLI I. '-'■As vejjels -made to hoiiour'^ — Rom. ix.
21, 23. with reference to Jer. xviii. 1, &c. — Thefe
texts defcribe only coniparati-ve privileges, or dif-
tindions; and thofe diftindions muft be fuppofed
to be acquired in the common t^tzv, by a diligent
ufe of opportunities^ and then referred, indiilinctly,

to

y Art. X. Se6l. xxxv.

^ Rogers on this Article, mentions, as in error, thofe who
iliy, " it it> is any man's power to be elcded," page 80. —
l^'heophylad is one, I fee : whicli is a comfort.

* Seft. XVIII. and Art. XI. Seft. xxi.

BOOK IV. AP..T. XVII. SECT. XLIII — XLV. I^

to the Divine Providence : though the refer-
ence to God will always be the ftronger when
we fpeak of men collectively^ and of difpoling or
governing them''.

We have now got what may be called a dcfi-
niticn of our caufe ; of the caufe of Chrijlianity, as
exifting in the Divine mind, in a manner unknown
to us, from a time not to be limited by us. The
efectSy that is the parts of Chriftianity, fall more
within our comprehenfion. If they had been
mentioned j?r/?, and then referred to their unfearck'
able caufe, in indefinite language, our ideas would
have been kept in better order j but it might be
thought that an Article ought to keep to the

fynthetical method.

XLIII. *■'- Wherefore, they which be endued with

Jo excellent a benefit of God''"' — I fee nothing in thefe
words but connexion. " T^hey 'which i^,'* feems
to imply uncertainty about individuals-^ whofo-
ever they may be, that are, in the fight of God,
true Chrifiians.

xLJ.-v. " Be called according to Gods pirpofie^''-—*
the expreflion is all taken from Rom. viii. 28.
— See alfo 2 Tim. i. 9". — invited, offered eleciion\
Matt. XX. 16. — Taylor's Key, par. 97. — The in-
vitation mufl have been primarily given to quit
Idolatry and Paganifm.

XLV. " 5y his fpirit working in due feafon' —
I Pet. i. 2. — the manner of referring converfion to
God's fpirit, has been mentioned" under the tenth
Article : it mud not interfere with endeavours, nor
take place till the converfion is pafi. — " /;/ due

Jeafon" I do not feem to fee the whole purpofe

of

** Art. X. Seft. xlix.

*= I Cor. vii. 21. " called,'* is equivalent to becomin? a
Chriftian. ^

** Art. X. Se£l. xxxvi.

l6 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XLVI L.

of inferring thefe words; they fill up the fentence to
the e^y ; they occur feveral times in fcripture, but
not with regard to the working o^ ihc/pirif,

XLVI. " T/jey through Grace obey the calling^''' —
obey \s in Rom. vi. 17. and obedience 1 Pet. i. 2. —
It would not have been regular to have omitted the
divine affijiance.

X L V 1 1 . " ^hes be jujiified freely ;" — the expref-
fion comes from Rom. iii. 24. but Rom. viii. 30.
ihould be kept in mind. Of Jullitication we have
treated under the eleventh Article.

XL VII I. '* They be made the Sons of God by
adoption:'' — GdA. iv. 5, 6. — Rom. viii. 15. — Heb.
ii. II. we were born m fin. But the principal paf-
iage feems Eph. i. 5.

XLix. " Ihey be made like the image of his onl\~
begotten Son Jefus Chrifl : — this expreilion comes
from Rom. viii. 29. — but if we look at the 30th
verfe, we have after jiiftified^ " glorified ;" inllead
of which our church takes a paflage out of the
29th verfe : from whence it feems probable, that
they had the fame notion of the pallage, with
Taylor ; namely, that the 29th verfe defcribes the
firfi and Iqfl lleps of our fpiritual progrcffion ;
and that the 30th enumerates the intermediate
Heps : if this be right, it comes to the fame thing
laying, we fliall be finallv glorified, and, we (hall
be made finally like the image of Jelus Chrift. —
See 2 Cor. iii. 18. — " begotten'' may be oppofed to
adopted.

L. " They walk religioufiy in good zvorks :" — this
feems implied in becoming Chrifiians ; but for the
fame rcafon the twelfth Article was infcrtcd, a
plain exprefiion feems ufetul here : — I conceive a
reference to Titus ii. 14. and iii. 8. —Rut Eph.
ii. 10. has the moft of Prcdcfti nation in it,

LI. ''And

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LI— LTV. 17

LI. '■^ And at length, by God's mercy i* — Tit,
iii. 5.— I Pet. i. 3.

Lii. " They attain to e^erlajling felicity" — Matt.
XXV. 34. rpeaks of the predeftinated as attaining
to endlefs happinefs, therefore is here the proper
authority.

Before we proceed, we fhould confider whether
the diftino-uirhins; charafteriftics of Chriftians admit
of various degrees. Salvation does ; jujlification has
been faid to do, under the eleventh Article ; why
may not Jdoption f good works allow of great
variety.

LII I. We have now had a fcriptural delineation
of Chriftianity^ and we have ktu. the fcriptural
method of referring it to the divine foreknowledge
and " everlafting purpofe." And what is the nfe
of fuch referring ? that we are to fee next. It
may be ufed fo as to do good, but it, or fome*-
thing thought to be of the fame fort with it, may
be ufed fo as to do great harm. Our Article pro-
pofes to attain the good, and avoid the evil.— The
unfearchable counfels and foreknowledge of God
do fo far appear to man, as to become to him a
mod interefting object of contemplation and re-
flexion; and if rightly contemplated, they may
improve Chrijlian piety ; if wrongly, they may pro-
mote vice and mifery. But let us purfue the expref-
fions of the Article.

Liv. ^^ As the godly confi deration of Fredefiina'
tion, and our eletlion in Chriji" — the fort of con-
templation allowed, mull be '-'^ godly " that is, it
mull prefuppofe true piety in the mind : and it muft
alfo prefuppole admijfwn into Chriftianity, -it muft
be contem.plation of the Chrijiian fchemCy as re-
ferred to the purpofe of God ; Che word " our**
was infcrted in 1562, but it might as well perhaps
have been omitted ; if it had been wanted to fhew
VOL. IV. B that

l8 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LV— LIX.

that the meditation ought to be upon the Chrijlian
plan, it would have been ufeful ; but there are
other marks of that; at prefent, it muft cither be
taken imperfonally, and To add little or nothing to
the fenfe ; or it muft come too near affirming of
individuals^ what is only intended to be affirmed of
Chriftians in general.

LV. *' Is full of five ct., pleafanty and unfpeakahle
comfort to godly perfons" — again, '' godly ;" joined
to " perfons^'* as well as to " conf deration ;" in
order to make the diftinftion as clear as pofTible.

Lvi. " j^nd fuch as feel in themf elves the working
cf the fpir'it of Chrif —\vt here diftinguifh between
feeling the fpirit, and feeling the workings vim^ of
the fpirit; we mean, finding iuch difpofitions and
principles as we pioully, though indiftindlly, afcribe
to the ajliftance of the Holy Spirit, in the man-
ner mentioned under the tenth Article : for fear of
miftake, the effe^s of the fpirit, or the phaeno-
mena which are to make us truft we are real
Chriftians, in fome degree or other, are next
fpecified.

Lvii. '■'■Mortifying the vcorks of the flefJiy and
their earthly members ^^' — ih'is is from Rom. viii. 16.
— Col. lii. 5.

Lvm ** And drawing up their minds to high and
heavenly things ,'* — more phsenomena, from whence
we may judge whether we are fuch Chriftians as
may derive good from contemplating the Chriftian
fcheme as fettled in the lecret counlels of God. —
Here feems to be an allufion to John vi. 44. —
** except the Father draw him."

Lix. *' ^J zvell bec/iufe it doth greatly efiaUiJh

and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed

through Chrifly' — fuppofe then a Chriftian, with

fuch difpofitions; would it really ftrengthen his

faith to refer the Chriftian fcheme back to God's

planning

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LX. LXI. I9

planning it before all time ? it muft ; the conflancy^
the duration of it, muft heighten his conceptions of
lis Jhbility and importance: and the power, juftice,
and wifdom of God muft appear in a ftrong and
ftriking light.

LX. ** v^j hecauje it doth fervently kindle their
love toivards God" — in like manner we may afk,
would it really inflame the devout Love of fuch a
Chriftian as is here fuppofed, to dwell on the fame
contemplation ? unavoidably : for fuch a con-
templation would fhew him God as engaged, for
endlefs ages, in ads of kindnefs to him; and
would make the connexion between a kind Deity
and him feem much more intimate than it was
before. — " We love him, becaufe he firjl loved''
us."

LXI. *' So for curious and carnal perfons, lacking
the fpirit of Chrifl.'' — Now we come to the perfons
who may make a pernicious ufe of the fecret coun-
fels of God ; in the firft place, they are not Chrif-
tians-y or if they have been baptized, they have not
the internal qualifications of real Chriftians : " lack-
ing the fpirit of Chrift," may be ftill farther
cleared by comparing it with the fixteenth ^ Article,
*' after we have received the Holy Ghoft," — " A
Chrifti fpiritu prorsijs alieni^^ fays the Reformatio
Legum.

And the perfons who would do harm by think-
ing much on the fecret counfels of God, are not
only no Chriftians, but they are weak or wicked
men ; curious or carnal.

" Curious" feems to be ufed with much meaning;
and to defcribe that kind of men, who are con-
tinually entering into fuch abftrufe and fceptical
fpeculations as are apt to make Atheijis ; fuch as

un fettle
e I John iv. 19. f Art. xvi. Seil. xix.

£ %

20 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXII— LXVI.

unfettle all principle ; perplex, but never convince.
— Re ipsa cunofi, the Reformatio Legum calls
fuch perfons : (peculations of the fort here meant
frequently engender melancholy and mifanthropy,
as well as impious murmuring againft God.

" Ciinial^'' means men of debauched morals ;
the Reformatio Legum informs us, that there were
many fuch, who took, the turn of fatalifts at the
time of the Reformation : ** differti luxu;" having
recourfe to Predeflination as a covering, *' male-
ficiis, et fceleribus, et omnis generis perverfitati."

LXII. "To have continually before their eyes the
fentence of God's predejiination,^* — here the obje£l of
contemplation is changed : it was before the ChriJ-
tian religion in the divine mind ; here it is *' Gods
-predeflination^^ in general ; Fate, Deftiny^. — For
bad men to have fatality before their eyes, is cer-
tainly what the following words exprefs.

LXII I. " Is a moji dangerous downfall^^ pra-
cipitium; the nature of a precipice is, that it does
not necelTarily deftroy, but puts one in immediate
danger of being defbroyed j either by any one
who chufes to pu(h one down^ or by a flip of
one's own.

Liv. " IV hereby the Devil doth thriijt them^'
about referring evil to malignant Spirits, I have
faid fomerhing^ before. — " diice Diabolo^^ Reform.
Legum.

Lxv. ** Either into dejperation^''—dit{i^2ivc is one
natural confequence of a perfon's perfuading him-
felf that there is a fatality againft him.

In deiperationem prasfentem abjiciuntur/)r^f//)//^j,

Reform. Legum.

LXVI. " Or

K Or, according to Bilhop Hooper, ** fatal dejlinj :" — See on
the Commandinents ; or Heylin Quinq. page 557,
*" Art. X. bedl. l.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXVI LXVIII. 21

Lxvi. "Or into wretcJileJJiiefs of moji unclean
living,"'— wretchlefs^ means carelefs, negligent; in
the Rhemifh Teftament on Rom. ix. 14. it is
fpelt retchlefs, which brings it nearer recklefs^ which
occurs feveral times in Skakfpeare* : and a charader
in one of his plays, fays, " I reck not" — for, I care
not. At Sedbergh I have (above 40 years ago)
heard often, " never reck,'' for *' never mind,'' (pro-
nounced, neverack), do not give yourfelf any
trouble, or concern. In the Latin, the word is
fecuritatem :—" impuriffimce vitje." The Refor-
matio Legum has, " ad folutam quandem et
7nollem vita; fecuritatem :" ht\n<^[ecure is, properly,
being without apprehenfion of danger; whether
really in danger or not.

Lxvii. « So Icfs perilous than defperation."^
perhaps more perilous : God may pity the defpair-
ing fatalift ; he is more likely to be fincere than
the fenfualift, who muft, on numberlefs occafions,
ad contrary to thofe principles by which he excufes
his faults.

Perhaps " defperation" may refer to " curious,"
and *' unclean living," to " carnal."

Some paflages from Latimer and Hooper might
be read here, (quoted Heylin's Quinq. page 556,
&c. ; alfo Oxf. page 54, &c. ; alfo Rhem. Teft.
on Rom. ix. 14. marginal note.)

LXVIII. We come now to the third Paragraph.
— So far we have been concerned with duly regu-
lating a fublime and interefling meditation, into
which men are very apt to run.

It feems proper not to conclude the Article,
without laying down fomething relative to pra6tice.

In the Article of 1552 thebeginningof the third
paragraph ftood thus;

" Furthermore"

* See Ayfcough*s Index, Stockdale's edition,

» 3

22 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXIX — LXXI.

" Furthermore'^ " [though the decrees of Pre-
deftination be unknown to us,"] — it fecms a pity
the words in hooks were omitted ; they tend to
keep the thoughts in the right train : feme puri-
tanical influence might throw them out.

LXix. '* JVe miijl receive God's promifes in fuch
wife, as they be generally Jet forth to us in holy
Scripture :"

Promifes are oppofed to decrees ; that which fup-
pofes man at liberty, to that which fuppofes him
fixed. Promifes feems to include threats : they are
things to a6l from; decrees, while " fecret to
us," or " unknown to us" are only to be con-
templated.

" Generally fet forth ;" to all men, not to any
fet of men particularly favoured. Eletling is
partial, promifing extends even to thofe at prefent
" lacking the Spirit of Chrill." Promifes any man
may apply to himfclf: decrees, no man may, in any
definite manner.

Lxx. *• And in our doings,'^ in our conduft, or
practice, *' in i\d:\on\bus fufcipieh-dis,'" lays the Re-
formatio Legum, more clearly.

LXXI. " That will of God is to be fnf/ozved'* — here

is a reference to iht Jcholajlic divilion of will into

different kinds ; which would not have been made

except, as in St. Paul's time, pcrverfe men faid,

" who hath refilled'' his ^^'///.^" — lo in the age of

the Reformation, men had urged the //7// of God

as an excufe for their vices: " in volnvtut.^m Dei

criminum fuorum culpam conferunt." (Ret. Leg.)

—'■'■they fay it is God's will." (Hooper'). — I will

not take you into all the diftindions of Arch-

bilhop Ufiier"' on the fubjecl: of will, much lefs

into

^ Rom. ix. ig.

' See Heylin, page 556.

»" Body of Divinity, page 40— 48. 7 th Edition,

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXII. LXXIII. 23

into thofe of 'Thomas'^ Jquinas ; but fome diftinc-
tion Teems neceffary.— From what was faid in the
elementary. introdu5lion to this lecond part of the
Articles, it will be eafily allowed, that we may
conceive a thing to be according to the will of
God, or man, in two icnfes, as he permits it, and
as he c/iufes it fliould be done ; wi/l, in the former
fenfe, may be called y^rr^/ ° will, in God, as con-
taining the rules of God's government, which muft
be fecret to usj in the latter, revealed. The feeret
will of God we can only contemplate^ in the man-
ner now fettled ; the r£vealed will we muft endea-
vour to execute. God wilhes us to do what is
right, for our own good.

LXXII. " Which we have exprefsly declared unto
us in the word of God.'' — " diferte revelatam :"
this means God's revealed will. Diferte, Livy
ufes for, named, mentioned by name; fo it may be
that will of God which is plainly called fo, called
his will, in fcripture. However, it is oppofed to
God's will ^^ fecret to us ;" to " decrees'" " unknown
to us:'

LXXIII. Having now gone through the feveral
expreffions of our Article, I conclude the Expla-
nation with obferving, that our Article does not
deny either abfoliite or conditional^ Predeftination.
And that it is filent about Reprobation, has been
already obferved.

Ecclus. iii. 21 — 23, is like the general turn and
fcope of the Article.

Lxxiv. According

" The Index to his works, under Voluntas, is really worth
looking at as a matter of curiofity.

" Plaifere, page 34a. 398.-866 alfo Whitby on Five Points,
Chap. 3. page 435; and compare John vi. 39. with Matt,
xviii. 14. and i Tim. ii. 4.

P Waterland's Supplement to Arian Subfcription, page 60.
with reference to Plaofere's Apello Evangelium.

»4

24 BOOK IV. ART. XVIT. SECT. LXX7 V LXXV.

Lxxiv. According to our common order, I
fhould now come to Proof -^ but there is a difnculty
in determinmg what is to be proved. Our Church
can fcarce be faid to lay down'^ ans doEirine in
this Article ; it only gives a feries of texts ^ and
declares againft the abxije of them. I will, how-
ever, lay down oyie propofition^ in order to have an
opportunity of ofTeiing fome remarks, tending to
give the right value of thofe texts which have
occafioned the flrid: doctrine of Predcftination :
my propofition may be,

God has predeftinated Chriftians^ as fncJi^ to Life.
But as all our knowledge of God's lecret counfels
is extremely indiftinft, and as therefore this pro-
pofition, in its prefent form, feems to have more
meaning than it really has ; and moreover, as in
its prefent form it interferes with prafticaP exertions,
I will put it into a form, better fuited to the real
ftate of our knowledge, to the real fcnfe of fcrip-
ture, and the adive performance of the duties of
human life. In its new form, then, it may Hand
thus ;

Lxxv. Whenever any thing important hap-
pens, or is conceived to happen, of a tendency to
bring Chriftians to heavenly happincfs, they may
afcribe that to the purpofe of God ; not limiting
the duration of his purpofej if they do it with due
diffidence i and in circiimfiances fimilar to thole in
which the fame is done in Icripture.

Still our afcribing is, from our ignorance of
God's decrees and counfels, to be extremely in-
diflin5f^ and in the hearty rather than the head\
but proving this, will juflify the generality of
Churches in holding fomething about Prcdeftina-
tion.

The

5 Sedl. XVI. ' Art. x. Seft. xxxv.

BOOK IV ART. XVII. SECT. LXXV I . LXXVII. 25

The only paflages where predeftination is men-
tioned expre[sly, are Rom. viii. 29, 30. — And Eph.
i» 5. 1 1. — Thele may therefore have a precedence;
others may be mentioned in the order in which
they He in the lacred volume.

Matt. XXV. 34. — John xvii. 11. — Acts ii. 23.
and xiii. 48. — Rom. ix. 23. — Eph. i. 4. 9, or the
whole, 4 — II. — I Thefl'. i. 4. and v. 9. (the latter
quoted by U(her repeatedly.) — 2 Tim. i. 9. —
Titus i. I. — I Pet. i. 2.

Thefe may anfvver our purpofe; and he who
has a right notion of thefe, may apply it to
all the reft.

Lxxvi. The remarks, by which I would endea-
vour to give the right value of thefe expreffions of
Scripture, are much the fame with thofe in the
tenth Article; that is, applications of the elemen-
tary remarks, which make the Introdudion to the
fecond part of our xxxix Articles.
. Lxxvii. The popular^ language of Scripture,
does not lay down 3.ny Jyjiem of Ipeculative truth;
but each expreffion defcribes {om^ feeling for fomc
ufeful purpoje : we muft fee what this purpofe is,
in each inftance, or we do not underftand the ex-
preffion. ThtXQ \s rt2i.\\y no Theory of Predejiination
in fcripture ; there are feparate pious references of
important and happy events, to the unbounded
forefight and fuperintendence of the Deity; and
out of thefe, men have /orw^J theories; but fuch
theories are merely human Each pafTage of fcrip-
ture aims at producing Faith and Love; and we
Jhave no right to ufe any paflage for any other
purpofe.

If this is not the cafe, why are trifling events
never referred in fcripture to Predeftination.? God
/s as much the Author of trifling events as of

important;
• Art. X. Seft. XXXIX,

26 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXVI I I. LXXIX.

important ; and it has in (Iridlnefs been as long ago
determined, for anything we know, that a man
fhall be y/x /w/ high^ as that he fhall be a ChriJIian;
yet the former kind of event is not referred to the
divine counfcls, the latter is : why, but becaiife it
anfwers a good purpofe to the Chriftian, and not to
the tall man. The fine reference of the privileges
of a Chriftian to the divine counfels, in Rom. viii.
28 — 30, is not for the fake of truth, or fpeculation ;
but for animating the converts to brave all the
terrors of perfecution, rather than revolt from Chrift.
^And whoever fees the paffage for a moment
without feeing it aim at the /lean, milles what was
principally intended, and of courfe fees fomething
which the writer never thought of. The fame
may be faid of the openings of feveral Epiftles ;
the heart is to be inflamed, by grand and affeding
fentiments, however indefinite, in order that the
work may htjl tidied with a proper intereft.

Lxxviii. In the texts on which Predeftination
is founded, great ufe is made of pofitive terms
with negative (ignifications ; as may appear from
the beginning of the explanation. It would greatly
tend to prevent mifconception, if we kept this
conftantly in mind ; as alfo, that our meaning fre-
quently is, when we refer to divine predetermina-
tion, no more than that it would be impious to
exclude* th^ Deity j or fix on any time when he
did not forfee, or intend to confer, fuch or fuch a
bleflihg. The expreffions concerning the " eternal
purpofe" of God, have had a fenfe in the mind of
the facred writer (as it appears to me) much nearer
this, than any Theorijl imagines.

LXXIX. Events afcribed to the Predeftination
of God, are not to exclude human agency , they
will be afcribed to the one or the other, as the

occajion
« Art. X. Seft, xt.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXIX. 27

oicajion dlrefts; fometlmes to" both; and when
only to one, the other muft be iinderftood to be
implied.

Acts ii. 23. may afford us an inftance. *' Him
being dehvered by the determinate counfel and fore-
knowledge of God ye have taken, and by zvicked
hands have taken and ilain." — The death of Chrift
is fometimes afcribed to the will of God'', fbme-
times to the wickednefs of the Jews, (in different
fenles indeed;) here to both. Whatever happens
may be referred to God, in one way or other. —
But the part which God ad:sin the Government
of the world, does not in the leaft af^eA the moral
nature of man; that nature is God's imme-
diate work ; and men, when free, aft under his
government ; whenever any good purpofe is to be
anfvvered by referring an event to the government
of God, it may be lb referred, even though the
adl be punijliable^ ; only in that indijiin^i way,
which becomes our ignorance of the divine coun-
fels : when any good purpofe is to be anfwered by
referring ihefame event to the choice of man, that
may be done ; and if it fhould happen that a good
purpofe would be anfwered by referring one event
at the fame time to both the government of God,
arid the choice of man; the reafon ftili remains in
force : this lall mode of referring muft intimate,
that though man is ever fo free, he is ftill under
the controul of God. By Ads ii. 23. the Jews

were

" Art. X, Seel. xli. referring to Introdudlion to fecond Part,
Se6l. viu.

* Rom. V. 8. — viii. 32.

y Art. X. Sed. l. — Hecuba, (II. SI. 209, &c.) fays, that
her fon Heftor was killed by Fate; yet (he defires to punijk
Achilles on account of his death.

(Edipus is faid to have had aa Yid^vA/ate, but he is blamed
juft as if that had not been faid : — See Batteux, Arillo't. Poet,
page 358, Note.

28 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXX.

were given to underhand, that they had made a
bad ule of their freedom, but that they depended
on God J he was their Governor, and would be
their Judge. — Does not Mr. Pope's expreffion,
** His /course the tyrant^'' mix divine and human
^\ agency equally ? ** tyrant'''' implies u-ickednefs, which
implies choice, or human agency ; the Tyrant's
being 2. jcourge in the hand of God, expreffes the
government of God, or div'me agency.

LXXX. We have no right to ufe any text of
{cripture without regard to the circumfiances in
which it was ufed originally. Hdw much change
of circumfiances will alter the y^;//^ of words, has
been carefully^ (hewn. If then, in fcripture, we
only find pajt events, or events fuppofed to have
happened, or viewed as having come to pafs, re-
ferred to the everlafting purpoie of God, we have
no right to refer events to the fame, without
attending to that circumftance.

This again, will prevent any theory^ any ahjlraEi
propofitions, about predeftination, from being ad-
mitted.— This would have been reafon enough for
changing the form of our propofition^ : it was liable
to be objevfted to thus ; ' 1 know of no fuch propo-
fition in Scripture; give me a fa£i, and perhaps I
may refer that facft to God's unbounded foreknow-
ledge.'—Matt. XXV. 34". The kingdom of the
blelfed was ^'■prepared'''' for them *' from the foun-
dation of the world i" — but this is faid when you
are fuppofed to look back from the Day of Judg-
ment. We might now fay, to any man; be you
goody and a kingdom zuill have been prepared for
you from the foundation of the world ; but if you
become wicked, and are fo finally, an " everlafting

fire''

* Book I. Chap. X. XI. Introd. to fecond Part, StSi. ix>

-^Art. X. Sefl. xm.

• Sedl. Lxxn', *• Compare i Cor. ii. g.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXX. 2q

fire*'' will have been prepared for you. Both the
paffages of fcripture which mention Predefti nation
exprelsly, have a retrofpedive view ; and refer, in-
diftindly, a prefent happy ftate of things, to the
divine fecret counfels. And the fame may be
obferved of thofe openings of the Epiftles, from
which any thing relating to Predeftination has
been taken.

I think fome of our Reformers and writers have

feen fomething of this notion. The Ne^eJJary

DoSlrine lays down% that a man ought not to

judge that he is ek^ed^ but by his good difpoii-

tion, " and by the tokens of good and virtuous

living." — When Latimer fays we fliould " begin

with Chriji" — he feems to mean we Ihould begin

with the effediy and reafon a pojleriori^. And Arch-

bilhop Bancroft meant fomething of the fame fort

at the Hampton-Court conference, by ^^ afcen-

dendo^:'" we afcend from effed to caufe. When

we reafon from a known effed: to a caufe imper-

fedly known, v^tfiniJJi with that which is above our

comprehenfion ; but when we begin from a caufe

not^ underftood, we are milled in things which

concern us immediately ; and which are, in reality,

level to our capacities.

Attention to circumftances would hinder us
from referring any trivial^ events to God, or from
making any references to his fecret decrees, with-
out a view to exciting fome good Jentiment -, accord-
ing to what has already been laid down: and

would

' Seft. XVI.

^ Ser. on Septuages, quoted by Heylin, page 557,.— Water-
land, page 60. (Suppl. to Arian Subfcr.)

^ Oxf. page 36.

' Introd. tofecond Part, end of Sed, viii.

s Fanatics have referred trifling events to God*s decree or
purpofe, though I have no inftance at hand : fomething Jimilar
10 this we have had, Art. x. Sed, xxxix.

3© BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXI.

would make us aware how things are referred to
the permijfion of God though contrar}' to what is
moft commonly called his will.

The more a man ftudies the circumftances in
which our texts were ufed, the fewer references
to the eternal purpofe of God, will he be inclined
to make.

LXXXI. I have feveral times faid, that I look
upon the paflages of Scripture from which the
dodtrine of Predeftination has been derived, as
being of the nature of Eloquence^, and not of fpecu-
lation. That will be the cafe if thofe paflages are
always calculated to excite good fdntiments. And
they will be, of courfe, rnuch lefs plain and per-
fpicuous, becaufe more indefinite, than practical
diredions ; and therefore ought to be interpreted
lefs literally. Indeed to interpret an eloquent ex-
prelTion, fo as to give it its true value, and neither
more nor lefs, feems fcarce pradicable. — Rom,
viii. 29, 30. is intended to have an efFe6t upon
\\\t feelings of thofe to whom it is addrefTedi — part
of Taylor's paraphrafe on the next verfe is, " and
what effed Ihould they [" thefc things"] have
upon our hearts^" and though Mr. Locke on the
opening of the Epiille to the Ephefians^ gives
predeftination the limited fenfe of God's purpofe
to take the Heathens into the Chriftian Religion;
yet he looks upon that whole epiftle as a piece Qf
eloquence and fublimity.

He fays, in his Synopfis, that St. Paul difplays
in it, '* the glorious ftate of that kingdom" (the
kingdom of the MefTiah) *' not in the ordinary
way of argumentation and formal realbning, which
had no place in an Epiflle writ as this is, all as it
were in a rapture^ and in a flile far above the plain
Jida^iQal way ; he pretends not to teach them any

thing,
•> Art. X. Sedl. XLii.— Art. xvr. Se6t. xxx.

BOOK IV. ART. XV. SECT. LXXXII. LXXXIII. 3I

thing, but couches all that he would drop into
their minds, in Thankfgivings and Prayers; which
affording a greater liberty and flight to his thoughts,
he gives utterance to them in noble and fublime ex-
preffions, fuitable to the unfearchable wifdom and
goodnefs of God, Ihewn to the world in the work
of Redemption." Mr. Locke himfelf makes one
afraid of giving any very definite fenfe to any lofty
expreffions in the opening of fuch an addrefs efpe-
cially; though he may rightly point out what
was to be a dijiingu'ijlied part of the fentiment
excited.

Perhaps fome paflages may be made eafy by
obferving the Jewi/Ii mode of referring all events to
God. But this remark may be more ufeful when
we fay anything about Reprobation.

Lxxxii. An obfervation made in the Intro-
dudion to this fecond part of our Articles, may
be of ufe here. Sometimes expreffions of Scrip-
ture are not confidered with fufficient freedom,
becaufe they are fuppofed to contain new truths^
communicated immediately from Heaven. — 1 do
not perceive^ that any facred writer intended to
teach any thing nezv with regard to the predeter-
minations of God ; I mean, it does not flrike me
that any facred writer has intended to give us any
knowledge of the Nature of the divine decrees,
which might not be derived from natural reli-
gion. The facred writers refer new events to the
everlafting purpofe of God ; but it does not follow
that they taught new dodtrines about them.-

LXXXIII. I will now make a few remarks on
the particular texts which I have produced in fup-
port of my propofition. — Of Matt. xxv. 34. — .
Ads ii. 23. and the opening of the Epiftle to the
Ephefians, I have already faid fomething; Rom. ix.'i
will come beft under Reprobation : and the open-
ings

32 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXIII.

ings of the firft Epiftle to the ThefTalonians, anci
the Epiftle to Titus have nothing pecuhar in
them : I will therefore confine mylelf to Jolin
xvii. II. (and fimilar expreffions;) Acts xiii. 48 —
1 Theff. V, 9.-2 Tim. i. 9. and 1 Pet. i. 2.

In John xvii. 11, and other paflages, Chrift
{peaks of Chriftians as given him by his heavenly
Father; a very proper and pious acknowledge-
ment ! efpecially in prayer^ or devout difcourle ;
but containing no more do^rhie than would have
arifen from our King's thanking God, on the
day of his public thankfgiving, for giving him
millions of affectionate fubjefts, rejoicing in his
recovery.

A(5ts xiii. 48. has occafioned many difcuffions.
I confefs it ieems to me to mean no more than
that as many as chofe to become Chrillians, were
allowed to become Chriftians ; or as many as it
pleafed God to make fo : none duly qualified were
refujed^ though they were Gentiles : that was the
wonder; that Gentiles fhould be admitted to be
God's people! "when the Gentiles heard this"
(that they might be Chriftians) "they were glad;**
it was new to them at " Antioch in Pifidiai"—
*' they glorified the word of the Lord ! and as many
as were ordained to eternal life, believed :" not one
or two diftinguifhcd Heathens were admitted into
Chriftianity, but Heathens were admitted jull as
Jews would have been. Certainly the phralc
" ordained to eternal Life,* to cxprcfs being in-
clined to become Chriftians, is copious ; and it is
very folemn and grand; but fo was the occafion ;
nothing lefs was in agitation than what is called
the rejedion of the Jews, and the adoption of
all nations upon the face of the earth : the phrale
might feem natural to Jews, in defcribing conver-
fion to a religion, the charaderiftic of which was,

CO

feOOK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT LXXXIII. 33

to confer " eternal Life'' on its votaries; it muft
needs feem highly decorous — " Believed^'' is put
for, becoming believers.

Archbifliop Sharp ' and Mr. Parkhurft'' under-

ftand by oVo» wocv Ttrayif-ivoi a? ^wnv <Sj»wv<oy, as

many as were in a due dijpojition for eternal
Life : a fenfe fupported in a very refpeftable
manner'.

But if TiruyiJ.ivoi meant dejlinedy thfe expreflion
might mean no more than that all fuch, of thofe
prefent, as were deftined to be converted, were
converted then t that is, the converiion of the
Gentiles j as a folemn thing, might be referred,
when it had adually happened, in the way already
defcribed, to the divine purpofc. Being deftined
to eternal Life, might be ufed for being deftinetl
Co Chrifianity\ as Cliriftianity produces eternal life
of courfe, all things going right; ho impediment
arifing on the part of the convert; being admitted
into Chriftianity is often exprefled by the word
Salvation"" : which is generally equivalent to eternal
Life. — As many as were deftined to hefaved, were
admitted Chriftians. — Ads ii. 47".

I Theff. V. 9. is twice referred to by Arch-
bilhop Ufier in one page": yet it is the conclufion
of an exhortation to arm; therefore cannot, at leaft,
exclude human agency. It, with what goes l^efore,
conveys to me this idea. Remember the ftate
you are in; a ftate of warfare •■, you are encom-

paflfed

' Sermons, Vol. 3. " Greek Lexicon.

* For Epidetus's fenfe of TJTwyptji'Of, fee afterwards, Seft.
txxxix.

"» Art. IX. end of Seft, xxiv.— Art. xi. Se£l. xiv.—
Append, to Art. xi. Se£l. vin. — Locke on Eph. ii. 8.—
Taylor's Key.

" 0],e might fuppofe what efFed the phrafe would have had,
which was uftd with regard to Zjv/<'<2'/ converfion, Afts xvi, 14.

« Page 73, 7th Edit. Body of Divinity,

VOL. IV. C

34 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXIII.

paffed with enemies ; they may come upon you
by furprize; put on " the whole armour of God ;'*
if you are furprized, you wiJl incur di[grace and
puniJJiment : yet, believe me, that was not the defign
of your being placed in a (late of warfare ; it was,
that you might attain to honour, viflory, reward.
If this be right, there is a likenefs between this
paiHige and James i. 2, 12. " My brethren, count
it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;"
that is trials^ difficult fituationsj " Blefled is the
man that endureth temptation: for when lie is
tried, he fhall receive the Crown of Life, which
the Lord hath promifed to them that love him.'*
But no doElrine of decrees do I perceive.

In 2 Tim. i. 9. and what immediately precedes
it, St. Paul exerts ail his powers of eloquence to
"j/?/r up'''' Timothy to exercife his minillerial func-
tions : St. Paul himfelf was a prifoner when he
wrote, and under affliBion on account of the
Gofpel; his minifler feems to have been of a mild
difpofition ••, we read of his " tears" of his drink-
ing " no wine" of his being *' aJJiamedy'' of a
*' fpirit o{ fear;'* fuch a fituation of things was
alarming; the minifters of the Church which we
are told of, feem to have been very few, confider-
ing the number of countries in which Chriftianity
was planted; 'Timothy was to be animated in the
moft forcible manner; the Gojpel was to be fet in
its higheft light; to be fliewn as exifting in the
divine mind time without end. Let any one read
our text with thefe ideas, and he will fee much
noble vehemence in it, but no fpeculative teaching;
nodiing didadic.

I Per.

P Compare the difpirited expoftulations of Elijah, 1 Kinga
xlx, 4. 9, 10. 14.

BOOK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT. LXXXI V. LXXXV. 35

I Pet. i. 2. has been explained before^i with
relation to our prefent fubject, we have only to
oblerve, that it is a fine exordium of an interefting
and afFecfling Epiille. The author inftead of ad-
dreffing the converts by the bare appellation of
*' Chnjlians,'* enumerates the moft ftriking cha-
racierifiics oi Chriftians ; and in order to raife their
minds the more, he direfts their views back to the
foreknozvledge of the heavenly Father. But teaches
nothing new j points to nothing which is not
paji.

I conclude^ that to refer in an indefinite manner,
the important things of religion, to the purpofe of
God, may be highly proper and decorous^ on great
occafions, as a part of devotion or exhortation ; but
that no pra5iical rule, no fpeculative propojition, can
be juftly deduced from thofe paflages of fcrip^
ture, which have given birth to the doflrine of
• Predeflination.

Lxxxiv. J will now come to fome proof of
the indireEi kind ; or to the anfwering of a few
cbjeSiions : premifing, that what was faid in anfwer
to objeflions under the preceding^ Article, migliE
be of ufe here. The immutability of God ufed to
be urged by the Predefhinarians at the time of
the Reformation, in favour of their notions. —
It may be proper to keep in mind the obje£lions
in the tenth Article.

Lxxxv. Is not what has here been laid down,
too intricate^ for common people to attend to ? It
does not feem fo to me. Indeed, common people
do in reality know as much of the fcbjeft, as the

karned j

'^ Art. xc. Se6l. xxn.

' Art. XVI. Seft. xxx.— In Heylin, 557th page,— Oxford,
page 64.

* Art. X. Seft. xlv.

c z

36 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXV.

learned ; if they would not frighten themfelves
with fancies : and as all ranks may feel uneafinefs
from what they hear of prcdefti nation, all Iliould
be provided with the remedy. In our method, all
diftiniftlons Ixitween abfolute and conditional Prc-
dcftination are fet afide; all theory is difmitred ;
nothing remains, but what is to be difpatched by
common feeling and common fenfe. Nay, no
man is required as matter of duty, to think any^
//////^ about predeftination; only it is a pity any
one fliould lofe a fpecies of meditation, which " is
full of fweet, pleafant and unfpeakable comfort,"
when rightly performed. Mr. IVhiteheacKcc^Sy that
fages formed cwW focietics.

By hea.v en's per f^iiji on' y or by hQa.w^n.*s command -,
and afterwards,

And men are hrn to trifle, or to reign.
In thefe two lines are couched all the myfteries
of God's different wZ/A, and of each man's defiinyy
but they give no fort of trouble, fo long as men
have no fuperftitious fear about them. If we
would carry the feelings and fenfe with which we
read thefe, to Scripture, that would occafion no
greater perplexity. The plained things feem ab-
llrufe whilft we are obliged to examine them
minutely; but ufe foon makes examination un-
neceflary.

In (hort we feem to have little to do in re-
ferring

* See William Whitehead's Works, Vol. ii. Elegy iii. ad-
drefied to the prefent Earl Harcourt, (1796.) — Marmontel puts
thefe words into the mouth of one of his charadlers in his Tale
of La Bergere des Alpes, (Contes Moraux, Tome 2. p. 50.)
*' Puifquc je /uis Padeur" — " il faut bien que je fois ne pour
I'etre." — Any common expreflions, of the fort here quoted,
iifed without any idea of their being abftrufe, or of their
having relation to religious difputes, are to our prefent pur-
fofe.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. LXXXVI. LXXXVII. 37

ferring events to God's piirpofe ; but to let our feel-
ings" ply freely to the cafe.

Lxxxv I . Is not the general language of fcrlp-
ture as if men were" /rff/' yes; and fo is the
language of our Article : " in our doings,'* we are
to conceive ourfelves free; though looking backy
we may acknowledge our dependence on God in
every thing. Our moral and accountable nature is
immediately ^ from God. The texts about pre-
deftination are fezv, and fo are the occafions on
which they ought to be ufed. It may not be
jiecejfary to ufe them ever. Even thofe men who
favour predeftination in the way of Theory, have
fuch faint notions of it that they do not a5l from
it. Cah'inijls a£i from free-will as much as other
men : fometimes men may evade their duty, by
pretending to aft from a belief of defliny, but I
do not call this ading from a fuch belief; they
ad; from the notion of their being free, in every
thing t\(t.

Bifliop Butler^ proves, that the do6lrine of
men's not being at liberty, if it could be true
in Theory, mufl be falfe in praEiice : we muft a5i
as free; therefore there muft be a fallacy fome-
where.

Lxxxvii. Is not the doftrine of Predeftination
hurtful to Virtue ^ No ; Virtue is, in our Article,
pre/uppofed, before men are allowed to meddle
with Predeftination : thofe who are to hope that
God's purpole will prove favourable to them, muft
" walk righteoujly in good works-^* thofe who may

meditate

" Hecuba does this, in the paflage mentioned Seft. lxxix.
II. SI. 209, Sec. fhe ufes Fate to raife 2.fenthnetit of Confolation:
refers an event back to fate, though flie has no precife idea
what Fate means.

* Art. X. Seft. xLvi. y Seft. lxxix.

* Analogy i. 6.

c 3

^\

38 BOOK IV. ART. XVI I. SECT. LXXXVIII. LXXXIX.

meditate on the Chriftian difpeniation as having
been planned in the divine counfcls, muft not be
" carnal" but "-^ godly perfons" And even ihefc,
according to our notions, ought only to dwell
upon the decrees of God, as far as it will promote
and flrcngthen their virtue. — Bcfides, thofc texts
which mention predeftination, are fo linked with
the mention of virtue and holincfs*, that no in-
genuous man can take the former and leave the
latter. If, on reading any text feeming to favour
predeftination, we afk, ivhofe virtue could this
hurt? we Ihall find that it could hurt no one's,
without fome mifapplicauon.

Lxxxvii I. Does not the dodrine of Predefti-
nation interfere with the duty of Prayer ' f No more
than with any other exertion for attaining good :
no more than with any Virtue : indeed, accord-
ing to the reprefentation of our Article, referring
important and facrcd events to the divine purpofe,
is itfelf a fpecies of devotion.

Of Prophecy I have faid enough before^
Lxxxix. I would laftly propofe the fame quef-
tion which I have propofed in fome preceding^
Articles; will not the doftrine before us, dijgujl
thinking men ? I think it ought not; particularly
if our obfervation be true, that the fcriptures give
nothing nezv upon it. If, as a Chriftian, I were
alked what I meant by Predeftination, I Ihould
give an anfvVer which would fuit natural religion,

as

* Eph. i. 4. *' he hath chofen us in him before the founda-
tion of the world, that we fhoiild be holy and without blame,"
Sec. — See alfo Eph. ii. 10. crentf^ wnto gvi(l -iiorks, *•' ordained
that we (hould loalk in them :" and fo in other paffages.

" Art. X. Seft xLvii.

« Append. to Art. XI. Seft. XXVII.

^ Art. IX. Seft. XL. — Art. X Sed. XMX. — See the Heads of
Ledures in each Article, and the AppemUx to Art. xi.
Sedl. XXIX.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XC. 39

as well as revealed. T fhould fay, I mean that,
which, in the divine mind, is the caufe of order
and regularity ; of fuch order and regularity, as,
in man, would be afcribed to forefight and pre-
determination. To this, events have been ever
afcribed, in all ages of the world. EpiSietus ufes
rira.yiA.i\>oq much like the Author of the Ads of
the Apoftles': and certainly reafonable men could,
in no age of the world, deny or limity the prede-
terminations of God: If we can only turn re-
flexions upon the divine decrees to a moral purpofe,
we may be well fatisfied.

XC. But while I am upon the fubjed of natu-
ral religion, I fhould take notice of the famous
difficulty arifmg out of the Divine Prefcience. If "^^
God foreknows my adions, they are fixed, though
feemingly voluntary; therefore I have no choice j
I am no agent. But, according to our notions,
repeatedly ^ ftated, we have no right to afcribe to
God a certain knowledge of our voluntary adions,
if we have no fuch thing ourfelves, nor any idea
of fuch a thing : do we know that it is not an
impojfihility? WthdiWQ analogies, by which we can
conjeBurel with great probability, how men will ad;

and

e The paffage, to which I mean to refer, I find in Cap. ai.
in a Glafffow Edit, with a Latin tranflation, page 30.— In Stan-
hope's Edft. with Simplicius, about the 26th or 27th Chap,—
Simplicius, in his comment, makes the paflage belong rather
to the tenth Article : to which might perhaps be referred the

frayer, with which Simplicius concludes his Comment.

(Lardner's Teftimonies.)

Epid. Enchir. Cap. 22. Twv Ja !5i\rtrfv aoi <pxivo(^imv bTui
£%a, «? vvo TB ©£« T4T«7fA£vo; El? rxvryiv rm Ta|iv.

Here the true end of referring adlions to God, feems to be
difcerned: not fpeculative truth, but moral feelings; afliftipg A
virtuous principles of human agency, and mixing it with
divine.

f Art. XVI. beginning of Se£t. xxx.
C 4

4© BOOK IV. ART, XVI r. SECT. XCl.

4nd God mufl liave fomething of the fame fort in
an unbounded degree; hut thefe muft, by their
nature, tall fliort of certain knowledge. This is a
different thing from denying the Prelcience of God,
as the Socinians are faid to do : God has certainly

\\ all pojiible knowledge; but if he has a certain fore^
knowledge of our voluntary actions, it is a thing
of a kind* of which we know nothing; and there-
fore if we admit it, and aft from it, we are anfwer-
able for the coiifequences. We muft nor, through
?^ fear of detracting from the wifdom of God, en-
danger our own morals ; they are the principal
objects of tlie divine adminiftration.

xci. I would alfo recall '^ to your mind, that
there may be two different trains of thought, feem-

\\ ingly inconfiftent v/ith each other, and yet in either
you may go on without coming to an end. Study
the regularity of God's government, the conftancy
of the rules or laws of nature ; you come to no
end : — Study the freedom of voluntary agents, and
the interpofitions of God's pimculiv Providence ;
again you come to no end; what remains, but that
here, as in former inflances', we leave two things
to exift together as they qiay, though we are un-
able to make them fit and iuit each other ? alluring
ourfelves, that there is fome way of reconciling
them, though we m.ay not undcrftand it; now,
or ever.

What we have faid of the Divine Prefcience
and Immutability **, may put us into a right way
of underftanding the Repentance^ of God, and

other

S It is one of t\\t fecret things which belong iinto the Loid
pur God. Dsut xxix. 29.

*^ Book II ». Chap. XV. <^e5t. tx.

' Sedl. V. with references.

*' Art. XVI. beginning of Se(5>ion xxx.

' C.^mjjare Num. xxiii. 19. with Jer. xv.ii. 8, 10,

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XC I f. 4I

Other things afcribed to the Deity, which feem
rather to belong to man. Each is, (as before,
repeatedly) the caufe, in God, of thofe effeds,
which, in man, would be afcribed to that quality:
r.nd each quality is afcribed to God in any fitu-
ation, as far as, in that fituation, it is a Per^
fe^lion.

We fpeak of Rules of the Divine Government;
but, in ftridnels, we know no fuch : when any-
thing goes on nniformly, we prefume and fuppofe
a rule; but we know not the mind of the Lord;
the unexpeded violation of that uniformity which
we have obferved, may be as much from rule, as
the uniforniiry irfclf.

I conclude this topic of natural religion, with
obferving, that I do not fee how the divine prede- \^
termination makes any difference in the doctrine
of Liberty and Nece[/jty, which was laid down "
under the tenth Article; and therefore I do not fay
anything here on that fubjed.

xcii. I now come to fay fonjething of the
Dodrine of Reprobation. As in the tenth Artide I
referved to the laft, the fubjed of referring m/
to God, fo I do in die prefent Article. — Evil has
been referred to God as infpircd'' by him, or de-
creed, the form.er part was treated in the tenth
Article, the latter muft be mentioned here.

I fliould imagine, that as we have already (ttn.
the manner of referring good to God, if we gave
fome account of the etymology of reprobation, and
Ihewed in what refpects referring evil to God is \x
more complicated than referring good, (and there-
fore how any fcriptural expreffion afcribing evil,
ihould be conilrued lefs Jlriaiy than one afcribing
good,) we fliould, with the help of what has been
already laid, be prepared to examine any particular
/tw/j of fcripture.

Probd
'^ Art. X. Sea. xlix. " Art. x, Sed l.

42 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIII.

Probo fignifies to try, and fo, in the common
courfe of things, to approve : a tried friend is an
approved friend. — Reprobo is, ^fter trial, to rhrow
away, as refufe, that which has not anfvvcrcd the
trial.

In the trial of metah, what is thrown awav, is in
Englifh, called drofs, in Greek°, aSovAixo-j [a^y-cemv).
— In any contefts, in rnmwig^ &c. the lofer was
called ah-mu.oq; to this St. Paul feems to allude

when he fays, of himfelf, /ztiTrw? aXXcig xr,^v'^oc,(; auro?

a^omfjioq ytvuixai^ . Man is in a fhite of probation;
if he does tolerably well, he is Soxiy.og, but if he
is fo bad as to be deemed incorrigible, he is
aaoxifxog, or reprobate'^. I do not fee why Locke
and Taylor fhould run away from this fenfej there
is nothing more frightful in it, than in the expref-
lion, " he gave them kj)," when it is feen what they
were given up to.

Reprobation feems generally to give more alarm,
by the found, than condemnation; yet one had rather
be neglefted as refufe, than adjudged to pofitive
punifliment. A man may be comparatively repro-
bated ; as when another who \s preferred to him, is
faid to be eleded; reprobated, being the correla-
tive.— Nay, one might conceive one who is re-
probated in comparifon of one man, to be elected,
in comparifon of another. As a thing thrown
afide, may be ufed for fome other purpofe from
that it was tried for; and in preference to fome-
thing elfe.

xc 1 1 1 . The difference between referring good
and evil to God, feems to confift in this ; God
may have evil afcribed to him, becaufe none can

happen

° Prov. XXV. 4. — If. i, 22. according to the Lxx.
P So that with us, a di^aticrdhoric, I'iViTeprobate hor/e.
1 In ovir Homily, re/troveai>Ie \s the woidioi reprobate. — On
Faith, beginning ; from Titus i. 16.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIII. ^^

happen wliich he does not permit, and which,
therefore, does nor, in fome fenfe, make a pan of
his Gov ermvent ; (and every part of his Govern-
ment is ^wJ;) or becaufe there is no evil which
he does not conlroU, To as to prevent its operating
be5'ond certain limits''. Evil may alfo be afcribed
to God, when he ■punijlies it, and thereby produces
good\ but more diredly, when the evil afcribed is
ufed as a piinifiiment . It is alfo afcribed to him
when he brings incidental good out of it. Langiiaoe
muft, to be fure, be far from literal., which ai-
cribcs evil to God in any fenfe; but it is ufually a
fad which is afcribed, and that fact is good in
fome refpe£is and evil in others. Jt bottom, it is
only good w^hich is afcribed to God, or what is
good to him who afcribes it ; and common fenfe
lees this, though it may not be confcious of every
ftep in the procefs. When God only permits eviJ,
there is, no doubt, good, if it v.-ere only in the
liberty, accountablenefs, &c. and in every other
caie jufl now mentioned, the good appears more
plainly.

But good is afcribed to God more fimply and
directly; it is unmixed ; he not only permits it,
but rewards and encourages it ; fo that both the
liberty of conferring and attaining good, and the
encouragements to ufe that liberty, are his.

Though language in which evil is afcribed to
God, is more imperfect than language in which
good is afcribed ; yet even the latter is capable of
being perverted : — God is " the author of /)f'^<:d';"
then what occalion, fays a man who wants to evade
his duty, for me to be a Pti<r(f-;;;rt,('tr r'— perhaps

this

' Some '-eferer.ces might be n\ide from this Seftlon, and the
next to the 50th Sedion of the tenth Article ; but the beft
iv.ethod would be, to look at that before reading this part.

44 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIV.

this evafion might be too grofs to pafsj but others
do pafs, which are of the fame kind.

When one man is /)r^^;T^^ to another, we fome-
times hear the comparative difadvantage called m/,
injury, or even punijliment. Of fuch evil God may
be the immediate author. He may prefer one of
his creatures to another, or make them into differ-
ent ranks, in any kind of life. (Rom. ix. 15.)

There feems to be Reprobation fpoken of a
priori and a pojeriori.

XCIV. Some have had a notion, that God, by
a direB a£l, ordains a number of men to mifcry ;
but there is no warrant in fcripture for faying any
fuch thing. Take an evil, a fnB, and you may
refer it to the divine government, with that indif-
tinclnefs which your ignorance demands, if you
can anfwer a good piirpofe by fo referring it; if
you can excite a pious or virtuous Jentiment; but
not otherwife. An attention to drcumftances, is
required in referring evil as well as in referring
good*; nay, a greater degree of attention. But
let us take fome ivflance.

Let us take firft the rejeflion of the Jezvs; as a
great part of the doiftrine of reprobation has been
taken from fcriptural expreiTions relating to that
event. The plain fa5i, if told in common lan-
guage, was, the Jews, or part of them, rejeded
the Chriftian religion : but when this facl was
taken in a religious light, and confidered as part
of God's government, and referred to God, the
expreflion then was, God rejected the Jcivs; whicli
to the Jews ihemfelves would feem natural and ealy
language.

The Jews, in this cafe, were reprobated-, and
important good, no doubt, they loft; — but they*

might

* Confider Matt. xxv. 41. in this light, as before, Sedion
l,xxx.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCV. 4J

might any of them embrace Chriftianity when
they pleafed ; and then, when their conveiTion was
fpoken of in a religious light, and as part of
divine government, they would be faid to have
been eleci, predejlinated^ according to God's pur-
pofe. In both cafes, of rejeding and embracing
Chriftianity, \\\(^fa6i muft come jirft^ and then be
referred back to the divine counfels; in fuch re-
ference language implying divine agency would be
rightly ufed.

XCV. Now let us take a few particular texts,

I will take them chiefly, or entirely, from Arch-
bifhop UJIier's proof of Reprobation', which he
favours. I do not perceive Jude 4, amongft his
texts ; which I wonder at.

Frov. xvi. 4. gives me no other idea than this :
God's government is univerfal ; what he crsatedho.
always defigned to fuperintend : he created all
things as fubjeds of his government ^ it extends to
the punilhment of the wicked. Though God
hates fin, yet the permilTion of it, and the punifli-
ment of it when committed, is as much a part of
his plan, as even the rewarding of goodnefs.

Let us now go to the ninth Chapter to the Romans^
and firft take the 13th verfe, *« Jacob have I loved,
but Efau have I hated." This whole chapter is
written to prove, that God might/f/ afide the Jews,
or leave them out of the kingdom of the Meffiah,
that is, reprobate them, notwithftanding his pro-
mijes to their forefathers. Their notion fcems to
me to have been this; — the Chriftian religion
cannot be the true, or if it is, we need not be
anxious about it, becaufe we muft be of- the true,
in confequence of the promifes of God. No,
fays St. Paul, that reafon is not valid ; you cannot
depend upon defcent, becaufe you inherit from

-Jacobs
* Body of Divinity, page 73, 74. yxh edition.

40 BOOK IV, ART. XVII. SECT. XCV.

Jacoby and lie vv:is not regularly defcended from
Abraham; Efau was bis elder brother :~that in-
flance of quitting the diredt line, St. Paul well
knew, the Jews would not object to; the preference
of the defcendants of Jacob, that i"^, of the liracl-
ites, to thofe of Efau, or the Edomites^ was a
favourite fubjed: : but, fay the Jews, Elau was
dilinherited, bccaufe of his bad charaElcr -. that,
replies the Apoftls, was not the realon; for the
ilifmheritina; was announced before the birth of
the twins; therefore God may make a fmiilar
change when it fcems good to him. The exprcf-
fion of the Apoftle, " Jacob have I loved, but
Efau have I hatedy' is, very properly, borrowed
from a Prophet''; and the language of the prophet,
means, that the Ifraelites were a much more prof-
perous /)c'6])/t? than the Edomites : — there is not the
lead in the paflage of any vidividunlSy or of any
punidiment in a future ftate.

The 17th verfe? is another fupport'' of Repro-
bation : It contains another inftance, which the
Jews v/ould readily adopt, the punilliment of the
enemies 0I their forefathers, the punilhment of the
yRoy-ptianSy and Pharaoh their King. — It is men-
tioned in the Book of Exodm'^ . God rnifed up
Pharaoh in order to fliew his power ; the plain faci
was, while Pharaoh was under the rod, under any
of the plagues, he was humble and fubmiifive ;
when they were remitted, he exalted^ him{elj\ and
grew arrogant again.

But though in plain language he exalied himjelfy
yet when the tranfadions were confidered as a part
of God's government, the cxprcffion was, God
exalted him, or raijed him up ; by allowing him

that

" Mai. 1. 2, 3. Obadia^feems all on tliis fubjeft.

* Rhemifts oa the place.— Uflier, page 74.

y Exod. ix. 16. * Excxl. ix. 17.

book: IV. ARTv XVII. SECT. XCV. 47

that relaxation from punidiment, which occafioned
his infoleiice. And this was very luitable to
Jewifli phrafeology. The effect of Pharaoh's in-
folence was, to make God's protection of the
Ifraelites much more flriking, and much more
celebrated than it v/ould othervvife have been ;
which is, in hke manner, as a part of divine
government, thus expreffed, " that my name may
be declared throughout all the earth." — Now why
might not God, in the fame fenfe, raife up the
Jezvs P the more they exalted themfelves, and the
more obftinate they grew in rejeding the Gofpel,
the more would the fame of the Gofpel be declared
throughout the world. Indeed the lituation of
the Jews has been, and is, mod wonderful ; and
has, in fad, greatly affifted in proving the divine
authority of the Gofpel. But the paiTage before
us is fo little to Reprobation, in the ufual fenfe of
the word, that we have loft all idea of reprobation
merely by examining it.

We mufl take one more paflage out of this
famous chapter; the 2 2d verfe : " vejpis of wrath,
fitted to deJlrnBion ;" but we muft look back, per-
haps as far as our laft inftance, the 17th verfe.
My idea of the whole paflage, is this; — a taunting
Jew had faid; we make God's name^ to be glo-
rious ? do we fo ? then God cannot be anory with
liSy in truth, as yet, (continuing the farcafm) we
have fufFered no great harm !— On this the Apoftle
is indignant; Infolence! he exclaims. You know
your cavil to be infolent, as well as Ibphiflical : but
dare you infult God ! are not you, accord! no- to
your ow^n prophets, in his hands, as clay in the
hand of the Potter } may not you be appointed to
a more or lefs noble office } He might dsjiroy you,

and

" Ezek. xviil. a Jew makes a taunting cavil j fee the ninth
Art. Seft. XXXVIII.

48 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCV.

and he does not j is this your complaint ? forgive
him this wrong : it may not continue ; He only
knows how near your dcflru(5lion is ; He only
knows liow loon you may weep over your "Jempley
and find not one ftonc left upon another ! Bccaufe
deilrudlion is not actually arrived, do you con-
clu(ie that ChriRianity is not the kingdom of the
true MelTjali 1 that would be a moft unwarrant-
able conciufion. Remember how God acted with
t\\Q j^gyptians; if, in the fame manner, he makes
your refufal of the Gofpel, the means of promoting
its honour^ you cannot, after praifmg the mealure in
one cafe, blame it in another, exactly fimilar.

Thus we lee, that the naflage has no relation to
indh'icluals^ or to Chrijlians, or to punilhment in a
future life. There is fome appearance as if St.
Paul had not been wholly without an idea of the
deftrudion of Jerufalem ; but how flir he was in-
formed of that event, docs not appear. One
thing fecms evident, that St. Paul, by his reafon-
ing was endeavouring to promote converfion to
Chriftianitv ; and from thence we may conclude,
that any individual Jew might have efcapcd troni
any kind of deftruclion which was impending over
the JewiHi people.

We have now only i Pet. ii. 8. and Jude4, re-
maining : they are fo much alike, that 1 will take
them together : indeed they icem fo little different
from Prov. xvi. 4. that if that is explained, lb arc
thefe. All three confift in referring evil to God,
in order to fliew, that the mod daring offenders
cannot exempt themlelves from the reftraints ot his
Government. You will find learned^ and inge-
nious folucions of them all j but I am mofl in-
clined to folvc them from what has been laid down,

about

*> In Benfon, I.e Clerc, Whitby on the five points, &c.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCV. 49

about the difference between referring" good and
evil to the Supreme Being. When men run into
great crimes, they are apt to triumph in their free-
dom from thofe fetters, in which they fancy the
good are confined : nothing tends more to humble
them, and make them fober-minded, than to
make them feel, that they are totally under the
government of God; and that, though they are
really guilty, yet their very crimes may be inftru-
ments of good in the hands of God; this makes
them feel impotent and defpicable ; and the more
if they are made fenfible of the boimdlefs duration
of the divine fchemes of Government.— Thefe
are the ideas which feem to me to prevail in the
minds of the facred writers when they throw our,
*' appointed''' to this evil; " of old ordained to this
condemnation."

And we fhould really eonfider what a world wC
Ihould be in, if God was ignorant of man's wicked-
nefs ; or if the profligate were really laivlefs ; or if
evil was limply evil; if no good came out of evil;
or if a fin was never made the punifliment of a
fin. It frequently happens, that the good which
fprings out of evil incidentally is fo great, that we
dare not wifli the evil had not happened. To be
fure when we exprefs God's permiffion, regulation,
improvement of evil, by fpeaking as if he were
the author of evil, our language is very imperfed;
but fo indeed is the generality of our lan2;uao-e ;
often, I apprehend, not lefs imperf?6l : cuftom re-
conciles us to it; and praclifing upon it, ferves to
define it : the cafe might foon be the fame w^ith
language afcribing evil to God. It has been eafy
and familiar to the Jews ; it might become fo
to us.

xcvi. Ac
*= Sect, xci ri,
VOL. IV. D

^O BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCVI. XCVI I.

xcvi Al length we come to our Application.
If what has been'' faid is juft, we may have here
an Article of natural religion''.

* I have already^ returned thanks to Providence
for making me a member of my religious ajfoci-
ation : Its laws and regulations mufl improve me
and bring me to happinefs ; but 1 cannot think
that thofe laws exifled Jir^ when I firft knew
them. — how long then may the plan have exifted
in the divine mind ? — the heavenly planner only
knows !

* When 1 refled on the bleffed Inftitution, as
feltled by divine wiidom, before all time, 1 am
filled with facred wonder : could I flatter myfelf
that I was a worthy member of it, 1 (hould be
happy; 1 try my principles and my conduB ; and in
proportion as they lluisfy me, I feel a confidence in
(jod as the protc(flor of it, and an affeSiionate
gratitude towards him. — Yet I can fee, that if a
had man was to ad from a notion that all things
are fettled, it could only lead him to defpair, or
licentiotifnefs.''

' No ; the decrees of God may be an intereding.
fubjed of contemplation to a good mind ; but prac-
tice mufl fpring from the endeavours of man,
animated by the hopes of pleafing God, and being
rezvarded by him.*

XCVI I. A Chrifllan might fay thus ;

' That I am a member of the Church of Chrifl,
is matter of fincere rejoicing to me : what a pri-
vilege ! to be ifivited into fuch a Ibciety, to be

conlidered

^ End of Se£l. lxxxii.

*^ Thefe forms proceed according to the hint at the end of
Seft. xLii: firft comes they^^?, then the cau/e, in God's pur-
pofe, formed before any aflignable time : then the good and
ha.d u/e of contemplating God's purpofes, or decrees: then tlie
nature oi practical rules.

* Art. XIII. Seft, xxvii.— Art. xii. Sed. xxvi. — Art. xi.
Sedl. XXX.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCVIII. 5I

confidered as free from any great faulty to be re-
garded in the light df a brother to my Lord and
Saviour ! to be led naturally to imitate his perfec-
tions, and to be put into a way which leadeth to
eternal life ! — The importance of the bleffing ftill
grows upon me when I confider, that the Church
of Chrift has been an objeft of attention in the
Divine mind ever lince the Fall of our firft Parent.
— So far i am exprefsly taught ; but had not the
Chriftian difpenfation been concei';ed or planned
before the Fall? I mud not fay Or think' it : I
look back, and time keeps opening upon me : I
can fix no period when it feems at all probable that
the gracious defign had a beginning.'

* Chriftianity, exifting in the divine mind before
the foundation of the world, and opening r^radu-
ally upon mankind, is the moll au^u/i and afecii'dg
object which an human being can contemplate. —
And when an examination of my heart and actions
gives me any reafon to think that t am really a
member of it, my hpe is confirmed, and my de-
vout affe5iions enlivened, by the conjiancy of the
divine benevolence. Neverchelefs, it is intelligible
how an opinion, that all things are fixed by the
Deity, may lead a man into a ilate of defpondency,
or into a negligent and diliblute courfe of lite.'

* Though therefore I am happy in having fuch a
fubjeft of meditation, to raife my mind to piety
and devotion 5 yet I (hall endeavour to ftrengthen
and improve my prc5lical principles by attending to
the promifes of God, and to the revealed defcrip-
tions of that condu(fl:, which he wilhes man co
purfue, for the improvement of human happinefs.*

XCVIII. With regard to mutual concefftons, I
would not fay much ; — Dupin^ makes no objeftion
to this Article : there is great room for candour in

debating
c Mofhelin, Vol. 6. page 77, osflavo.

^2 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. XCIX.

debating about it. If divine agency does not ex-
clude human, nor human'' divine, and both are
indijlin^, different modes of referring events, to God
and man, fliould be allowed j and different y^rrt/>^,
according to mens different feelings and concep-
tions. St. John feems to have been of an affec-
tionate temper, and that influences his ftile. — And
if you and your adverfary may get into two dif-
ferent trains, of thought and expreffion, and both
be' right, to what purpofe is difpute ? Our form
of affent feems to be fuch (as we faid on a former
occafion") as an Heathen would fubfcribe to, ex-
cept in thofe particulars which mull be common to
all Chrijlians ; and if it be fo, no denomination of
Chriftians need diffent from it. But till it appear
how our method would be accepted, one cannot
tell what conceffions to propofe. — Even UJJier,
fpeaking' of Reprobation, feems to have had lome
ideas of referring evil to God, which might, with
Ibme tempering, be made to coalefce with ours.
Indeed our method has favoured Reprobation as
much as Election ; and poffibly might be accept-
able to fomc as fetting afide no texts of fcripturc, in
order to favour commonly-received notions of hu-
man'" Philolbpliv.

XCIX. We come, in the laft place, to Improve-
ments. Shall we, in imitation of Melan^hon, Jlrike
out this feventeenth Article ? I had much rather
our method of explaining and defending it, were
accepted. The mind wants fomething to lean upon
with rec^ard to the divine Counfelsj and thofe paU
fages of Scripture which fpeak of them. The
dilquifitions and meditations on fuch paflages

mioht

*> Sefl. i-xxix. Lxxxvi.

« See Sett xci. referring to Book iii.Chap. xv. Sefl. ix.

^ Art. x. Scd. Liii.

• Page 74, Body of Divinity, 7th Edition.

» Dr. Powell's 3d Charge.

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT. C 53

might be called a fine fpecies of devotion : they are
all lentiment and fublimity. — One would do a good
deal to fuit weak brethren; but there is no fuffi-
cient reafon why thofe who are not weak fhould
lofe fuch fubiime devotion: efpecially as thofe who
are perplexed by meditations on the benign purpofes
and plans of the Supreme Being are under no fort
oi obligation to dwell upon them. (SecV. lxxxvi.)

A tranfpofttion of the former and latter parts of
the firft " paragraph, might prevent fome wrong
conceptions.

It muft be tried, in Natural Theology, Heathen
writings, the Scriptures, and common" difcourfe,
whether the obfervations which have been hazarded
are juft.

c. When Milton affigned to his fallen angels
the employment of reafoning^ on our prefent fub-
jeds, 1 hope he did not mean to deny, that, when
rightly conceived and made the fubjedt of our con-
templation, they are " full of fweet, pleafant, and
imfpeakable"^ comfort,^*

" Se£t. XL II. 0 Art. x. Se£l. liv.

P Paradife Loft, Book ii. 557.

*i It may be a fatisfaftion to fome hearers of the Leflures,
who took notes, to know, that the five laft Seftions of this 1 7th
Article, were omitted April i, 1791, for want of time; even
though the Lefture that day was fupernumerary.

ARTICLE

54 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. I.

ARTICLE XVII!.

07 OBTAINING ETERNAL SALVATION ONLY BY
THE NAME OF CHRIST.

THEY alfo are to be had accurfed, that pre-
ilime to fay, That even' Man fliall be faved
by the law or feet which he profcffeth, fo that he be
dihcent to frame his hfe according to that Law, and
the figlit of Nature. For holy Scripture doth fet
out unto us only the Name of Jefus Chrift,
whereby men muft be faved.

I. In treating of this Article we will proceed
in our ufual method, though much of what was
faid upon the thirteenth Article might be applied
here The thirteenth feems to relate to indivi-
duals^ and this to members of Society ; but yet as
tliefe may be the fame perfons, their negleding
Chriftianity in the capacity of individuals, mull
be nearly connected with their neglecting it in their
focial chara(5\er.

According to what was faid at the opening of
the Introduction to the fecond part of our Articles,
the THIRD PART bcgins here.

It has probably been the cuflom in many dif-
ferent ages to fay,, that all honefl men will be
faved, whatever religion they may be ofj but this
fentimcnt muft be moft prevalent when men are

mod

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. II. III. 55

mod divided into religious parties; then the dif-
iiculcy of forming a judgment, is moft ftriking :
—it muft, on this account, have been very pre-
valent at the time of our Reformation, and that
«ra is probably of the moft confequence to us
at prefent ; neverthelefs, if we make hiflorical
remarks, we may as well look back as far as we
can.

II. Bifhop Burnet {^ys, that " The impiety that
is condemned in this Article was firfl: taught by
feme of the Heathen Orators and Philofophers in
the fourth Century," who pleaded, that God was
more honoured by various modes of worfliip, than
if all men agreed in one mode. — I fliould rather'
apprehend, that the compilers of our Article
would have chiefly in view fome error held by
Chrijlians^ or by fuch as might have the fcriptures
propofed and urged to them; fcriptural authori-
ties would only affedt perfons fo fituated.

Philajier does give an account of a Sefb called
RhetorianSy Vv'ho held, that ail fe^s were right; and
fome have imagined, that thefe were Rhetoricians^
or Orators of the fourth Century ; but Philafter
lived in the^ fourth Century himfelf, and places
this fedt much earlier. Our bufinefs does not
feem to be to enter into nice qneftions on ecclefi-
aftical Hiftory ; and therefore I (hall content myfelf
with referring you to Lardner's account'' of Rhe-
torians, and with obferving, that though Augujiin
thinks it incredible that any i^oX. (hould juftify all
feds ; it has often appeared to me, that each {^dijets.
out on fome right principle, though it may after-
wards go too far, or deviate from the right path.

III. We may now take notice of the fifth
Century. One part of the Pelagian controverfy was

about

* A. D. 380, Lardner, '' Works, Vol. 9, page 333.

D 4

^6 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. IV. V.

about the univerfality of Redemption-^ was intended
to determine, whether all men were redeemed by
the Death of Chrilt, and whether all men were
called. I beheve difputes on luch matters referred
chiefly to Predejiination ; and were intended to de-
termine whether Chrift could be faid to have died
for the reprcbate-y but yet perhaps they might have
Jome relation to our prcfent Article j for if all men
Avere fo redeemed by Chriit as to be upon one
footings it would not fignity what religion any man
was of. — It fecms, moreover, as if the Pelagians
had held notions which were not approved by the
orthodox", about the juftiiication and Salvation of
•the holy men nientioned in the Old Teflament.
Yet this Salvation was, in fome meafure, afcribed
to Chrifti to their hzx'xngforefeen his coming.

IV. Mohammed lived partly in the fixih Cen-
tury, and partly in the feventh, (571 — 633J. Bp.
Burnet obferves. that the Koran reprefents " alj
men in all religions" as " equally acceptable to
God, if they ferve him faithfully in them." lit
aho remarks, that this candour was intended as an
inducement to embrace Mohammedanifm, and was
followed by great feverity towards thofe w-ho v\cre
defircus to apoftaiize. We may give a pafllige
from the Koran to our purpofe; " Sciendum
generalitcr, quoniam opnis reifte viycns, Judieus
leu Chriftianus, Icu lege fua relida ad aliam
tendcns, omnis fcilicet Dcum adoians, bonique
geftor, indubitanter divinuni amorcm aflequctur''."

v. But, for the reafon already afligned, we are
chielly concerned with the age ot the Reformation,

la

' See Auguftin's Works, Eci. Antv. Vol. ro. — Appendix,
pap-e 7 c;, in a Pel.ii^ian Crred, or Confeflion of Faith.

^ Azoara 2d. page 10, Edit. Bibliandri. Zurich 1564, quoted
by Forbes, Lib. 4. cap. 10.

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. V. 57

In the Racovian^ Catechifm it is laid down, that
fmce the coming of Chrift no one is juftified with-
out faith in him,' but before his coming, good men
were juftified by faith in^ God. — Erafmus not only
fpeaks of Cicero as infpired^, but as probably 'i
Javed.—Pmdus Jovitis died in the year 1552, when
King Edward's Articles were publifhed ; in his lives
of famous men, he gives an account of Galeottii^
Martins., who was perfecuted by fome monks
(though accidentally proteded by Pope Chryftus,
or Sixtus the Fourth, as an old acquaintance)
for teaching, in a Book of facred and moral philo-
iophy, *' omnibus gentibus, integre et puriter
veluti ex jufta naturae lege viventibus, teternos
coeleftis aurse frudus paratos :" &c. this perfon
died in 1478. — We have already *" mentioned the
decrees of the Council o^ Trent ; I do not fee any
thing more to our purpofe than what was quoted
under the thirteenth Article".

The Scotch confeflion feems very ftrenuous on
the necelTity of being of the true Chriftian church
in order to attain'' Salvation. " Extra quam'*
(ecclefiam) '* nee eft vita nee eterna felicitas. —
Itaque prorsus deteftamur illorum blafphemiam qui
dicunt homines viventes fecundiim equitatem et
juftitiam, quamcunque religionem profefli fuerint,

fervatos

« This quoted Art. XI II. Seft. VI.

^ De prophetico Jefu Chrifti munere; or page 212.

8 Mentioned Art. x. Sed. ii. Ep. ad Jo. Ulatt, in Cic.
Tufc. Difp.

^ Art. XI 11. Sedl. v.

' To what was quoted Art. xiii. Se£t. v. from Hume's
Hiftory, Ihould be added the latter part of Hume'sTentence ;
which belongs to the i8th Article: *' Any one who prefumes
to maintain, that an Heathen can poffibly be faved, is himfelf
expofed to the penalty of eternal perdition." — Hume's Hift.
4to. Vol. 3, page 334, ift Edit, quoted by Gilpin in his Life of
Cranmer, page 159.

^ iJea. 16. Deficclefia.

58 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VI.

fervatos iri." The Scotch might be the more
zealous, as being inclined to Calvimfm : to fuch
it mull be Ihocking to have any one fpeak as if
there were no eleB.

The authors of the Reformatio Legxtm are aHo
very warm; perhaps thinking the notion oppoled
an affront to Chriftianity, *■*■ Horribilh^ eft et
inanis illorum audacia, qui contendunt in omni
religione vel fed a quam homines profefli fuerint
falutem iliis effe fperandam," &c. — In the fame
chapter is a declaration againft the notion that all
men fhali be faved at Injl, after undergoing fome
punifhment; which notion is the fubje6t of the
laft of King Edward's Articles. Perhaps it might
feem, that univerfal falvaiion, though after fome
evil fuffered, was not agreeable to the fcriptural
accounts of falvation by Chrift.

This Reformatio Legum profeffes to cenfure
only hasrefies a6lually prevailing at that time : as
appears from the Epilogus after the twenty-fecond
chapter.

VI. We have fometimes carried our hiflori-
cal remarks lower than the times when the Articles
were compiled; if we do this in the prefent cafe,
we may take notice of Milton^ Hohbes^ and Pope.
V Milton may not at firft, feem a proper inftancc,
as he did not, in the latter part of his life, adhere
to any fed, but thought he might l)e faved though
feparate from all feds; but if the fault condemned
in the Article be that of not founding our hopes
of Salvation on our being members of the Church
of Chrift, and on our ading as fuch; the great
Poet might run into that fault by depriving him-
felf of opportunities of performing focia} a5ls of
Chriftian worftiip. His Biographer, Dr. Johnfon,
feems to difapprove of his condud in this refped.

Hobbes
' De Hierefibus, Cap. i r .

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VII. ^g

Holbes is menrioiied by Bifhop Burnet as requlrino-
no man to take farther care what Religion he it
of, than that it be the rehgion eftabhihed in his
own country by law.-^l would mention Mr.
Pope^ only in order to introduce thofe two lines
of his, which may have contributed, perhaps more
than he intended, to promote the notion con-
demned in our Article ;

For modes of Faith let gracelefs Zealots fight.
His can't be wrong whofe Life is in the right.

Near end of 3d Ep.— Effay on Man.

We might again" read the paffage where Dr.
Prieftley affirms, that «' nothing is requifite to
make men'* objed of God's favour, *' but fuch
moral conduft as he has made them capable of j"
—with what follows.

VII. After Hiftory we come to Ex-planation.

Ought this eighteenth to be confidered as be-
longing to the/e'fo;?^" or third part of our thirty-
nme Articles .? 1 think, rather to the //;/r^; it feems
a kind of Introdiiaion; and the idea this; a man
mufl not thmk that he may be fure of Salvation
as a member of any fed, or religious Society, which
he may happen to engage in : Salvation can only
be hoped for, according to the Scriptures, from
bemg a member of the trne Church of Chri/i, what-
ever may be the right idea of that Church : and
what It IS, IS fettled in the fubfequent Articles.—
The Scotch confeffion introduces the error oppofed
m our eighteenth Article, under the fubiedt
hceJefia. ^

In

^7l''::ioritfj:: '''"' '"^^ ™- ^-•^«^- ''P^s«

60 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VIII.

In the Articles of 1552, indeed, there is an
Article between" our eighteenth and nineteenth,
againft evading the Moral Law, cither under pre-
tence of its being Mojnical^ or of immediate mj-pi-
ration ; and fo the connexion might be, though
mere virtue cannot y^i^^ men, it is not to be neg-
le5ied: — in 1562, the part about the moral law
of Mofes was added to the feventk Article, (about
the Old Tellament) and the part about Infpiration
was omitted.

The title of our eighteenth Article fpeaks of
obtaining Salvation " by the Name of Chrift :" in
compliance with the text which is introduced into
the Article. The force of that expreffion may
therefore be noticed when we come to that text.

VIII. " Ihey ALSO arc to be had accursed,"
— to what does the word " ^//o" refer ? no perfons
had been pronounced accurfed before?— but feveral
fets of perfons had been condemned for holding dif-
ferent errors, though not by the fame expreffion.
In the fourteenth Article we have, " Works of
Jxipererogation cannot be taught without arrogance
and impiety;' — In the fixteenth, *' they are to be
condemned which fay they can no more fin," &c. —
In the feventeenth, a doctrine is faid to fet men
on a precipice from, which they are liable to fall
headlong into defpair, or llcentioufnefs : — in the
eighteenth, " they aljo are to be had accurfed,'' &c.
" damnandi" — et — " anathematizandi."

Indeed it might be proper to take notice of the
meaning of the word " they :" the perfons fpoken
of mud be fuppofed, at leaft, to know of Chrifti-
anity, if not to be, in fome fenfe, Chri/iians : in

1552

" Why fliould Bifhop Sparrow, in his Articles of 1562, iiifert
this Article of i 5 152 before our 1 8th? was he unwilling to inter-
rupt the feiies oi Articles relating to tlie Church ?

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VIII. 6t

1552 the title was, '' IVe muft truft ro obtain
eternal faJvation only by the name of Chrift:"
and in the body of the Article we have, " holy
Scripture doth fet out unto its only the name of
Jefus Cliriil whereby men muft be laved." This
cannot belong to thofe who know nothing of the
Holy Scrip turesP : the peribns condemned lire fup-
pofed to make a wrong choice, to reft their hopes
of happinefs on a wrong foundation, when they
migl/t reft them upon a right one.

Jf it be laid, that "y^^," and natural virtue,
conildered m regard to a power of conferring fal-
vation, are oppofed to Chriji, and therefore fea
may mean a religion not Chriftian; I anfvver, there
may be feds not Chriftian, which may be within
reach of arguments for Chriftianity, though too
carelefs m attendmg to iuch arguments : and there
niay be Chriftian feds too carelefs about approach-
ing as near to the 5>/^/// as poffible. (Art. xiii.
Sed. I. near the end.) —Probably at the Refornm.
tion many took up this mode of talking; it fignifies
but litde whether you are Papift or Proteftant, or
Puritan, or even a Jew, if you are a good mal.-^
And many might float about, as kind of nominal
Chnftians, without paying much attention to any
reafonmgs on religious fubjeds.-This might re-
tard the Reformation, as well as feem aniiffronc
to Chriftianity. One cannot conceive a perfon to
be ftrongly imprefled with the idea, that he can
only be laved by being a member of the Church of
Chrift; and not anxious to know wherein o-enuine
Chriftianity confifts. "^

" To be had accurfed;' in the Latin, <' anathemati-
zandi fwit •;' -^-^XQ to be anathematized. Some-
thing was faid of the meaning of this exprefljon,

in

P See opening to tlie thirteenth Article.

6z book: IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. viit.

in the third Book''. It has an harfli founcl, but
ihould be, like all other expreflions, interpreted
by cujiom. Now it has been very much the cliI-
tom to condemn errors in fuch form as this ; if
any one holds fuch an error, " anathema fit " let
him be accurfcd : we may fee inftances in the afts
of the Council of Trent, or of any other Council.
— And in our readings on Bilhop Pearfon, we meet
with"^ Cyri/Ps twelve anathematifmsj againft Nefto-
rius, and thofe of the Council ol Sirmium and
others, againft* Photinus. Indeed this has been the-
eJiabliJJied language of the Church. Its general
meaning feems to have been, that men who ran
into fuch particular errors, did not deferve to be
united to the holy Church of Chrift, did not ap-
pear to be fo in the fight of God ; — but ought to
be looked upon as Jeparated from it ; and as ana-
themas accompanied excommunications, the ideas ot
them became ' ajfociated. This account agrees with
the exprcfiions in Bingham's Antiquities; where
the exprefTion, " caft out of the Church," ufed
by Pope Vigilius, feems equivalent to, *' anathema
eftoy' ufed by the firft Council of Bracara. — And
in JVaWs"^ tranflations from Auguftin, we find re-
nounced and anathematized put as meaning the fame
thing. — This anathematizing was not only the lan-
guage of the high Orthodox party, but o'l Pelagius
himlelf''. — It was indeed taken from the New Tef-
taxiient, which often took its expreflions from the
Old. Confult Rom. ix. 3.-1 Cor. xvi. 22.—

Gal.

1 Chap. IX. Seft. i. Vol. 2, page 97.

' Page 32;;, Fol. * Page 120, Fol.

^ See Du Frelne under Excommunicatio. The excommunicatitf
major and Anathema are laid, I th.nk, to mean the fame
thing.

" On Infant Baptifm, page 188, 4to. or i. 16.24.

* Sec his Creed, in AugulHn'b Works, Vol. lo. Prcf. Edit.
Antv.— Voffms'sHift.Pel 1. i.— Wall i. 19. 29.

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. VIII. 6l

Gal. i. 8. — Rev. xxii. 3. — In Rom. ix. 3. accurfed
anfvvers to the wyxx^ViA feparated-, avxhfjix is from
«vaTi9ri^t to feparate. Ai/aQf/xa amongft the Hea-
ihens figiiified anything put afide, or feparated for
the life of the Gods ; that is in effed, mod com-
monly, for deJlruSiion. Sacer, means, fet apart, or
devoted., in the fenfe of cur fed. In i Cor. xvi. 22.
St. Paul ufes both the term of the lxx, xvx^sfAx,
and the Hebrew maran-atha^^ curjed art thou;
changing, according to cuftom, the final m of
D"ino into ;/.— In Gal. i. 8. a.wM^x feems to im-
ply feparation, devoting, curfe. - It is on Rev.
xxii. 3. that Hammond gives his explanation of
avaSsjUa, and makes it relate 10 excommunication.

In the Old Tejiament, Din generally, if not
always, implies feparation for the purpofe of de-
ftrudion. And with us, devoted, conveys the fame
idea : yet Corban amongft the Jews, oblation^ from
linp to approach, implied fomething confecrated
and not to be deftroyedj but when anything was
devoted to deftrudtion, there was a previous fepa-
ration of it, either adtual, or fuppofed. The
Heathen "" Idols were actually fet apart and de-
voted;—the city' of Jericho, when devoted to the
Lord, or accurfed, is fuppofed to be fet apart ;
the befiegers are commanded to " keep'' themfelves
*' from the accurfed thing." — Chrifi, by an igno-
minious death, was " made a curfe'' for us," was
devoted to dettrud:ion : '* curfe'' often means a
devoted " perfon.

From hence we may conceive how the early
Chriftians might come to ufe the word curfe., or

anathema.^

/ Parkhurft's Lexicon: this is Parkhurfl's etymology, but
not the common one.

* Deut. vii. 25,26. ' Joihua vi. 17, i9,.

''Gal. iii. 13 Deut. xxi. 23.

"' See Hammond on Rev. xxii. 3-

64 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. IX. X.

anathema^ and how they might efteem any cooler
word, a fign of lukewarmnefs or difrepect. —
Though we flioiild not omit to mention the t'.v-
ample\\\-\\c\\ they had in Deut. xxvii. 14—26.

The exprcflion of the Article in ,1552 was,
*' They ahb are to be had accurfed and abhorred"
&c. which looks more like the " damnandi'^ of the
lixteenth Article, than " accurfed'' alone.

IX. " That pre fume to fay that every man fliall be
Javed" —^\\2X is here blamed, may not perhaps

appear, without fome attention : the words may
lead fome to think, that it is called an accurfed
thing to hope that virtuous Heathens may be faved :
but they do really exprefs a different idea; they do
not blame candor, but prefumption ; it would be
prcfumption to acquit a culprit, or reus, without
authority, as well as to condemn one ; we need not
condemn, but we muft not acquit : to do either
properly, we lliould be judges. It is neither our
bufmefs to confine the mercy of God in its opera-
tions, nor to difpenfe it according to our fancies.—
Nay, fuppole that in particular cafes it were
allowed us ftrongly to hope, that the divine good-
nefs would be exerted, yet even that falls far
fliort of the prefumption of affirming that '* every
man (hall be" made eternally happy in a way pre-
fcribed by ourfelves.

X. " -Sy the Lazv or Se5l which he prof effeth^'
Src. Bilhop Burnet diflinguifhes between being
faved by a law, and in a law ; — and with rcafon ;
a man may be faved in an imperfect religion by the
mercy of God, or even by the merits of Chrij}\
though not by virtue of the religion which he pro-
feffes : it may be confidercd whether the word
tsohereby, which comes afcerwards, docs not rather
confirm this notion. — Indeed in the Latin Article
the exprclTion is "/« lege," but we cannot fay that

the

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XI. gr

the Englifh is a wrong tranllation ; becaufe the
Englifli and Lathi are equally authentic. *' In

feda" therefore means, as a member of a fetfl,

We have'', in Eph.iv. 32. £v X^^jry tranilated, "for
Chrift's fake;" it may mean, as aiwrn^tr of Chrift;
or of that fociety, or body of which he is the Head.
It is fcarcely needful to obferve, that our bein^-
faved by Chrifi, or /;/ Chrift, cannot exclude' Iiuman
agency, (ev « is tranflated whereby.)

XI. " Only the Name:' &c.— fn order to fee
the force of this expreffion, which is taken from
Acls iv. 12. we mufl conceive different men to
worlhip'" different deities, and invoke them and
praile^ them, and fwear^ by them under, their
different names. — The contention between Elijah
and the Priefts of Baal, related in i Kings, Chap
xviii, may give us an idea of the cafe; particu-
larly ver. 24. & 26. — Through affociation and
habit, fentiment and paffion are excited by the
mere found of a name; io that enthufiafm might
rage on founding the name of a much- honoured
Deity, and the whole of his attributes might feem
to be concentred in the appellation. We find
iimilar effecTis from the names of political or other
parties'; the very found of them excites animofity
and virulence*".

And when men do not diftinguidi between the
power of the perfon to whom the name belongs,

and

■' Art. xir. end of Sea. xi. « Art. x. Seft. xxxu.

^ Jofiiua xxiv. 15. g pfaim Ixviii. 4.

I" Pfalm Ixiii 12. 1 Sam. xvli. 43.

i The Chorus in the Oiatorio of Samfon, in which the
Ifraelues and the Philiftines contend in Invocation, the one party
mvokmgJeJwvah, ihtoxhav Dagon, mull tend to enliven our
conceptions of what is related, i Kings xviii. 24, &cc.

"Nov. 1793, the French are changing names of Streets,
Cards, Montlis, &c. .

VOL. IV. E

66 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XII. XIII.

and the combination of letters or founds which
compofe the name, then the name itfelf comes to
be regarded as endued with fome charm or fuper-
natural influence.

XII. The lafl: thing which can come into our
explanation, is the word "/^v-cy/," and we have
before'' confidered its meaning. Here we may ob-
lerve, that Salvation (and in like manner damna-
tion) may admit of an endlefs variety of degrees: and
it might be wrong to omit wholly, t\\SLX. Javing has in
Acls iv. 12. a particular reference to deliverance
from bodily evil. Peter and John had healed a lame
man ; they are afked folemnly, " By what power,
or by what name have ye done this ?" they anfwer,
*' By the name of Jefus Chrift of Nazareth." —
" Neither is ihtxt Jalvation in any other : for there
is none other name under heaven given among
men whereby (eu u) we muft be faved ;" (cJTt o-wSjjvat
r/xa?). Suppofe this meant merely that the lame
could only be healed in the name of Chrifl:, yet
the healing meant was miraculous ; and therefore
that would be faying, that real miracles could only
be performed in fupport of Chrillianity : but the
Apoftle, with what he fays about the miraculous
cure, mixes a great deal of realbning about the
nature of the Chriftian Difpcnfation, and we*"
know that mere admilfion into Chrillianity, vvas
called beingy/7ivJ : what he fays, ver. 12. fcems to
be delivered as an mni-erfal truth.

XIII. Having finiflied our explanation, we
come to the Proof of wiiat is affirmed in our
Article. And 1 do not fee that we need make
more than one propofi'ion.

XIV. * The

' Appendu to Art. xi. Sed, xvii. — and feveral other
places.

" Art, IX. Sei^. xiv.ati<l Appendix to Art, xi.Sefl. xvin.

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XIV— XVI. 67

XIV. * The Scriptures do not allow any one
to confider it as an indifferent matter, whether
he ads as a member of the true Church of Chrift,
or not.'

We have already produced many texts which
are really to this purpofe ", though they relate im-
mediately to ads of individuals. There would be
no propriety in our being reprefented as branches
of a vine^ as xhQ flock of a fliepherd, as Mhtfponfe
of Chrift, as ele£i, knit together, forming an edifice
built upon the foundation of the Apofdes and
Prophets, Jefus Chrift himfelf being the chief
corner-ftone, if we were under no obligation to ad
focially as Chriftians, or if we could attain to Chrif-
tian Salvation without ading fo.

XV. As to indirect proof, or anfvvers to objec"
tions, we have before given what is abundantly
fufficient. No objedions of any force feem to
occur, except thofe from Ads x. 34 and Rom.
ii. 1 4 --2 7.; and thefe° texts have been already
confidered.

XVI. We may therefore proceed to our Appli-
cation.

We might, at this time, give our AJent to the
Article before us in fome fuch form as the fol-
lowing;

' Whatever degree of happinefs it may pleafe
God, in his mercy, to confer on the virtuous
Heathen or Jew^ who continues fuch to the end of
his life without 2i.]\y fault of his own ; no man can
voluntarily neglcSl the provilion which God has made
for us under Chriftianity, or encourage others to
negled it, or be carelefs about getting as near

truth

f* Art. XII. SeiEl, XXI.— Art. XIII. near theendof Sc£t. xvn.
and near the end of Se£l. xxii.

*" Art xiu. Sections XXIII. & xxvi.
E Z

68 BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XVII.

truth and perfedion as pofliblcP, In Chriftianity,
without meriting a fevere condemnation^ and render-
ing \\\m(^\^ nnivorthy to continue in poiTeffion of the
ineftimable privileges of that fociety of which Chrift
in Heaven is the Head, and to'' purchafc which he
filed his precious blood.'

XVII. With regard to mtitml concejfionsy little
more feems wanting than for difpiitantsto acknow-
ledge that, when they dilagree, they do not fuffi-
ciently confider the different points of viezv in which
they fee the fubject of contention. — When we
approve fuch expreffions as that of Mr. Pope\ we
fuppofe men to have done their beft, humanly
fpeaking, to acquire right religious principles :
when we difanprove men's notions, and call them
horrible, blafphcmous, acciirfed, he. we fuppofe
men not doing their beft; but ncglcding, with ab-
furd prefumption, contemptuous ingratitude, and
profligate infenfibility, every thing that has been
done and fuffered for mankind, in order to give
them a bleffcd religion, and bring them to the
never-ending enjoyment ot lupreme felicity. —
While men difpute without entering into each
other's views, they are not likely to come to any
end of dlfputlng; but there are perfons fo reafon-
able as to allow of candour towards thofe who
really do every thing in their power to be upon a
right footing in refpeft of religion, and at the fame
time to abhor, cfpeclallv in themfclve?, every de-
gree of voluntary neglip^ence. — Not to aifl as
Chriftians, may in fome be only a misfortune, in
others a great fault; but yet in either caie it may
be attended v;ith great and important' evil.

XVIII. I am

P Phil. i. 9.— iii. 1 '1, 14 — Conclufion of St. Peter's fecond
Epillle.

q Aas XX. 23. ' Sea. VI.

» Dr. BalguV's Sermons, pa;',c 158, &c. to the end of the
9th Difcourfc.

BOOK IV. ART. XVIII. SECT. XVIII. 69

XVIII. I am not prepared to fuggeft any Im-
provement relative to the prefent Article ; unlefs it
might be exprejfed more preciiely than it is. Per-
haps it might be fo exprelFed as to fliew for whom
it is particularly intended, bow far it conceives
thofe of whom it fpeaks, to be members of reli-
gious Society; and how it fuppofes thofe whom it
condemns, to be informed of the nature of Chrif-
tianity.

ARTICLI

BOOK IV. ART, XIX. SECT. I.

ARTICLE XIX.

OF THE CHURCH.

THE vifible Church of Chrift is a congrega-
tion of faithful men, in the which the pure
Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be
duly miniftered, according to Chrift's ordinance,
in all thofe things that of neccfllty are requiiite to
the fame.

As the Church of Hierufalem, Alexandria, and
Antioch, have erred ; fo alfo the Church of Rome
hath erred ; not only in their living and manner of
Ceremonies, but alfo in matters of Faith.

I. Before I enter upon another Article, let me
fay, that it is my intention, in this part of my
undertaking, to make a change in my manner of
treating the fubje£ls which may come under con-
fideration. I mean to treat the remaining articles
in a more fiimmary way than I have treated the
preceding. For this change it may be natural to afk
ibme reafons. The firft is, that without fome
change, our fyftem would be too extenfive, if it be
not fo already, confidering that, in order to obey
the directions of our Founder, I have been obliged
to make Bifliop Vearjon on the Creed occupy every
third Lefture. It may indeed be faid, 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 j but

yet

EOOKIV.ART.XIX.SECT.il. ^I

yet It Teems better to go the bottom of fome fub-
jefts, and give a fummary account of others, thaq
to treat all with an intermediate degree of fulnefs.
This might be faid though there were no other
reafons for the change I am about to make; but
it may be added, that the remaining fubjecls have
been already much better treated than thofe which
we have gone through; and are therefoie much
more eafy for the ftudent to confider by himfelf.
Bifhop Biirnet writes better on the Articles which
are to come, than on thofe which are paft: and
the refutation of the Popi/Ii errors is now reduced
into a fmall compafs, by Archbifliop Seeker and \\
Bifliop Porteiis. It feems to me likewife, that the
firft eighteen of our xxxix Articles may be con-
fidered as more important than the reft, as be-
longing more to Mankind in general. Religious
Society is indeed a fubjed of great importance to
all^ men; but that was attentively confidered in the
third Book of our Syftem.*

Neverthelefs, though I propofe to fpeak more
briefly on each fubjedl than I have done hitherto,
or at leaft than I have done fince I entered upon
the Articles of our Church, I would keep the fame
method in view; as that feems founded in reafon.
What fads are mentioned, fliould be mentioned
before we ufe the expreffions which allude to them :
and the terms of propofitions fhould be explained
before their truth be proved.

II. With regard then to the nineteenth Article,
fome few Hijiorkal remarks may be made. The
propagation of the Gofpel was treated in our firft
Book. Here we may obferve, that before' the

Church

* The Hlftory of the beginnings of the Church of Rome is,
I believe, too obfcure for us to dwel! much upon : I would not
fpeak pofitively : the Billiop of Rome nuift be above neighbour-

E 4. -^ ,w

72 BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. II.

Church of Rome came to be famous in the weft,
the Churches mentioned in the Article, had ex-
ifted in great celebrity : fo I conceive. Tlie
Church of Jerufalem mud of courfe be eminent,
as It was planted where our Saviour and his
Apodles refjded : it might be confidcred as the
Jource of Chriftianity, where it was mod pure :
the firft Bifliop of it is faid to have been St.
James.

The Church of Alexandria was the capital of
the Churches of Africa, and has been faid to be
fjunded by St. Mark. In like manner the Church
of Antioch was the capital of the Churches oi AJia,
and has been faid to have had St. Peter for its
firft Bilhop. Thefe became three Patriarchates^
\ and we have in Bingham s Antiquities'', three maps
of them^

In what thefe three churches " have erred,"
feems but of little moment; becaufe the Article
is only againd the Pomanifis^ and they would not
deny the fallibility of the Eaftern Churches. Yet
thefe three churches might have made as high
ckims, of any kind, as the Church of Rome;
having under them Primates and Metropolitans.

The

ing Bifliops; people would have to go to Rome about various
concerns; when a precedence was wanted, it would naturally
fall to the Eifhop of that Church which was in the Capital.—
By the year 32^ the Biftiop of Rome muft have grown great :
about the year 250 there were at Rome 1500 Widow sand other
indigent perfons fupported or relieved by Chr.iHans ; fee Lard-

ner. Index, Rcmc. The Bifhop of Rome was not at Nice

in 325, only Prejhyters; why not Suffragan Bifhops, if he
had any ?

^ Book ix.

' For the dignity of thefe Churches fee the Canons of the
Co'.mcil of Nice; Canon 6 and 7. — Alio Billiop Hallifax on
Prophecy, page 335. — Heylin, on Epifcopacy, mentions Saint
James, Saint Mark and Saint Peter as having been the firft
Bilhops.

BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. III. IV. 73

— The errors alluded to, however, fcem to have
been, favouring Arianifm, and condemning'' Origen.
Ads for diefe purpofes were paffcd in Councils °
at thefe cities ; and the decree of a Council at
any citj' mufi include the opinion of the Church
there. — (Councils occur again in the twenty-firll
Article.)

Several fuhje^s relative to our prcfent Article,
have been much difcuflcd; but it does not feeni
nectflaiv for us to enter into them at prefent ; fuch
are, the marks of a^ true Church, the power of
tije Keys°, the naUire of binding^ and loojing. —
The Romanifts, after we had fcparated from them
at the Reformation, held, that we were no true
churchy and the difputes which took place on that
matter, Vv-ere probably one immediate occnjion^ of
our prefent Article.

III. Let us next fee what may be wanted in
the way of ExpIanatlcn.—OuY Article confifts of
two Paragraphs J the firH; feems to be definition
and theory, the fecond, fa«ft.

IV. The definition is, of " t/ie vif.hk church
of Chrifi :" now previous to that, we fhould con-
ceive, that Chrift formed all his Difciples into one
fociety; the members therefore muft live in dif-
ferent ages : it is not needful to confider the
deceafed at prelcMit, therefore our vievv's are con-
fined to the " vifible church," that is, to the
fociety of all living Chriftians. But how, you hj,
do thefe iorm a Jocidy P firfl, we may anfwer, as
all men form a lociety ; God has made good to

follow

^ Socrates 6. 10.

" Bcni'b Compendium, Vol. 1, page ia6.

^ Hdlcs,G — 13 — 49, Cambr. s Matt. xvl. 18, '9.

^ Matt, xviii. 18.

' The Trent Creed is called by th- Romaaifi", that Faith
" extra (iiiani nemo falviis efle potelL" quoted in Eennet's EfTay
on the 39 Articles, page 42,6.

74 BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. V. VI.

follow from mens acting as a fociety, and evil
from their not acling as a fociety ; this lliews them
that they are a fociety. Secondly, we know,
that all Chriftians conftitute one fociety, from the
Scriptures ''.

V. " Congregation,^'' ccetus, rather feems to im-
ply, as does £XJcAii(rj«, that all living Chriftians can
affemhle at one time, in one place ; this is fuitable
enough to Theory, and is Dr. Balgufs^ firil fup-
pofition, when he is defcribing the nature of a
Church : the contrivances which become nccef-
fary when it is found that all cannot make one
congregation, are only mechanical, as it were, and
do not affeft the nature or effen^e of the thing
which accidentally requires them.

The compilers of our Article would be led to
ufe the word '■'^congregation^* by the language of
our Old Teftamentj the ivJwle body o{ Ifraelites,
(the Church of God before Chrifiianity) being
called the Congregation. See Numb. xvi. 3. —
xxvii. 17. — Joili. xxli. 17. — I Chron. xxviii. 8. —
Pfalm Ixxiv. 2. in all which places we have o-uvaj'wj'u
in the Lxx ^ except i Chron. xxviii. 8. which is
E)txAtia-ta. — In the hi ezv Teftament the whole Body
of Chriftians is called the Chnrch of God; but
the Greek is always E:ixX;iria : Taylor however looks
upon this calling the whole body of Chriftians^ the
Church, as an imitation of the language of the Old
Teftament, in which the whole Body of Ifraelites
was called the Congregation. — Taylor on Romans,
Key, par. 52. 133.

yi. The word ^^ faithfid" feems technical j
fidelcs ufed to be oppofed to Catechtimeni.

VII. "The

'' Art. XVII I. Se£l. xiv. Alfo Book iii. Chap. xi.

Seft. IV.

^ Vol. of Sermoni", page 89.

BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. VII. VIII. *j ^

VII. " The fAire word of God" — is alfo theory :
it is that to which Chriftians may continually ap-
proach, though they may never attain to perfedt
purity of dodrine. — •* I'he facraments'' are intro-
duced as ejfentials of a Chriftian Church; and it is
at the fame time impHed, that though they are
elfential, fome circimjlances about them are not fo :
this is more clear in the Latin than in the Englifh.
— A religious fociety under natural religion might
perhaps have no effentials ; I mean, they might
purfue the ends in view by fuch methods as their
wifdom fhculd fuggeft ; but that is not the cafe
in a Chrifbian fociety; they cannot teach any doc-
trines but thofe of fcripture, nor (et afide the holy
Sacraments. — y^t may obfcrve how very little was
thought" neceffary, by our Englilh Reformers, to
conftitute a Chriftian Church; prayer is not men-
tioned, though it is in Ails ii. 41, 42. nor any
kind of difcipline : this feems to imply, that no
Chriftian church could be fuppofed to meet with-
out prayer, or that prayer is included in pure
doSirine^ and that no modes of adminiftering the
Sacraments deilroy the effence of a Chriftian,
Church.

VIII. In the fecond part there is a fort of
ambiguity : a doubt is 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 fenfe may
be taken by him who gives his affent.

In

*" P. S. See a paflkge quoted by Dean Tucker (Letter to
Kippis, page 56) from the enlarged confeffion of Augfburg.
** Ad veraim unitatcm Ecclefije fatis eft confentire de Doilrina.
Evangelii, et adminiftratione Sacramentorum." This does not
mean a conlent about all particulars, as appears from what
follows, which anfwers to the beginning of our 34.th Article :
f" Nee necefTe eft ubique fimiles effe Traditiones humanas, feu
r//«j ab honunibus inlUtutos." Syntagma; page 12.

76 BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. IX.

In the Enolifli, we have *' m thnr living"
(Church of Rome), but in the Latin, " quoad
agenda.'' The Juiglifli feems to regard condiiti^ the
Latin, moral, pradicA principles taught^ or allowed.
Hence, in examining the wickednels prevailing in
Pcpiih countries, we ihould always keep in mind
how far it is permitted, or encouraged.

The Church ot Rome is here allowed the ejj'ence
of a true Church" j it aims at preaching fcriptural
do(i:nincs, and it does not fet afide the Sacra-
ments. Archbilhop Land., on his triaL" before the
invcreratc enemies of the Roman church, main-
tained ihis to be the truth, but did not, I think,
refer to this Arriclc, to prove it : that the Church
of Rome is here declired erronouSy as well as fal-
lible, needs no remark. The Church of Chrifl;
in theory is pnre; in praclice each part of it \'i falli-
ble and imperfed>.

IX. Thus we have looked through the Article;
but yet a fe^v things remain to be mentioned : if
" the vifible Church of Chrifl" be the fociety of
living Chriftians, what is oppofed to it ? or what
Church of Chriil is invifihUf' the Romanifts do not
allov\ P oi any. There may be, feemingly, tzvo notions

of

" The Puritans did not allow ihis. See Neal, i. 96. 410.

" Index to Neal's Hill. Pur. et alibi. When Proteftants fay,
that a Chriftian may be faved in the Church of Rome, they
mean, or ought to mean, fuppofing the Chriftian not to think

it ivicng to be of that Churcn fhcrefore Papiih cannot ufe

their famous argument to thofe who do think it wrong. —
The argument is, all fides own, that a man may be faved in
the Ciiurch of Rome; but all fides Ao net own that a man may
be faved in a Proteftant Church ; therefore it is moll fafe to
adhere to the Chuicli of Rome.

P " The pretenfcd invifible Church of the Heretikes."

Rhcmi.ls on Atfls ii. 47. the Romatiills fecm to mean, that the
fcripuircs, when ihey fpeak of the Church of Chrift, do not
mean to fpeak of thofe who are true Chriftians in the fight of
God, but of Chrif^iaiK fu, h n.r. \vc find them.

BOOK iV. ART. XIX. SECT. X. yy

of It; one, that the imijibk church contains^//
Chrifiians; the hving, and all -.vho have depart evl
this Life in the Faith of Chriil : another, the cal-
viniflic, and mofh common, that it conhfts of
thofe v.'ho in the fight of God are confidered as Inie
Chriftians; and Romanifls, I think, make a dif-
ference between vera and viva membra oi the
Church. Perhaps the term " vifibW' might be
ufed in order to prevent Romaniils from objed:-
ing; and to fatisfy Calvhifs that it was not intended
to fpeak here of the elect or -predefinat^, as itm by
God himfelf.

X. We often hear of the Catholic Church. — Lf
.we go only by Etymology, it may fignify ihe
vv'hole vifible church of CJirifl, or even invifiblc -,
or all Chriflians of aJl agci. When I fay I be-
lieve in the Catholic Church, I mean, I believe
that Chrift intended to form all Chnflians into one
fociety; though when I fpeak of the Chuich at
large, I have only in mind the prcfent generation.
(Art. VIII. Sec^. III.) — And the church of Chnft
may be " therefore called catholic, or univerlai,
becaufe it Cimfifts of ^// ;/^//5;/i ; whereas the Jew-

ilh Church" confifted'^ " only of one nation':"

As words are made for ufe, one may often oet the
right feufe of a word by confidering tor what ufe it
might be made; and this is geneiaily to mark out
fotiie difin£tion y asjufi: now was tlie the calc. The
church might be called Catholic, to didinguiai it
from a church, or a particiikrr chui-ch ; tfiat is a
fet of Chriftians whole m.inds cannot be fatisfied
without joining in fome peculiar regulations for
carrying on focial religion amongft themlelves,
within certain limits. But perhaps the moft com-
mon ufe of catholic is to dillmgu'fh, in an honour-
able ir.anner, a large and i^fpedable bod)' of

Chriftians
^ Bilhop Porteus's brief confutation, page 14.

yS BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SLCT. XI. XII.

Chridlans from a fmall body who affedl fingularity
in feme doctrine or ceremony : to call the large
body the catholic church, or catholics, ieems to
make the fmall one fink into nothings as if it only
made an exception not worth mentioning.

XI. A particniar church may be a legitimate
Chriftian Society, but IhoultJ always regard itfelf
as a coPifi-ituent part of the catholic church'. In
any nation, it may help to promote civil fubjeclion,
and may itfelf receive fupport and protedVion or
even honour. This has been more fully explained
in the third ^ Book. — The definition of oar Ar-
ticle feems not wholly unluitable to a particular
church '.

XII. I know not that any other terms need be
mentioned except militant'^, asoppofed to trium.ph-
ant. This diftinclion iuppofes men pocly popu-
larly fpeaking; 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 gdod fight, they are called the church 7nilitant,
and after death, when they'' receive their crown of
Glory, the Church triumphant.

The Scotch church calls thofe whom we fuppofe
good, the eieS; the church, ftrictly fpeaking, (in

their

* Dr. Powell, page 26, alludes to him, " who refufed to be
made a citizen ot Alliens, becaule lie was already a citizen of
the world.''

^ Cliap, xjv,

* Wheatly (page 394) obferves, that our Church Catechifm
was {yi m.ide as to luit the Cutholn Church. Any youth in our
/)^j77/fw/<ar Church, according to him, is catechized, or grounded,
in no dodtrincs fecmiar to tliat Cliurch. Vet all Chriftians do
not allow of water-baptifin ; nor that the Death of Chrift ib a
f.icrifice, fpeaking without figure.

" Scotch Confefiion, 16. de Ecclefia— — Div. Leg. Vol. 4.
Svo. page 470. calls the Church triumphant thofe who ac-
company Chrift at his fecond coning.

' Sec 2 Tim. iv, 7. — a Cor. x. 4.— i Tim. i. iS.— i Pet. v. 4.

BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. XIII XVI. 79

their idea) hiv'ifible to the eye of man, but the imz
church in the fight of God''.

XIII. We may now beft fee the connexion of
this Article with the one preceding it. Salvation
is not to be hoped for out of the Churchy by the
eighteenth Article; agreed, fays the Romanifb,
therefore continue Catholics ; no, fay the Prote-
flants, we may, if we think we cannot lawfully
communicate with yon, form another parfknlar
church Rill conceiving our particular church to
make a part of the catholic vifible church of
Chrift : and what we afliime to ourfelves, we
allow to others.

XIV. But let us come to our Proof. — We feem
to have at leaft two propqfitions.

1. Chrill has formed his followers into one
Society.

2. TheRornhh church " hath erred;" in prac-
tical principles, or morality, ("agenda"}; in cere-
monies; and alfo in doctrine or tenets, {" ere-
denda.")

XV. The former propofition has been verv
lately ^ proved. To what was faid we might add
I Cor. xii. 5. 10. 12. 29. which fhew, that the
miraculous powers given to the Apofties, &c. im-
plied religious fociety : and our Saviour's various
prophecies concerning the fortunes of the Church,
imply the fame thing. He foretells its durabihty,
&c. as one body.— -Matt. xvi. i8, 19.

XVI. That tlie RomiOi Church hath erred in
morahty, or *' agenda," need fcarccly be proved,

not

^ Pet, Heylin, In his Dlvlnlty-A£l at Oxford, put up as a
queftion, " An Ecclefia unquam fiierit invifibilis ?" and deter-
mined in the negative. — He was an Arminian.

^ Art. XVIII. Sedl. xiv. See alfo Book iii. Chap, xu

Sea. iv. ^ .

So BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. XVI I.

not only becaiife the Popes and Clerg)-" have had
amoiigfl them men remarkab!)' immoral and pro-
fli crate ; but becaufc rliins:s have br.-n ^Z/oaV'-Zanrl
forbidden v^rongly; this, as well as the Popilh
errors in ceremonies and doctrine'', may be Ick
to be proved by rhc lublequent Articles. — Pope
Liberius favoured the Arinns\ ZozJtnus the Pela-
i^niHSy and llonorins was condemned as a "^ Mono-
ihelite.

This direfl: proof fecms eafy, but the Romanics
quote fcriptv.re; the general anlwcr to all texts cx-
prefTmg the perLclion of the Churcli, is the fame
with that to all icriptural exprelfions of the per-
fection of a ChrllVian ; thev defcribc ///cWvS not
faB. — This has been already Miinted in explaining
the word ''prireS'

XVII. The fubjeift before us lias b:cn made
Lb intricate by controvcrlV with the Papifts, and by
the Calvinillic notion, that the Church means the
flecl and predellinated, that it may be wortl; our
while, in the way of AppliccJ'wn, to conceive a form
of ajfent to our Article.

'All Chrillians conftitute a Society, the end of
which is to attain perfect purity of manners, and
unerring religious truth : the means ol promoting
this end are left to human prudence, fo long as the
dodrines taught are found.d on Icripture, and the
jacraments inllituted by Chrift, are held to be in-
difpenfit^le — Could all Cliriflians agiee, tlnv might

ad

* See Sir Edwin fvandvs's Ruropn? Speculum, under Life and
CuiVtrfjticri : ti,o;igh wiLkcdnei's dots not prove iiidiii>utably
the inculcating ot b.id moral principles, yet when it is very
ptevaleat it affords a ftrung pn-rumptiun: b-.-lides th;it " wicked-
nefi is deftruflive of gocd principles ;" as Comber obferves, ih
his traft againlt Popery, page 33, from Ariilotle, Eth. lib. 6.

'^ Maclainc'sMolheim, Vol. i. 4to. page 278, Note.

« Berti, Vol. i.page 123. '^ Fcrbes, B. 5. Chap. 10.

' .\a. XV. iJct^. XIX. ' Sed. VII.

BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT. XVIII. XIX. ^I

ad under one ecclefiaftical authority ; but if any
number are fully perfuaded that they cannot law-
fully unite with the reft, they may form a feparate
fociety, ftill conceiving that fociety to make part
of the whole fociety of Chriftians, till fome general
agreement can be effefted.'

' When we judge from experience, we muft con-
clude, that unanimity is not at prefent to be ex-
pedtedi and we muft allow, that every particular
fociety of Chriftians falls far fhort of perfedion.*

XVIII. ^ The remarks and diftindions here
made, might be the ground of fome mutual con-
cejfions-, but Dr. Bu Pin, in his negociation with
Archbidiop PVake\ about an union between the
Englifti and Galilean Churches, gives up the nmt-
ter m difpute. " Though all particular churches,"
he fays, " even that of Rome, may err, it is need-
lejs to fay this in a Confeffion of Faith." — It is not
more to our purpofe that this learned man gives up
\\\t fallibility of the Roman Church, than that he
fpeaksof it 2.% ?, particular Church.

XIX. In order to promote Improvement, I would
recommend an attentive perufal of Dr. Balguy's
two Confecration -Sermons, and his Charge" on
** Subfcription to Articles of Religion."

g Molheim, oaavo, Vol. 5. page 130. — It might be worth
■while to read Archbilhop Wake's compliment to Dr. Du Pin,

page 123. And what the Archbilhop thmks may be Du Pin's

own judgment about the Englifli Articles.

T')\t people amongft the Papifts are not taught, I fuppofe, ac-
cording to Da Pin's candid notions ; he feems to make a great
difFerence between the Peopk and the enlightened.

VOL. IV. F ARTICLE

82 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I.

ARTICLE XX.

OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH.

THE Church hath power to decree Rites or
Ceremonies, and authority in Controverfies of
Faith : and yet it is not lawful for the Church to
ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word
written, neither may it fo expound one place of
Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Where-
fore, although the Church be a witnefs and a
keeper of holy Writ, yet as it ought not to decree
any thing againft the fame; fo befides the fame
ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for
neceffity of falvation.

I. We begin with Hijlory.

At the time of the Reformation, fome of our
countrymen were defirous (as we have often oc-
cafion to obferve) of departing farther from the
Church of Rome than we have done, and others
willied not to go fo far. The Reformers had, on
this account, a difficult tafk to execute. The
Puritans hated the Church of Rome, and every
thing that fcemed to charaAerize it; but fome,
though they faw the errors of Poper)^ retained
their prejudices in favour of thofe things, which
implied no error or impiety. The Reformers
wilhed to comply with both, as far as they might
lawfully. The difficulties arifing in this manner,

did

BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I. 8;^

did not relate fo 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 fenfe.

The averfion of the Puritans to appointed cere-
monies. Sec. feems to have been on two grounds ;
as PopiJIiy and as profaning worlhip by the intro-
duftion of the fine'' arts. Indeed the application
of mufic, painting, &c. to religious worfhip, is
itfelf rather Popifli ; but independently of that,
the Puritans were void of what we call tafte and
elegance. The three ceremonies they chiefly ob-
jeded to, were, the fign of the Crofs in Baptifm,
the wearing oi furpUces, and bieeling at the Sacra-
ment of the Lord's Supper. Thefe have been
called the three'' nocent ctxtmomts ; only byway "^"^
of oppofition, I fuppofe, to innocent. Indeed all
thefe favoured of Popery; the laft, as keeping up
the idea of the Mafs. But the Puritans always
petitioned againfl 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 refpeds, were mem-
bers of it, and Minifters : they were forced to
complain and difpute; feparation was not a thing
eafy to be accompliflied ; otherwife difputes would
have been more rare.

One difpute related immediately to this twen-
tieth Article : the queftion was, whether the Jirji

clatife

= Book in. Chap, xv. Se£l. x.

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

<^ Convocation of 1562; in Neal, i. 119, &c. Strype, and
others.

^ Book rii. Chap, xiv. Se«5l, xv.

F 2

84 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I.

claufe was genuine orfurreptitious' ? It Is a curious
qucftion •. to read Neal's account, one would think.
it muft be fpurious j yet Bennet, in his EJJav^ has
arguments on the other fide, which appear to me
the ftronger. In King Edward's anicles the claufe
is not ; but in the fifth of thofe articles there is
fomething relating to the fubjeft, which is omitted
in our fixth ; (the correfponding Article). When
the Bilhops in 1562 were to fign the Articles re-
vifed, a copy feems to have been prepared for them
to fign before they met, from King Edward's; but
when they met, they feem to have made feveral
alterations in it, and then to have figned it. Yet,
though they figned it, they did not make it a
Recordy becaufe after the fignature, they agreed
upon the danfe in queftion : And as it was not a
record, the Archbifhop kept it in his own private
. cuflody, and left it to Benet College. — At lad a
frelh paper was figned, which /lad the claufe in
quellion; and this was lodged regularly, as a
Record, in the Regifter's Court of Canterbury,
from whence Archbifhop Laud had a copy ^ on his
trial, in 1637.

The Bifhops alfo ordered the Articles with the
Claufe to be prbited: yet there are fome printed
copies which have not the claufe; but Bennet
argues, that fuch are fpurious, if in Englifh, and
that thofe in which it is found, are genuine : the

Records

= See Neal, 1. 1 18. and Bennet's Ej/ay, paffim.— Alfo " Prieft-
cralt ill Perfedion," Canibr. Bb — 10 — 47. and Bennet's Anfwcr
to it in his Preface to his EfTay : addrelTed to Anthony Collins,
Efq. the Infidel.

From the Life of Peter Heylin it appears, that he kept his a£b
for D. D. at Oxford on the claufe, taking its genuinenefs for
granted. — Strype's Annals, Chap. a8.

^ Heyliti's Jhort account (page 19, Life of Laud) agrees, I
think, witli tliis.

BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I. 8^

Records were burnt in the ^ great Fire of London
in 1666. — This queftlon is now merely hiftorical ;
for by an Ad of Parhament made in 1662, all the
Clergy are obliged to fign a copy, in which this
claiife is contained.

The matter about the power of the Churchy with
regard to ceremonies, got mixed with a difpute
how far the CiviL Magijlrate^ could enjoin ob-
fervances for religious focieties, in matters indif-
ferent ; the Puritans always held, that the Church
was independent of the ftate; and few faw, that
when the Magiftrate ufed a coercive power in fpi-
ritual matters he ufed it as the Ally of the Church,
as far as he adled without any view of fecuring the
State. However in this twentieth Article we have
nothing about the Civil Magiftrate : nor has the
thirty-leventh, " Of the Civil Magiftrates," any
mention of rites and ceremonies.

In the time of King Edward VI. there was a
great controverfy about the Habits of the Priefts
and Bilhops. The Puritans found them Popifii
and fine, others thought them recommendatory of
religion; and coniidering the poverty of fome of
the Clergy, almoft necellary for decency. Bifliop
Hooper had lived at Zurich, and perhaps had there
contrafted a love of plainnefs and fimplicity ; and
Swifs ideas of Church -government. He refufed
the Bifl-iopric of Gloucefter becaufe he could not
be confecrated and appear at Court, and in his
Diocefe, without wearing fome habits which he
efteemed to be Popifli; but his refufal was not ad-
mitted ; he was imprifoned fome months : either
in his own Houfe or in the Fleet Prifon, and
treated with great rigour; at laft a compromifc

was

s Vol. 2. page 209. — Introd. to Book i v. Sc<St. iv.
*" Neal, 1. 95— 98. always quarto.

F3

86 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. I.

was adopted, and he became a Prelate. He was
a perfon of great worth, and very inftrii mental in
completing the Reformation.

It is not to be concluded from what has been
faid, that the Piuitans real!)' willied religious fociety
to have WttlQ power ; their view was rather, to pre-
vent thofe particular ceremonies from being en-
joined, which they faw the Church of England
•was, at the time, moft likely to adopt; and to
make Scripture a guide in' every thing : though,
1 think, fcripture was, at bottom, rather a pre-
text for refufing, than the ground of making re-
gulations.

The Romanics, however, were for requiring an
implicit obedience to the Church : fuch an obe-
dience, as if the Church of Rome . was in faft,
what the Church of Chrift is in Theory, "without
fpot, or wrinkle, or any'' fuch thing." Dr. Alid-
dleton, in the Preface' to his Letter from Rome,
gives us a paflage from a Popilh writing called
" the Catholic Chriftian," which may anfwer our
purpofe : the fubjeft is Tranfubflantiation. '• The
unerring authority of the Church has declared it
to be true, and enjoined the belief of it ;" — after
fuch a decifion — " it is the part of an Tnfidcl
rather than a Chriflian, to afk, how can this be?"
— The Papifts have faid, that the Church is even
fuperior to™ Scripture : how ?— becaufe the Church
judges what is fcripture; there have been many
fpurious writings pretending to be Scripture; thele
the Church rejedts, keeping only fuch as are ge-
nuine and authentic : but have they any right to

fettle

* Warburton's Alliance, i. 4. page 46, Svo. Edit. 1766.
Note.

'' Eph. V. 27. 'P. Ixxvli.

^ Gilpin's Life of Wickliff, page 61, 62.

BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. II. 87

fettle thofe as fcrlpture which are not genuine and
authentic ? — and when they have accepted any
thing as fcriptuie, does it govern them, or they
it? — the moment any writing has an exiftence as
fcripture, it is fuperior to them. — Here we clofe
our Hijiory.

II. Our firft remark in the way of Explanation,
is, tliat we fhould conceive our Article to be di-
vided into two paragraphs^ the firft againft Puri-
tans, the fecond againft Papijis. Puritans are
oppofed as fetting afide all ufe of human prudence
in providing the means of exercifing focial reli-
gion ^ Papifts, as aiming to advance human au-
tliority above the word of God. In this matter,
our Church feems to fay, let us avoid both ex*
tremes.

" "The Church^'* — how does this expreffion fuit
what was faid under the preceding Article ? does
it mean vifible, catholic, particular, church ? or
what ? — that is left to bs decided by the ftate of
things. \i all Chriftians are united, it means the
Catholic church, of one generation j if not, it
means any particular church, which can properly
be called a church; it means any fociety of Chrif-
tians, as far as they conftitute a legitimate church.
— In what part of fuch fociety the government
Ihould be lodged, whether it fliould be of a mo-
narchical or democratical form, is left undeter-
mined.

" Hath pozvery — Pozver here means rightful
power; no uncommon ufe 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 fenfe.

F 4 "7b

SS BOOKIV.ART.XX.SECT.il.

" I'd decree rites and ceremonies^ and authorily in
controverjies of faiths Here " authority" means
only tveight or influence ; wliich is not a wrong ufe
of the word.— This latter influence, here called
authority, is much lefs than the former, here called
power. It may be proper for you to refpeA a per-
fon's judgment, when he has no right to infill on
your obedience. The expreffion, " in controver-
jies of /«////," — ! niplies, that you are not expcded
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 all ceremonies whatever ?
— yes, it feems as if private judgment (hould com-
ply, in matters indifferent : and if fo, you are not
accountable while you think it right to continue
a member. RefpeAful expoftulations might be
made; and if at laft, much folly or fuperftition"
remained, a feparation might be allowed : but
the eifect of ceremonies depends upon unifor-
mity" : — and you fliould be fure you can meet
with better ceremonies than thofe you quit. Cere-
monies might be taken in a large fenfe, including
Liturgies^ &c. — Though the Governors of the
church are not to fubmit to your judgment im-
mediately, yet after you have obeyed, they are
finally to be accountable to the ordinary members,
for the ufe of: any difcretionary pov^er entruftcd to
them. What follows, 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 ;" —
fome things that next occur in our Article ieem
felf-evident; but they probably mean to guard
againft abule, and againil excefs of that deference,

which

" See Powell, page 27. top.

• Book III. Chap. IV. Sc6i. 11.

BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. III. 8^

which ought to be paid to the Church in difficult
do6lrines.

Indeed, if each private man is to judge whether
an ordinance recommended by the Church is con-
trary to icripture, or whether any dodtrine makes
one part of fcripture to contradid: another, or is
over and above fcripture, there is but Htde danger
of abiife : — but the meaning feems to be, that the
Church has no right, " ought'''' not to decree fuch
things i though, if it does, it fliould be refpeded,
and perhaps fometimes obeyed j flill the rules here
laid down might be the ground of calling eccle-
fiaflical governors to account, and, in the end, of
propofing and effecting a Reformation.

" A keeper of Holy writ," refers to Rom. iii. 2.
and ix. 4. — I conceive them to be ailufions; but
the only thing of any moment is, that " bef.des''*
the fcriptures, the Church ought *' not to enforce
anything to be believed for necejfity of Salvation;^*
ceremonies are generally fomething *' be fides''' the
fcriptures, and the church can enforce them; but
then they are not *' anything to be believed.^'' —
Some notions too may be implied in ceremonies p,
or forms, but then they are not to be enforced as
neceflary'* to Salvation. Puritans Vv'ould have no-
thing to be enforced, either to be believed or done,
which is " be/ides'" the Scriptures. — It Ihould be
recollected, that we had a great deal about Tradi-
tions under the fixdi Article.

III. The next thing is the Proof.— V/c might
have three propofitions,

I V. Each

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

^ Kecejfiary to Salvation ; tl.e thing to which this was oppof<?d,
fetm? to be, " received of the faithful as godly, and profitable
for comclinefs." Article 5 of 1552.

<ja BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. IV. T.

IV. Each focicty muft provide meam of an-
fwering the ends ot its inftitution. — In religious
Society the general end is the promoting of xt\\-
g\ousJ'e)Ui}ne>its\ In ChriJIian fociety fome means
are prefcribed by divine authority ; namely, fcrip-
tiiral doclrines and facraments : but means are to be
devifed of ufing thefe means; fomething muft at
laft be left to the wifdom of the Church. I can-
not but confider this as felf-cvident. The puri-
tanical idea, that a church is not like other Socie-
ties, or that nothing is to be fettled and fixed tor
a church but v.'hat is found in Scripture, feems
totally impracticable; no meeting of Dillcnters'
could ever be carried on without arranging feveral
things not fpecified in Scripture. The diredions
axe ^uieraly as i Cor. xiv. 40. — It is impofiible that
this precept Ihould be obeyed without the inter-
vention of many other obfervances not mentioned.
Tell a fct of men to zvn'le themes for a prize;
there muft be pens, ink and paper, &c. and the
an of writing and fpelling muft have been learned.
— If the jezc-s' had fome liberty, whole religion
was confined to one people, and the ceremonials
of which made lb eiiential a part of it, what
liberty may not Chriftians expect, whofe religion
is to be exercifed amidft all the variety of cuftoms
of all Nations!

v. In do£Trinc5y to be believed, the Judgnicnt
of the Church ought to have great weight, cfpe-
cially with all its ordinary members. — This was
infifted on in the fecond " book, where men were
divided into Philofophers and People : and it feems

unavoidable.

" Book III. Chap. iii.
* Tucker to Kippis, page 19.

« Burnet, Matt, xxiii. 23. the things not to be left undone,
were not Mofaical : moftly, if not all, traditional.
" Book. II. Chap. iv. iictl. 111, 1 v.

BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. VI. VII. 9I

unavoidable. Thofe who pretend to avoid it, do''
not, and cannot^.

VI. In dodrines, if anything is impofed by
the Church as neceffary to falvation, it need not be
received as fuch, if it be not contained in Scripture.
— This was in the fixth Article.

VII. What remains muft be propofed as Ap-
plication.

A new form of Jjjent feems nnneceflliry : — But
mutual ccnccjfions may be worth confidering. —
Some DilTenters have declared, that whilft the
firft claufe of our twentieth Article continues in
force, there is no poffibility of a reconciliation^:
Yet, let not anything be neglefted which feems
likely to weigh with a man of real candour. —
Miftakes feem to have been made, both by thofe
in power, and thofe out of power. The firll
have taken for granted that things indifferent in
their nature might be enforced without difficulty ^
the fecond, that becaufe an averlion was real, it
was rational and invincible,-— But in the firft place
men in power fhould be aware of the ftrength of
prejudice; or of aiibciation of ideas : to lee its
force, we need only afk any man whether he
Ihould chufe to fee any of the veffels which com-
monly receive the evacuations of the human Body,
ulbd at a feaft to drink out of; or, if he be a
man of piety, in the moft folemn rites of reli-
gion ? Yet what more indifferent, as to right and
wrong, than Ihape i* — And in the next place, thofe
who are called to comply and obey, are not always
v.'ithout blame : they are too apt to negleft the

refult

" Tucker to Kippis, page 43, 4.4.

y One chief reafon urged by a Fellow of a College, for turn-
ing Papill, was, I have heard, that fo little refped was paid to
the Church of England by its ordinary members.

* Tucker to Kippis, page 9.

/

C;2 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. Vll.

refult of experience with regard to curing preju-
dices which at firft feel incurable. To raiie a
prejudice in favour of anything, allbciate it with
fome good. I have hated a certain kind oi food;
in very great hunger I eat of it ; my pain was
relieved, and that kind of food got airociated in
my mind with the pleafure of the relief;. I have
relilhed it ever fmce. — Now mutual conceflions in
cafe of ceremonies, &c. fliould confift in mutual
compliances; thofe who have authority fhould be
tender about enforcing; thofe who are to obey,
fhould labour to leffen their averfions; fo might
the contending parties meet in fome middle point.

This is applicable to Ji?ie arts : thofe who have
a tafte for them, ought nor to a6t as if all men
had the fame : and thofe who are infenfible to
them, ought to be aware, that men may differ in
imaginations as well as in fenfes or intelledls; and
therefore ought in fome mcaiure to comply ; for
the fake of others.

Bilhop Warburton, in his Alliance "" of Church
and State, mentions the judgment of foreign
divines in the queftion about habits. It was this.
*' That the Puritans ought to conform, rather
than make a fchifm : and that the Church-men
ought to indulge the others' fcruples, rather than
hazard one."—" A wife decifion," adds Warbur-
ton, " and reaching much farther, in religious
matters, than to the fmgle cafe to which it was
applied." He means, probably, that the prin-
ciples of mutual conccffions refpecting ceremonies,
ought to make men candid in matters of faith.

With regard to matters of faith. Dr. Dtt Pin^'
fays, that the Church certainly has not *' the

power

• Warburton's Alliance, pnge 314, oftavo, B. iii. Chap. 3.
** Appendix to MoTheinij as before.

BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. VII. 93

power of ordaining an}7thing that is contrary to
the word of God^ but he fays, it muft be taken
for granted that the Church will never do this in
matters, qu^ fidei Subftantiam evertant."

I need not endeavour to fuggeft any Improve-
ment y after what has been faid on the fubjedl of
improving rehgious Societies in the lall chapter of
ihe third Book^

« Book III. Chap. xv. Scft. xii.

ARTICLi;

94 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. I,

ARTICLE XXI.

OF THE AUTHORITY OF GENERAL COUNCILS.

GENERAL Councils may not be gathered
together without the commandment and will
of Princes. And when they be gathered togetlier
(forafmuch as they be an Affembly of men, whereof
all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of
God) they may err, and fometimes have erred,
even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore
things ordained by them as neceflary to falvation,
have neither flrength nor authority, unlefs it may
be declared that tliey be taken out of holy Scrip-
ture»

I. OiiY Hi/lory here might be very extenfive ;
I will endeavour to confine it within bounds fuit-
able to our prefent plan, without omitting anything
very important — Nothing is more natural to men,
than to confuk with each other when they are in
difficulties. We arc led to confultatlon both by
our reafon and our feelings. And we may con-
ceive that, in teaching t!ie Chriflian Religion, and
adapting it to the various cufloms of difTcrcnt
nations, confultation muft be frequently defire-
able. We have a memorable inftancc in the
fifteenth chapter of the Ads of the Apoflle. Paul
and Banuibas were at Antioch; it there appeared,
that the Jews who favoured Chriflianity, or were
admitted into it, could not bring themfclves to

cive

BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. I. g^

give up the religion of Mofes ; it was divine ; they
had been brought up in it ; it had diflinguifhed
them from idolatrous heathens; nay, they Vv^ere
not contented with retaining it themfelves, they
thought that even the Heathen converts ought to
conform to k: Chriftianity, they feem to have
thought a new and improved fpecies of Jiidaifm,
— Now the Apoflle faw, that Chriftianity was in-
tended to fuperfede Judaifm; and tliat it would
be a very great hindrance to the converfion of tl>e
Heathens, if they muft bear the troublefome bur-
dens of the Law of Mofes, in favour of which
they were by no means prejudiced. To manage
fo as to lofe neither Jewifli nor Gentile converts,
required much prudence: it required conjulta-
tiott : Paul and Barnabas thought it worth while to
travel from Antioch to Jerufalem, in order to con-
fult the '' Apoftles and Elders, with the zvhok
Ckird," in fo cridcal a jun<5lure. We have fome
account of the meeting; J^/wfj, theBi(hop% feems
to have given the final determination. — tlere was
a genuine confultation ; the church was not only
" affembled with one accord," but v/ith one accord
they attended to their proper bufmefs : their minds
pure from indlred: motives ; from pride, ambition,
rivalOiip, and worldly intereft. This meeting has
frequently been calkd the hx{k Council^.

As Chriftianity fpread, any affemblies, aiming
to colled the fenfe of Chriftians at large, muft
confift of members convened from a greater extei^t
of country : but Mojlicim tells us, that till the
middle of the fecond Century % Churches afted in-
dependently of each other, and did not- meet
together with any fuch view. He adds^ that there

* Art. VI. Sea. xxv.

^ Held A. D. 47, or near; Cave.

<^ Mofhdmj C«nt. 2. Part 2. Chap. 2, Se^. 3.

was

^6 BOOK IV. ART. XX. SECT. II.

was no general council till the fourth century*^:
yet there was a Council held at Antioch in the
year 270, againil: Paul of Saniofata, where were
prefent, according to Cave, Bilhops innumerable.

In proceeding farther, I will fiifl: mention fome
faBs^ Rich as a fcholar is fuppofcd to be informed
of, and then make a few remarks. Councils, of
one fort or other, have been very numerous;
Baster, in his account, mentions particulars rela-
tive to 480. — With regard to the number of genC'
rtf/ councils, writers are not agreed ^ fome calling
on\y /even or eight of the Councils general, others
eighteen.

II. I will now mention fome of the principal
councils; that at Nice^ was held in the year 325,
^ by order of Confhantine the Great, againtl the
Arians; and is always called the jfr/? general Coun-
cil : that at Coujlantinople was held in the year 381,
by order of Theodofius the Great, againft the
Macedonians:— the third of thofe, held at Ephefus^
was very eminent : it was afTembled in the year
431, by Theodofius Junior, againft Nejiorius:—
We may add the Council held at Chalcedon in the
year 451, by order of the Emf>eror Alarcian^ or,
in effed perhaps, by the influence of his Emprefs
Ptdcheria, on account of the adverfary or opponent
of Neftorius, Ev.tyches. — Thefe four are called the
jirjl four general Councils ; Gregory the Great com-
pared them to the/o7<r Go [pels .—l!\\<i reformed are
fpoken " of as having a very high reipeft for them.
— I muft pafs from thefe to fome of much later
date. The Council of Conjlancc, which began in
1 414, was called with the confent of the^ See of
Rome, and by mean.> of the Emperor Sigifmund;
to decide who Ihould be Pope, and againft the

Refoimers,

^ Cent. 4 2. 2. I. •-■ Rhemlfh Teft. on Ads xv. 28.

*" Baxter, page 430, or Chap. 13.

BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. III. g'J

Reformers, John WIckliffe and John Hufs, and
Jerom of Prague. Wickcliffe indeed was dead,
but the Council condemned his dodlrines, and
ordered his bones to be dug up and burnt. — The
Council of Bafil began in 1431 : it feems to have
been agreed upon at the Council of Conftance, and
to have been alTembled by the Emperor and Pope
jointly, againfl the Reformers; particularly againft
the Bohemians, who had Zifca for their head. But
the Council were fo afraid of their adverfaries as to
invite them to defend their notions ; a meafure
which had as much fuccefs as might be expected.
— The Council of Trent is not mentioned by
Baxter or Cave : but we often refer to the A<fls
of it. From thefe we fee, that it began Dec. 13,
1545; and from the 5«//<3 prefixed, it feems as if
Pope Paul III. had relied chiefly on the Emperor
Charles V. and Francis I. of France. Hiftory
fays 2, that the Emperor was very defirous to have
the Council continued after the death of Paul III.
— The Council was held in order to check the
Reformation ; its fufpenfions and interruptions
cannot be entered into here.

Of the Synod of Dort I faid fomething in the
Hiftory of the'' tenth Article.

III. It feems as if our ideas of the Councils
now mentioned will be very indefinite and imper-
fect, if we do not mention fomething of the num"
bers of perfons who have been faid to be prefent at
each J and the time of its continuance. Thefe are
by no means agreed upon, but I Ihall fatisfy my-
felt with delivering to you the report of any re-
fpedlable author. — The Council of Nice is often
called the Council of the 318; that is, of 318

Bifhops;

e Mofheim, Cent. i6. Sed. i. Chap. 4. Sedl. 3,
*" Art. X. Se£l. xv.
VOL. IV, G

98 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. IV.

BIfliops; but Lardner (hews', that this number is
not by any means to be depended upon. It probably
became the favourite number, becaufe it was the
number of Abrahatn's ^ fervants, by whom he con-
quered his enemies. But befides Bifliops we are
told, that there were at Nice an incredible num-
ber of Prefbyters, &c. At Conjlantinople Cave fays,
there were only about 150 Orthodox Bifhops, and
36 of thofe Bifliops who were followers of Mace-
donius. — About 200 Bifliops are (aid to have been
at Ephefiis^ and 600 at Chalcedon. — For the Council
of Conjlance I refer to Fox's' entertaining account ;
but the Cardinals and Bilhops were allowed to
confult at their own homes. — Cave does not men-
tion the numbers at Bajil"^, nor does Baxter; but
there are many hifliories of that Council : it was
a confufed affair; and the numbers muft have
varied. — At Trent the introduction to the Ads of
the Council tells us, that there were 5 Cardinals,
befides Legates; 3 Patriarchs, 33 Archbifliops,
Q^T)^ Bifliops, 7 Abbots, 7 Generals of Orders,
and 146 Divines; and Orators from the Emperor
Ferdinand (called Csefar) fuccellbr of Charles V.
in 1558, and many European Princes: — but at
what time thefe were prefent is not iliid, or whether
at any one time.

1 V. The duration of the above-mentioned Coun-
cils was very unequal. . The Nicene continued only
about two months and a few days. That at CoU'
Jlantinople was interrupted, and held at two dif-
ferent

* Works, Vol. 4. page 18;. '' Gen. xiv. 14.

' AiHs and Monuments, Vol. i, page 785. quoted alfo by
Gilpin in his Lives of Reformers.-— i/«//;f mentions a larger
Council than this, at Placentia, A.D. 1096, called by Pope
Martin II. in the time of William Rufus, in order to deter-
mine upon the firll Crufade.

» Dupin's Compend. gives aftiort and intelligible accQuntof
this Council.

BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. V. 99

ferent times". The Ephejine feems to have con-
tinued from about the twentieth of June to the
beginning of September. — The Council of Chalce-
don feems to have begun the 1 5th of October, and
to have ended very early in° November, if not the
laft day of Oiliober. — The Council of Con/iance
lafted between three and four years^; that of Bajil'^ .
eleven, and the Council of T^renf eighteen : reckon-
ing thefe two from the firfl Seflion to the laft;
taking no notice of fufpenfions, interruptions, de-
crees for removals, &c. &c.

General Councils have been of late difconthmed;
probably from their appearing not to anfwer their
purpofe.

v. Their Authority has been greatly extolled in
words', chiefly by the Romanifts ; but when we
enter into particular enquiries about them, they
feem very diforderly, in fad, whatever they may
be in theory; and they feem to have been fre-
quently hoftile to the Papal power, and fome-
times deftrudive' of it in particular Popes. —

And

" The firfl: meeting feems, from Cave, to have been in May,
and to have continued till Auguft : the next, to have been in
the next year, with rather fewer Bifhops. — Dupin's Compend.
fays, we Ihould conceive a third Council to have been held.—
Cave's Hift. Lit. may eafily be confulted on any Councils.

*• Cave: there are 16 Ads ; the firft on the Ides of Oflober,
the 14th Prid. Kal. Nov. — I do not fee a date for the 15th
and 1 6th Afts ; but the Hijlories of the Council feem volumi-
nous.

9 Cave, as I underftand him: Fox fays 4 years. Vol. i. page

78a. It began Nov, 7, 1414, and ended April 22, 1418.

Dupin Compend.

^ It began 1431, and ended 1442. Baxter.

* The firft Seffion is dated Dec. 13, 1545, and the 25th is
dated Dec. 4, 1563.

* See Rhemifts on Ads xv. 28.

* Baxter, page 431. 444. from Ads of the Council of Bajil.
That Council depofed Pope Eugenius IV : and the Weftern

G a Church

lOO BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. VI. VII.

And Popes have alfo" made free with decrees oi
Councils.

VI. After mentioning thefe /acfs^ I may make
a few remarks : I mean fuch as are hiftorical.

The manner of carrying on difputes in the
larger Councils, was fuch as promifed no decifion.
To form, or change, a folid opinion in religion,
much nicety of attention is requifite; much can-
dour, and opennefs to conviftion; but no one
came to a council to be convinced; every one
took for granted that his own opinion was right,
and aimed only at convincing others; or at at-
tracting them by eloquence; every one took up
every difficult fubjeft with, pajfi on; he was fhockcd
at the profancnefs and impiety of his adverfary ; he
felt more horror than doubt. Yet when he was
oppofed, he was perplexed; but this only ferved
to irritate, not to foften or conciliate. Inability to
anfwer% and clear up a point, never fails to ex-
afperate him who attempts'^ it. And thus would
arife expreflions of indignation, and in the end
furious perfecutions. " The beginning^ of ftrife
is as when one letteth out water."

VII. It was a great fault in Councils, that the
members of them fliould be all on one fide of a
queftion : called, not fo much to argue as to over-
power : confidering how abiurd this is, its fre-
quency is aflonifhing : what a number of debates
have been held, which were only apparent, or fort

of

Church was very adverfe to the Council of Conftantinople, as
held in the Eaft; did not reckon it general, if at all valid.

" Baxter, page 261. 450.

't Some Jpecimefis of replies maybe feen in Baxter, page loi,
&c. — 105.

y Baxter obfervcs, that the efFedt of Councils has been to
exafperate; page 100.

» Prov. xvii, 14.

BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. VIII. IX. IQI

of fham debates ! expreffing uncertainty, whilft
every thing was fixed !

VIII. And yet it feerns poffible, that, for a
time, warm and paffionate debates, however un-
reafonable, might be void of mahce, and corrupt
defign : inexperience, and thoughtlefsnefs, with
rehgious zeal, might be fufficient to produce them.
Good Canons of controverfy muft be the refult of
much calm obfervation. But after a few ao-es,
pride, ambition, a defire of rule, or even intereft
and felfiflinefs, might infinuate themfelves; and
mixing with bigotry, or fuperllition, might gene-
rate malice and corruption : then indired motives
would operate, for maintaining a dodrine, or
humbling a rival.— In fadl, at the laft, through
the indulgence and admiration given to Religion
by the ordinary people, thefe faults did certainly
grow to an enormous height, and fome perfons, even
in the moft eminent religious ftations, became, not
wicked men, but monfters in human lliape.

Neverthelefs I am perfuaded, that though parti-
cular fads may raife our abhorrence, if we take a
comprehenfive view of all the larger councils to-
gether, we muft acknowledge, that great abilities
were often exerted in carrying them on, and great
piety : and that many venerable Prelates and Di-
vines muft have expofed themfeives to great hard-
fliips merely with a view to promote a grand and
folemn meeting for the purpofe of fettling religious
uuth, and^ unanimity amongfl Chriftian brethren^
IX. I will dole this Hiftory with mentionino-
a few writers on Councils. In the Council of Chal-
cedon there is a book referred to called "Codex

canonum

* See Baxter's account of African Councils, page 73.
•* A good panegyric on Councils may be feen in Warburton'a
Alliance, 2. 3. 2, or page 198 ; from Hooker, i. 2.

G 1

102 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. IX.

canonum" Ecclefise Univerfae," which muft have
been a body of the decrees of only general Coun-
cils, 1 fear we have no fuch book now, that is
genuine, at lead ; but we have very good collec-
tions of Councils : that by Labbe is an able work,
but there is a finer publillied at Paris in 1644, in
37 volumes folio. This is the largeft I know;
the fmalleft, is Berlins compendium''. — Bifhop
Beveridge has written on the fubje6t a work in
good elleem ; and I have often ufed a book in one
volume folio, by Long. I think Baxter''s book, to
which I have now referred, contains fome acute
obfervations, and fome candid ones ; but allow-
ance fhould be made for each man's particular
views and principles.

I have fatisfadion in confulting Cave's Hiftoria
Literaria, which gives Ihort accounts of Councils,
and at the fame time refers to others much longer.
Binnhis is an author in good repute , but the ori-
ginal records of Councils were not io well pre-
ierved, as to leave no uncertainties or contradic-
tions in the accounts which v/e have of them at
this time. — Some writers you will find, who,
though ingenious, are too ludicrous and flippant
upon the fubjecl of Councils, for my judgment;
\\ as Voltaire and Dr. Jortin^ : thefe indulge a boyifh
kind of pertnefs, which fhews, to me, a want of
entering into the circumftances ot thofe whom they
ridicule ; that is, in truth, a narrownefs of mind.
And indeed not to diftinguifli between the nature
of anything and the abufe of it, is always a fign
of narrow views, or hafty reflexion; of an in-
temperate
<= Cave's Hift. Lit. 1 . page 386.

^ The writers on Ecclcf. Hiil. Bingham, Cave, ^'C. refer to
a Book called Hill. Conciliorum, or nearly that. Hunie, in his
Jiiftory of England, only quotes Concil. Tom. x. There are
many accounts of Councils.
'^ Art. IX. Seft. viii.

BOOK IV. AlvT. XXI. SECT. X. IO3

temperate love of wit, and a defire to be rather
humorous than accurate.

X. , Let us nov/ come to the Explanation.

« General Councils:'— K council, in common
language, may fignify any meeting of perfons who
confult with each other; but in church-hiftory it
feems always to imply fome reprefentation; and
the term is never ufed for any lefs fignificant meet-
ing than when delegates are fenc from the different
churches in a^ Diocefe. A Diocefe was once a
very fmall diftrid ; but of that another time. 'If
all the Diocefes in a Province lend delegates, or
reprefentatives, the Council is provincial; and the
Prefident is a metropolitan; (for fome one muft
prefide) : if all the Provinces in a Nation, it is
National^ : and if all the Nations t:i? ot>:»^eyn?, it
is cecnmenical, or general; and the Prefident mufh
be eleded. Iri faft, delegates are never fent from
all nations of the world ; and therefore, according
to the ftriftnefs of this lad definition, there never
is, nor has been, a general Council ; but people
will talk big fometimes; as when a large body ot
Chriftians call ihemfeives Catholics ; and we muft

fometimes

f The meeting at Jerufalem ( Aasxv.) may be called a Coun-
cil or not, as we follow or not theie definitions. If all Chril-
tendom, however fmall, appeared there, virtually, it might, in
fome fenfe, be called ?. general council, if it was a council at all.

g I know no name for the head of a national church, taken
independently of the ftate; our Convocations have had Prolo-
cutfirs, anfwering to the fpeakers of the Houfes of Lords and
Commons. Primate may he the name ; A h, our Archbifhop
of Canterbury may be Primate as head of the Englijh Church,
and Metropolitan as head of a Province. The Arch"bifhop of
York is called Primate of England; the Archbifhop of Canter-
bury Primate of all England. York was once a refidence of
Roman Emperors: Union of Nations may (asin Aquitain, &c.)
have left a title, which now feems too extenfive, though it did
{ipt when hrft given.

e 4

104 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XI.

fometimes follow them when they quit plain lite«
ral language. As we have no council between
national and general, if a Council be compofed
of delegates from feveral nations, and notice be
given to others, who are likely to be interefted ;
it may be called a general Council without much
impropriety''. A general council would be the
moft regularly formed, if each Church was to
chufe a reprefentative for a meeting of the churches
in a Diocefej if each Diocefe was to chufe, out of
thofe reprefentatives, a reprefentative for a pro-
vincial council ; each provincial coancil one for a
l^Iational Council; each national council one (or
more, according to its extent) for a general coun-
cil : then, if all Chriftian nations fent reprefenta-
tives fo elefted, one does not fee why fuch general
council would not fairly rcprefent the Catholic
church. — And if fome nations neglected to fend,
fuppofing they had proper notice, it would be hard
if their negligence could fruflrate the undertakings
of the reft of the Chriftian world.

I do not know any difference between Council
and Sy7iod, except that the latter is Greek, and the
former Latin ; the Laws of councils Icem always
to be called Canons^ thouohthat be Greek.

XI. ^'■Ilie Will of Princes^'' — fuppofed Chrif-
tian Princes, oppofed probably to Popes : in a
republic, &c. \ht Jovereign power. — Bccaufe gene-
ral councils are compofed of national councils, and
a prince is the head of a nation. It does not
follow (whether true or not) that PrOTwr/W coun-
cils may not be gathered together without confuk-
mg Prmces : fome Chriftian councils were held
before Conftantine became a Chriftian.

XII. " Ml

* Cave rcafons in order to fettle whether the Council of
Conftantinopic agaiiifl ijuages, in 754, was a general ont: fo
do other writers.

BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XII. XIII. I05

XII. *' Jll he not governed with the fpirit and
word of God;'' — that is, feme have fometinies
zvorldly views j— the expreffions of our Article are
directly oppofite to one in the RhemiJIi' Teftament ;
— " Holy Counfels" " have ever the affiftance of
God's 5/)/nV, and therefore cannot erre,'' &c. — And
the Council of Chalcedon cry out, *' thefe are the
words of the i7o/r''G//o/?."

XIII. " May c-rr,"— a priori j— and a pofterlori,
" have erred" " even in things pertaining unto
God:'' — it was, in 1552, *' not only in worldly
matters, but alfo," &c. ; this comparifon makes
our expreflion more intelligible ; and the change
makes our affent more eafy: it was a needlefs
trouble to prove that Councils had erred *' in
worldly matters :" — worldly matters are riot ex-
preffed in the Lathi of 1552.

Our cliurch refpeds Councils \ though it will
found Salvation on the Scriptures : ■— It fays, " they"
fometimes " have erred:" and *' things ordained by
them as neceffary to Salvation," muft be tried by
Scripture; but this implies, that in anything fliort
of that. Councils ought to be reipedled. And
accordingly, our Homily on fafting, fpeaks liand-
fomely' of the Council of Chalcedon.

'* Unlefs it may be declared," &c. this feems
rather obfcure; or however lefs clear than the
Latin, " nifi oflendi poffint e facris literis efle
defumpta," — But if Salvation is to be founded on
Scripture, the Councils may feem to have nothing
to do with our principles 5 yet they may fuggeft,
argue, interpret ; and their opinion, when they do
fo, may afibrd us light ; and is to be attended to,

and

^ Rhemifts on Aflsxv. 28. ^ Baxter, page loi.

^ Page 217, 8vo. — See alfo Reform. Legum de SummaTri-
nitate, &c. Cap. 14. which is more clear and full than our
Articles,

Io6 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XIV— XVI.

and treated with reverence : it may have weight,
fometimes great weight, with thofe who are not
qualified to judge.

XIV. We come to our Proof.

There feem but two propofitions to be noticed ;

XV. General Councils cannot be called without
the confent of Princes.

General Councils are made up of Delegates from
National Councils 5 and according to us, the Prince
is the head of the national Church. Hov/ far
the confent of the Sovereign is necelTary for a
man's quitting his own countiy, is a matter of
National Lazv ; but I think moralifts deem fuch
confent neceffary; either exprefs or tacit \ at leaffc
when fubjefts travel in any confiderable numbers ;
or for ends affedling the State to which they
belong.— The Chriftian religion leaves the political
obligations of fubjects in their full force.— (See
Matt. xxii. 15, &c — Rom. xlii. i, &c.) — If fome
fpiritual Magiilrate could call a number of every
nation out to a diftant region, it mufl greatly in-
terrupt internal Government : and if people fo
called out could make what rules they pleafed
about Religion, including difcipline, morals, fpiri-
tual Courts, &c. and the Magiilrate at home muft
execute thoie rules, he would be thwarted and
impeded in fome very important parts of his ad-
miniftration.

XVI. General Councils have erred. — \{ s^'t give
any farther proof of this than has already appeared,
it will be for the fake of rellecting on the Hiftory
of the Church. Indeed it would be fufficient if
vvc proved that Romanifts muft own general Coun-
cils to have erred, for our prefcnt Article is only
againfh the Romanifts : and in this view, we might
repeat what was"' before fiid about Councils

dcpohng
«" Scdion V.

BOOK IV. ART. X.XI. SECT. XVI. 107

depofing Popes, and Popes negledting Councils.
And we might add the inftance of Pope Honoriiis,
who was depofed as a Monothehte by the general
council of Conftantinople in the feventh Century".
General Councils have contradi5ied° each other, in
which cafe one mufl err; that at Rimini v^^s^ at
laft Arian. And I fear, if we examined the firft
four, we fhould not find them all free from error.
Lardner does not find the Council of Nice fuch as
he approves ; chiefly with regard to toleration. —
As I remember, it orders people to Jiand during
prayer J a fmall error perhaps: the P apiji s iTin^
think it fets the churches of Jerufalem, Alexandria
and Antioch too high.

For the firft general Council of Conftantinople
we may refer to Gregory '^ of Nazianzum, or to
the expofhulations of the Bifhop of Rome : it was
noify and diforderly, and ambitious to have all
church-bufmefs done in the" Eaft. — I do not
fcruple to fay, that the general council oi E-plieJus
erred in treating Neflorius' with too great /^i^tT/Zy.
—-The riot and warm oppofition of John of An-
tioch; the calling in of a military force; fraud,
prifon, banilhment, all thefe may be faid not to
be chargeable upon the Council; they w^re not
likely to make the Council free from error ; riots
in any alTembly are always a difgrace to it, and a
great hindrance to right decillons, though rioters

can
" Art. II. Seel, x.

° Long's Councils, p3ge 266. — Baxter on Councils, page 99.
44,, or compare page 98. Sed 9, with page 100, Seft. 17 :
and the Council at Conftantinople in 754, with- the fecond
Nicene Council in 787, about images. — bee alfo Bifhop Por-
teus's Brief Confutation, page 30.
P Bennetonthe Article.

1 Baxter, page 67, 69. — Gibbon, Vol. 3. (contents.)
"■ Baxter, page 70. Se£t. 11.
* And lee Baxter, page 94. Seft. 30. and Art, 11. Se^l. viii.

lo8 BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XVII.

can never be all on one fide. — The Council of
Chalcedon was a fcene of contention, as far as con-
cerned the Eutychians; the claims made at it are
fcarcely intelligible ; and the Legates of the Po-pe
protefled againft the eighteenth canon*. The Euty^
chian debate in that Council was curious enough i
no one knew how to oppofe Eutyches without
favouring Neftorius, who had been depofed at
Ephefusi nor therefore without condemning the
preceding general Council; this difficulty I can
conceive to have been the occafion of irritating
and exafperating the Fathers, and fo, of much
riot and diforder, both before and at the Council
of Chalcedon. The difference between Neftorius
and Eutyches (if any% at bottom) was fo fubtle
and refined, that no one cculd explain himfelf
clearly upon it.

Here Billiop Porteus's chapter "^ might be intro-
duced.

XVII. I will carry the Proof no farther, but
fee what can be faid in the way o^ Application. — ^o
new form of affent feems wanting.— And I doubt
whether any propofals of mutual conceflions would
be ef^eclual, (o bigotted is Du Pin^ in this matter.
Except indeed he means, that fuppofing a general
council fuch as \\. JJiotdd bcy it would be abfurd for
a private man to i^ox up his own judgment againft it;
if he means this, we might agree with him. And
the chief part of what is faid in order to inculcate
a veneration for general councils, is derived from

their

* Cave, I. 48(5. Its defign was, to make the Bifliop of Con-
fiantinoplc equal to the Biihop of Rome, Conftantinople being-
new Rome. The breach this occafioned between Enjl and Weji
has never been healed to this day. Baxter, page 70.

" Baxter, pa^je 102.

* Biiif Confutation, Part i. Chap. 6.
y y^ppeadix to Moiheim, as bcfoie.

BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XVII. 109

their nature, and excludes all fuppofition of their
being ahujed. — But if we fpeak of General Councils
as what they have been in fad, it feems to me
that Papijis have full as much reafon to declare
them fallible, as Protefiants.

As to Improvement , the idea of improving general
councils is quite fimple ; take away their faults^
and they are improved, and ufeful. A council of
Chriftians literally general, feems Icarcely attainable
in our age, becaufe the Greek Church mud be ad-
mitted to it, as alfo Afiatic and African churches ;
though anything might be done by carrying repre-
fentation far enough, or, what means the fame, by
reducing the number of reprefentatives.

Yet we can fcarce conceive, that mfaEl a fmall
number of reprefentatives would be allowed to
bind the univerfal Church, without havino- their
ads ratified by their conflituents : and fuch ratifi-
cation would confume fo much/Zw^, as, in many
cafes, to render the Councils ufelefs. Indeed the
time fpent merely in the journeys of very diitant
reprefentatives to the place of meeting would
make an infuperable difficulty, What would be
the cafe if we fuppofed both America and Afia wholly
Chriflian ?

No Council would be fo bad now asfome were
when the Clergy were ignorant and profligate;
but we are not yet arrived at a manner of dif-
puting produdive of mutual convidion ; let con-
troverly then be improved and humanized; by
our writings let us (hew, that we 2iXQ Jit to meet :
And then, let our councils at firft be iinall ; and
let them be enlarged as we find them produce
unanimity.

If we could thus proceed on till there was a
probability of fome good from confulting.with

our

no BOOK IV. ART. XXI. SECT. XVII.

our moft diftant brethren, it would be a cheer-
ing profpecl ; it would fill our minds with hope,
that the Church of Chrifl might, in fome finite
time, become in fad, what it always was in theory,
Univerfal,

:^

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. I. II. m

ARTICLE XXII.

OF PURGATORY.

HE Romifh dodlrifie concerning Purgatory,
Pardons, Worfhipping and Adoration, as well
of Images as of Reliques, and alfo Invocation
of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and
grounded upon no warrantry of Scripture, but
rather repugnant to the Word of God.

I. Although this Article is intitled, " Of Pur-
gatory," it contains feveral other fubje6ts. We
will make fome hijlorical remarks on them in the
order in which they occur; but it may be ob-
ferved of every one of them, that it began in a
time of Superftition j that it became popular be-
caufe it flattered or interefled mens feelings and
imaginations; that it got fixed in the dark ages-;
that it became lucrative to the facred orders, or
advanced their power ; and therefore, as well as
becaufe it had become aflbciated with religious
principles and fentiments, at the revival of learn-
ing, it was not given up.

II. With regard to Purgatory in particular,
though it may not be founded in either reafon or
fcripturc, it is not unnatural: who can bear the
thought of dwelling in everlajling torments^ ? yet
who can fay, that a juft God will not inflict them?

the
» If, xxxiii. 14,

112 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. II.

— the mind of man fecks fome rejource ; it finds
one only in conceiving that fome temporary pu-
nifhmcnt after death, may purify the foul from
its moral pollutions, and make it at laft accept-
able even to a Deity perfectly pure. Hence the
notion of the foul's iranjmigration ; and hence it is,
that the Epic'' Poets reprefent departed Spirits as
uttering complaints at the continuance of their
fufferings.— Yet fome make a difference between
men profeiTedly zvicked, and fuch as only are com-
pafled about with infirmtics ; the wicked they give
up to punilhment eternal j but the weak they hope
may be made perfect by temporary fufferings ; or,
in other words, they conceive, that thofe who have
committed mortal fins, and not repented of them,
will be punilhed for ever in Hell ; but that thofe
who have committed only*" venial fins, will only
fuffer for a time in Purgatory. — We have already ^
mentioned the laft Article of 1552 concerning the
final falvation of all men ; containing Dr. Hartlefs
dodlrine; and that of Or/Vf;/'.*— but that relates
to all kinds of fins, and to a termination of all
kinds of punifliment.

Some have fixed upon the element of Fire as
the inftrument by which men were to be purified
from their venial fins. That element was little
underftood, and is exceedingly powerful ; which is

enough

*> Homer, Virgil, mentioned by Burnet, who alfo mentions
3l platonic notion to the purpofe; but he refers to no pajfage. —
Forbes, 13. 2, refers to Plato, Cicero, Virgil, &c. but not to
Homer, that I fee.

<^ Art. XV. Sefl. xii. xxi. xxiii.

«* Art. xvui. Seft. v.

"^ Aug. Hxr. 43. "purgationem malorum," Sec. Reform.
Legum. de Ha:r. cap. 11. See the end of Somnium Scipionis.
In this 43d H:er. Aug. fays, that he has oppofed " diligcn-
tiflime" Origen, and the thUoJophcis from whom he borrowed
hisdodlrine; De Civitate Dei.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. II. 11^

enough to occafion myftical and fuperftitious'
opinions and feelings about k; and even to make
its operations to be afcribed to perfonal caufes. —
The foul has been thought to be itfelf ^ fire; and
different'' nations have entertained conceptions of
departed Spirits being affedled by fire; but we
muft not go far into fuch matters at prefent.—
There are expreflions of Scripture^ which may have
helped forward the adoption of fuch an opinion
into revealed religion; as Pf. civ, 4. — Mai. iii. 2.
— Matt. iii. II.— Acls ii. 3. — See Cruden's Con-
cordance, under Fire.

Some Chriftians feem to have had, in very early
times, fome notions of a temporary punilhment
after death, purifying the foul; Carpocrates'"^ and
Montaniis are particularly mentioned. The oriental
Chriftians were difpofed to believe the tranfmi-
gration of fouls, from their belief of the impurity
of matter. The Manicheans in particular, did
profefs that doa:rine\ Yet the Greek Church,
though eaftern, never held any purification after
this life.

Angujlin was. In his youth, a Manlchean, though
only an auditor, never one of the eled. He, in
fome way or other, had acquired a notion of an
ignis pur gat or im^ ; — but he made no article oi Faith
about it ; he only went fo far as to fiy, " non /«-
credibile"^ videtur," and on other occafions, he

exprelfed

^ Cic. de Nat. Deorum, i. 15. 2. 1 5. 3. 14.

8 Cic. Tufc. difp. I. 9. end, " W^o"— and Sefl. 11. "Si
jgnis, extinguetur." (anima).

^ See Michaelis, Introd. Set^t. loi, page 245, quarto.

* SeeFulke on the Rhem. Teft. from Ireuseus and Tertullian.
Matt. V. Sea. I. -He adds the Origenijls, Matt. xii. Sed. 6. —
Forbes's Inllrt;<El. 13.2. 4.

^ Lardner, Vol. 3, page 476. — Vol. 9, page 421, 422.——
See alfo Append, to Book i. Sedl. iv. or Vol. i,page 351.

^ Enchiridion, Cap. 29. «" Ad Dulcitii Qiiccft. 1,'

VOL, IV. H

114 BOOKIV.ART.XXII.SECT.il.

exprcffcd great doubtfulnefs" ; and when he treated
of the Llmbus infantum, in which children, dying
iinbaptized, were fuppofed to exift, he proved, in
general, that there was no third ftate befides heaven
and° hell -.—at leaft, that of fuch ftate we are
perfeftly ignorant, and that it is not mentioned in
the Scriptures.

After the time of Auguftin the notion of pur-
gatory kept growing in the church; but it was
only fuppofed to purify men from flight'' faults ;
as immoderate laughing, or inordinate domeftic
cares, &c.

The Schoolmen^ as ufual, run into minute parti-
culars ; Thomas Aquinas^ for inftance, mentions,
that it is the fame fire which torments the damned
in Hell, and the juft in Purgatory'' : and that the
leaft punilhment in purgatory, exceeds the greateft
in this life. — But I do not fee that he mentions
from whence he derives his knowledge.

The Council of Trent rather feems to take for
granted the doctrine of Purgatory, as fixed by
Fathers, Councils, &c. than to define it. In the
fixth Seffion, about Juftitication, it anathematizes
all", who fay, that fins are remitted in Chrift, in
fuch fenfe as to leave no temporal puniQiment due.
And in the twenty-fifth Seflion', it decrees, that

the

" Veneer on this Article refers to paiTages; Enchir. 66. 68.
Quaell. Dulc. i.— De Fide et operibas, cap. i6.

" De Verbis Apoll. Ser. 14. Hypognoft. Cont. Pclag. I. 5.

(reckoned fpurious). Fulke on Rhemifh Tell. Matt. xii.

beet. 6.

P Fulke, ibidem, from Gregory the Great, A. D, 590.—
Veneer obferves, that the (;th Gen. Council, in condemning
the Origenifts, did not mention any other Purgatory.

^ Quoted by Forbes, 13. 1.5. in 4 ^entent dift. 21. qusft. i.
— P'arther fubtlcties are mentioned by Forbes in the fame
place.

» Canon 30. » Opening.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. III. tl^

t\\Q found doftrine of Purgatory fliall be preached,
fetting afide all nice and fubde queftions ; but does
not fay wherein that found dodrine confifts. — It
mentions nothing of Fire; perhaps in order to
avoid abllrufe fpeculations. — But in the Rhemifli
Teftament, the notion of a fiery ' purgatory feems
to be kept up. Du Pin, in his negotiation with
Archbifliop Wake, " obferves, that fouls muft
be purged-, that is, purified from all defilement
of fin, before they are admitted to celeftial blifsj
that the Church of Rome doth not affirm this to
be done by fire ;" &c.

I here clofe the Hifiiory o^ Purgatory.

III. The next thing mentioned in the Ardcle
is " Pardons;'* this means the fame as Indulgences^
the Latin being Indulgenti^ ; but from the Rhemifh
Teftament it feems likely, that Pardons was the
more common term at the time of the Reforma-
tion". I have explained the nature of thefe under
the fourteenth Article. We may add here a few
inftances. Extravagant indulgences, or pardons,
were granted to thole who would undertake to join
in the Crufades"^. And in order to encourage men
to appear at the Council of Trent, the Legates and
Archbilhop of Trent, granted three years and one
hundred and fixty days of deliverance from Pur-
gatory, to any one, that fliould appear at that city
at the opening of the Council. — As I am not con-
fidering Hiftory with the moft fcrupulous nicety
(though 1 would not willingly make any miftake,)
I take the account of Mr. Voltaire, who adds, that
indulgences are ftill fold very cheap at Rome, fo

as
* On I Cor. Hi 15.

" In the Index, we find, *' Indulgences, fee Pardons.'*
'^ In the Crufade of Richard I. the expedition was to anfwer

to Sinners inllead of all Penances. — Innocent III. was liberal of

indulgences. Cave.

H 2

Il6 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV.

as to be re-fold in the Swifs Cantons at four Joh
apiece •■, but that the great profit made of them is
in SpaniJJi America^ where people are more rich
and more ignorant than in the fmall Swifs
Cantons ^.

Jubilees were inflituted in order to grant in-
dulgences. Bower, in his Life of Pope Boni-
face'' VIII. fays, that, in the year 1300, on fome
rumours of pardons having been granted at the
end of the preceding century (year 1200,) the
Pope appointed the firfl Chriflian Jubilee : and
gave public notice, that every man, repenting,
confefling, and fully abfolved, who fliould, during
the lafl^ year of any Century, vifit the churches of
St. Peter and St. Paul (at Rome) once a day, for
thirty days, fliould have a full indulgence : the
extent of which has not always been undcrftood in
the fame'' fenfe. — It has been computed, that
two hundred thoufand flrangers, have been at
Rome in one jubilee-year; and that the mere
brafs money, offered by the lower people, exclu-
five of filver and gold offered by the more opulent,
has amounted in one year to fifty thoufand florins
of gold. Since the year 1300, the Jubilees have
been made to return more frequently; there has
now long been one every '^ twenty-five years.

IV. The Hiflory of Images might be long;
bccaufe the ufe of them is calculated to produce
difputes. To contemplate refemblances of per-
fons whom we love or admire, is naturally pleafing

and

y Vol. I oth, quarto, page 151. 162.

» Bower's Lives of Popes, Vol. 6, page 354. — Chambers's
Dia. Jubilee.

* Perhaps 99 is moft properly the laft year, but, if loi be
called the firft year, 100 mull be the laft,

*» Art. xjv. Seft. i. — See alfo Fulke on 2 Cor. il. 10.
(Rhem.Teft.)

* Chambers,

BOOKIV.ART.XXII.SECT.lv. ny

and interelling to the mind. And if perfons, who
have gready promoted or fufFered for the caufe of
Religion, are departed out of ]ife, ftill the D>;vout
may be greatly affefted by a lively reprefentatioa
of their appearance and manner. But when the
perfon reprefented feems to have any claim to reli-
gious adoration, the refemblance occafions fome
danger. The Heathens had images of their
Godsi but it is probable that at firft each image
was only regarded as a mere refemblance ^ con-
tinual aflbciadon of the ideas of the invifible
original, and the vifible refemblance, united them
in the mind, and took away the diflinftion be-
tween them. Ere long the very fight of the
Image raifed all thofe fentiments, thofe devout
affedions, which at firll feemed appropriated to
the original.

This tranfition of the feelings from the original
to the Image, may take place, on different occa-
fions, and in different degrees. Suppofe then
Images in any place of worlhip j to remove them,~"
is to take away a great deal of that on which
the devout mind feeds, and by which it fupports
itfelf: to leave them, is to draw the mind on,
nearer and nearer, to Idolatry. What difputes
and contentions might not arife on the propofal
of fuch meafuresi- And difputes of this nature
might be forwarded by a confiift between love and
hatred for the'' polite arts.— We might give more
or fewer examples of thefe things ; but they would
fuggeft only this general obfervation.

As the early Chrijiians had occafion to contend
againft Idolatry, it feems natural that xhtj ihould
have an abhorrence of images. We may well
therefore confider the accounts of the ftatue of

Chrift
•• Art. XX. Sea. i. and vii.

Il8 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV.

Chriilfent to King Jb^arus, and the paintings' of
St. Luke, as fabulous. The Emperor Theodofius
forbade all incenfc, &c. to Idols, (fenfu carentibus
fimulacris), under penalty of forfeiture of the
houfes or lands where fuch ad of fuperftition was
committed ^ — y^/<^f</?//7 feems uneafy ^ at the mul-
tiplying^ of paintings and ftatues in his time,
though the political and hiftorical ufe of them
was not denied. In the fifth and fixth Centuries
they multiplied ftill more ; no one had time to
lay any rcftraints, fo bufy were the leaders of the
church with other matters. About the year 600
Serenus Bifhop of Marfeilles began to attack them
with violence ; Pope Gregory half commended
him, but rather foothed mens defire for images
upon the whole : however, it got fixed for fome
time, as a compromife, that it was right to have
images, but wrong to worjlup them'.

We may pafs on to the Emperor Leo III. called
the Ifawian ; a man of an imperious and violent
fpirit. Provoked by fomething of no very great
confequencc, he publilhed an Edid againft Images
in 726, and demolifned them in great numbers;
and in 754 they were condemned at a Council at
Conjlantinople called a general^ one : in 787 was held
the fecond Niceiie council, on which the Roma-
nifls found their worfliip of Images : they fpeak of

it

* See Forbes, 7. 8, and Dr. Middleton's Letter from Rome,
page 173, &c.

^ Leg. 12, page 15, quoted by Middleton, page 15S.

6 The Jttthrofomcrphitcs might be mentioned here: hv.g.
Hacr. 50. — Baxter's Councils, page 76, Scdl. 39.

^ Ep. 102, (al.49,) Tom. 1. page 212. Edit. Antv.

■ This fcems to be adopted by the NeceJJhry Do^rine; as
mentioned Art. vii. Note at the endof Se»^. xni.

^ Cave argues for its being called a general one. — Compare,
in Baxter's Councils, No. 228, with No. 232. — Partic. page 226,
Seft. 55. — Some mention made of this Council, Art. xxi.
Sea. X.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV. I19

it as if it had been the unanimous a(5l of all
Chriftians, and oppofed to' no other a.t\. Yet
it was called by an abandoned Emprefs, Irene,
who had caufed her hufband to be poifoned, and
afterwards put out her fon's eyes. — 'The oppolition
had now caufed much effufion of blood, as well
as the revolt of the Exarchate of Italy (Ravenna
the capital) from the eaftern Empire. In 794,
Charlemagne held a Council at Frankfort^ intend-
ing to moderate the fury of the contending parties;
and he alfo publifhed fome writings. — In 814
there was another Council at Conftantinople againft
images : and one at Paris in 825, but in that the
adoration of the Crofs was encouraged.

In the fucceeding centuries, till the Reforma-
tion, the paffion for Images grew Hill (Ironger; but
men of fober minds grew to be offended : and that
was one caufe of the Reformation.

The favourers of Images have been called Icono^
latra, and Iconodiili ; and their adverfaries, Icwio-
machiy and Iconoclaftte. — Cave calls the eighth
century Seculum Eiconoclafticum.

Jolin of Damafcus, called ufually Damafcene,
whom Lardner and Cave place in 730, was a
famous writer in favour of images; he was of a
great family, and eminent for his learning; but on
account of his credulity, which was the fault of
his time, he is not always to be depended upon.
— Pope Adrian I. wrote againft Charlemagne, but
got no fame "".

After

' Rhem Ted. end of i John, — Trent, Seflion 25, page 202,
duodecimo.

"* The Collyridians (Epiphan. Hsr. 79.) might be mentioned,
as it was to the Image of the Virgin that they offered their
Cake, («oAXt/^(y, its dim. KoWv^ic) — (See Fulke on Rhem.
Heb. ix. Sedl. 4.) And what Forbes relates of Theodore QLliota
(a new way of preferring facrifice to Mercy,) mighhc read in

H 4 Latin i

120 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IV.

After the Reformation began, the demoHtion
of Images was confidered as part of the deftruc-
tion of Popery. The Puritans wilhed the demo-
lition to be total.

Popidi countries abound with" Images ftill. —
They have, or have had, Images of the Deity ° ;
but what we hear mofl of, are thofe of Chrijl^ and
his earthly Parent, and fome Angels, and many
Saints. Some of thefe are very^ rich, others fo
mean as to be ridiculous to any but the lowed
people. — An image *' of Chrift upon the Crofs,
with Mary ** and John {landing by," uled to be
\\ called, in England, a Rood.

At Lijbon, as I have been told by one who fpoke
of what he had feen, there is a flatue of the
Virgin in a large full-bottomed wig, with Jefus,
as a Boy, dreffed in a Sword and bag-wig, with a
Violin in his Hand. — Sir Edwin Sandys fays, that
*' Where one voweih to Chrift, ten vow unto
her," (the Virgin), " and not fo much to herfelf,
as to fome peculiar image," &c. — " for one miracle

reported

Latin ; if it is, the approbation of Adrian I. and the fecond
Nicene Council, fhould not be forgotten. — Forbes 7. a. 30.—

7- "• 33- .

Here alfo might be mentioned " the Doftrine of School-
authors'* (Art. of 1553) from Forbes 7. 2. 26, 27, 28. — And
it might be feen, at the fame time, how " the Romijh Doctrine,"
(Art. of 1562) differs from the Scholaflic. — In the Article of
1552 the expreflion is, "The Dodlrine oi School ■ author s zou-
cerning Purgatory," &c. — In ours, of 11562, "The Romijh
dodrine concerning Purgatory," &c. in other things the Arti-
cles are much the fame.

" Middleton's Letter from Rome.

* Rhem. Teft. on A<5ls xvii. 29. fhews how Images of God
the Father were made from Dan. vii. 22. alfo with a Globe in
his hand, from no fcripture ; and of the Trinity, from Gen,
xviii. 2. and defends them.

P Our Lady of Loretto, &c. Midd. page 154, 155. Speculum
fiuropjc, page 4.

% Ntalj HiA. Fur. i.page 10a. Holyrood Houfe,

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. V. 121

reported to be wrought bj^ the Crucifix, not lo
few perhaps as an hundred are voiced upon thole
other Images'." This traveller fpeaks from his
own obfervation; and fo does 'Dy. Mid diet on in
later times, when he tells us of feveral women
whom he faw fitting before the Altar of a Saint,
each a* child in her lap, " in expectation of his
miraculous influence on the health of the In-
fant."

The Council of Trent mention the Romanifts
as kiffing images, and proflrating themfelves be-
fore them ; as well as being uncovered in paying
them refpeft : the images fpecified are thofe of
Chrijl, the Virgin, and other Saints, to whom due
honour is to be given. — Due honour fliould cer-
tainly be given to every thing.

The alteration made by the Romanlfts in the
fecond commandment was mentioned Art. vii.
Sed. XIII.

v. There is a connexion or analogy between
Images and Relics; both deriving their efficacy
from aflbciation of ideas between the thing and an
interefting perfon. What was faid of Images, v/ill,
in great meafure apply to Relics. It is natural to
be affeded by a relic of any one loved, admiredj,
or venerated: the fight of it makes our regret,
afFedion, &c. lively and flrong : and the |3ace
where the remains of any departed friend are de-
pofited, will come under the notion of a Relic.
Virgil's Tomb has been vifited with a tender
intereft. — Some perfons of our own country
would, in the laft Century, have very highly va-
lued, and paflionately contemplated, any relic of

Charles

' Sir Edward Sandys's Speculum Europe, page 4 and 5

See alfo Midd. page 152.

^ Letter from Home, page 167. if there be no I/;.' nge' nczr
this Altar, the inftancc may belong to Sed. vi.

122 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. V.

Charles I. or a twig of the Royal Oak by means
ot whicli his foil efcaped.

But religion, in this as in other things, heightens
our feelings. \n Mr. Mafon's CaraElacm"- we find
a fcntiment excited by Diuidical relics. I can
conceive a degree of affcdion or enthufiafni to
have arifcn from a relic of one of our venerable
Martyrs in the time of Queen Mary.

It requires meditation and knowledge of Anti-
quity rather than reafoning, to fee what the early
Chriftians mull have felt on contemplating what
they believed to be remains of Saints, Martyrs,
Apoftles, their blcffed Lord himfeif! agitated by
continual danger, haraffed by pallionate exertions
to fpread the religion which they profefled ! — I do
not mean, that the primitive Chriftians imagined
themfeivcs to be really in poflelTion of remains of
Chritl and the Apoftles ; for the primitive times
are charged with no weaknefs of the kind ; but

. ...

when a pafTion for relics once began to prevail, it
fpread more eafily becaufe of the habitual feelings
of Chriftians, and, we may add, becaufe of the
credulity of the times. A paffionate attention to
the fate of Martyrs, and to every thing belonging
to them, one cannot wonder at, in Chriftians of
any age. Put yourfelf into the place of Chriftians
in the fourth century, for inftance; conceive how
hi2;hly they muft regard thofe whom they had feen
futfering with conftancy to the laft extremity;
imagine how they muft be united together, and
how their union muft heighten their mutual fym-
pathy; and you will not be furprized, that they
ihould meet at the Tombs of the Martyrs, and there
ctrtr up their prayers'" to God and their Lord,

as

' LIne2;6.

" See J'tinanf, in Lardncr's Works, Vol. 4, page 306. — Alfo
a quotation from Tertullian de Corona Militis, C. i, 2, 3. in
Wall's inf. Baptifm, page 460, quarto.

BOOK IV. ART. XXri. SECT. V. T23

as Chriftians, and confirm their refolulions of fol-
lowing the noble example of the deceafed, in cafe
they Ihould be called upon to fo fevere a trial. —
But it is to be feared, that the fcene was fometimes
too much for their fober reafon : they fancied
things without juft foundation, they believed with-
out fufficient proof; and fome, thinking the fpirit
good, muft have tranfgrefled the bounds of truth
in inventins; what mipiit nourifh and enflame it. —
If this was the cafe, any number of falfe relics
might be produced and circulated : any voices
might be heard''.

Augujiin muft have been fenfible of a foolifli
excels in this matter, by the terms in which he
abufes the idle Monks ; fome of whom wandered
about. " Alii membra Martyrum, fi tamen Mar-
tyrum, venditant."-— (De Op. Monach. cap. 28.)

About the end of the fourth Century, the fond-
nefs for relics was ridiculed by Vigilantius^ pollibly
with too little caution : Jerom writes againft him,
but not exaftly as one w^ould vvifh ; however, he
is rather to be called over ferious and declamatory
than extravagant^, or wrong in his fundamental
opinions.

John Damafcene^ in reafoning on Images, takes
|"elics as a ground^ or axiom.

In

* The word Memories is often made ufe of: Du Frefne gives /'
feveral different fenfes of it, but I think not that of what we
call Apparitions. — Menwria—z. fepulcre ; in pi. a cehbratiottt
which items to have been paffionate, with fome geltures and
falutations. — A receptacle of a corpfe. — A chapel — a box hold-
ing relics. — Anything which had been ufed by the deceafed, as
his 5/^, &c. — y«wr^/ rites -and Fejii-vals, fuch as we call
Saints^ Days.

y See Fulke on Rhem. Tell. Argument to St. Luke's Gofpel ;
^nd on A£ts xix. Sed. 8.

"^ Forbes, 7. 2. 27. end. If I am to adore the original Crofs,
the Spear, the Sponge, why not images of man's making, for
the Glory of Chrill: &c. in thit ^vay.

114 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. VI.

In dark ages, the pafTion for relics probably
grew ftrongcr, and tbe veneration paid to them
more folemn; but I know of no great events which
they produced.

The Council of Trent fays, that all thofe are to
be condemned who affirm, that '* worJJiip''' (vene-
rationem) and hcnour is not due to relics; or that
it is paid unprofitably ; or that the Memories of
Saints are celebrated in vain. It alfo prefcribes
rules for the aelmiffion of new relics.

The lower ranks of Romanifis have carried their
veneration for relics to fuch a childilh excefs, as to
give occafion to numberlefs fors^eries; fuch as bring
contempt and difgrace upon Chrillianity, and by
being believed by the fupcrftitious, though incre-
dible to any man of fenfe, promote infidelity in
things of importance. Every traveller into Popilh
countries recounts numberlefs ftories about them,
and the miracles" which they perform.

VI. The laft thing to be mentioned, is the
invocation of Saints : Saints are often invoked by
a perfon prefent with \\\c\x Images^ or their rtf/zVi j
but the ideas of their Images or relics, Ihould be
kept diftind from that of Invocation. I hope no
man is fooliih for being affe(5ted when he meditates
on the manner of exiftence of his departed friends;
or for indulging fome indiftinft hope of feeing
them again : nor any Chrillian, for feeling an in-
tereft in all tliofe, of all ages, who have departed
this Life in the faith of Chrift ; as well as in thofe
of his own generation; or far conceiving, that
there fubfifts between them that degree of inter-
courfe, fellow-feeling, fympathy, which their re-
fpeftive natures are capable of: Such a fuppofed
common intcrcil, is the communion of Saints.

Cicero^

» In the Decree of the Council of Trent, Se/T. 25, the word
♦' Uatficia" ib ulcd, not miracula.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. VI. 125

Cicero^, fpeakingin the charader of Cato Major,
defcribes every good man as warmly interefted,
both in thofe who have departed this Hfe before
him, and in thofe who are to Hve after him : his,
" divinum conciliim catufqm animonim^^ makes one
imagine, that the communion of Saints would have
been to him a very pleafing Article of Faith, had
he lived under Chriftianity. Infiying this, Cicero
is feldom confidered as toolilli or culpable; but
had he paid religious honours to any of his
worthies; had he made Images of them, or pro-
cured fome forged relics as belonging to them;
and had he killed thefe, proftrated himfeif before
them, invoked the worthies, and defired their in-
terceffion with Jupiter or Pluto; we fliould now
have different notions of his wifdom, from thofe
which we do entertain. How weak then fliould
we have thought him if he had done fuch things
towards men of no value : or on account of per-
fons whofe real charader was wholly unknown"
to him 1

We are told, that, invocation of Saints was a
thing unknown to Chriftians for at ieaft*^ three
hundred years; and that none of the Fathers, in
plain ferious writing faid, that Servitus was due to
Saints, for fix hundred years.

How foon Chriftians ran into excefs in worfliip-.
ping Saints, appears from the fecond African
Council, held A. D. 401, (Cave). In this it is
ordered, that the Jltars which are fet up every
where in the fields, or in the ways, to Martyrs, be
overthrown by the Bilhops, except the Body, or
fome iindoiihted relics be there. It is aifo laid,

that

•» De Seneftute ad finem.

' Middleton's Letter, page 173, 174.

** JBifhop For teas. Part ii. Chap. r. and Forbes, 7. i. 17.

126 BOOK IV. ART. XXI I. SECT. VI.

that Altars had been fct up by " dreams and vairt
revelations.'^

Invocation of Saints probably proceeded much
in the fame manner with the other abufes men-
tioned in this Article; it is lo intimately connected
with them- What Vigilantius wrote againft iW^ir-
/)rj, extends to Saints ; Martyrs were orten fainted:
and his reafoning affeils the Invocation of Saints;
as he affirms, that the fouls of Saints were not,
as was ufually prefumed, prefent with their Bodies;
or at their monuments; much lefs could they be
prefent at every place where their relics happened
to be preferved*.

The Council of Trent ]o\ns Invocation of Saints
with Relics and Images. All men are to be con-
demned (damnandi funt) v»ho do not own, that
the Saints, reigning with Chrift, offer their prayers
to God for men; and that it is ufeful to invoke
them in order to get their affiliance ; in afking God
for bleffings through Chrift.

Cardinal Bellarmin fays, as we find in Forbes,
7. I. 12. " Sanftis angelis et hominibus deberi
cultum aliqucm reUgiofinn" (de Sand. Beat. cap.
13.) but then he explains religiofum by " majorem
mere hnmanoy

BiOiop Portcus gives us ^ a colleftion of terms
in which Papifts addrefs the Virgin Mary, and
mentions alterations of the Pfalms, Te Deum, &c.
made in order to fuit them to her. Forms may-
be found in the PopiOi Liturgies, and in Forbes°;
and in Rogers m\ this Article.

For

e On this and the preceding paragraph, fee Fulke on Rhem.
Teft. Apoc. vi. Se»a. i.

f BKhop Porteus, Part ii. Chap. ii.

R Forbes, 7. 2. 19, -See alfo Fulke on Rhem. Tell.— John-
xvi. fed. 3. and i Cor. ii. Teft. 4.

BOOK IV. A.RT. XXII. SECT. VII. llj

For other inftances of modern invocation of
Saints, I will refer to Dr. MidcUeton's Letter
from'' Rome J and to books of travels which are
in every one's hands. lu may be as well not to
omit the idea, which fome have encouraged, in
order to obviate the difficulty arifing from the
limited knowledge of the Siints; that J no els in- ^,
form the Saints what is addreffed to them : Forbes
mentions this notion', but he does not fay by
whom it was held. — It may alfo be right to refer
to the fame writer in order to fliew, that the
Schoolmen held the fame with the Romanifts;
as the Article of 1552 affirms of the Sclicolmen,
what the Article of 1562 affirms of the Church
of Rome^.

V 1 1. But I will not purfue this Hiftory farther;
I will now proceed to fome Explanation.

Purgatory may be defined, a ftate, in which the
fouls of men, popularly called good men, (accord-
ing to what was faid under Art. xv.) though not
wholly free from fatdts and infirmities, are con-
fined, rill they are purified^ probably by lufFering,
from all thole faults and infirmities, and fitted (or
an entrance into heavenj and the more immediate
prefence of a Deity of perfedl Holinefs.

Why the title of the Article fliould be " Of
Turgatory" when it includes other Do6frines,
might poffibly be in fome meafure explained. —
All the things mentioned in the Body of the Ar-
ticle, after Purgatory, have been chiefly ufcd as
means of fliortening the duration of its pains'.
Indulgences have that end chiefly and immediately
in view. And adorations are offered to" Saints^

through

'' Dr. Middleton's Letter from Rome, page 176.— The paf-
fage, quoted Seft. i v, might have been here.

» Forbefii Inftrudl 7. i. 20. ^ Forbefii Inftruft, 7. 2.4.
' The Couacll of Trent mixes thefe (do6lri.ues, SelT. 25.

128 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. VIII.

through the medium of Images or Relics^ chiefly
in order to prevail upon them to affiil in deliver-
ing fouls out of Purgatory. So that the Article
might have been entitled, * Of Purgatory, and
the mc:uis of abridging its Pains,' were it not
that each fubjed may require fome feparate con-
fidcration. — Indeed, as it is, the whole chain of
fubjcdts is fpoken of as one do(5trinej what the
Romanifts teach concerning them is called " a
fond thing.''''

VIII. " The RomiJJi Doclrine:' — In the Article
of 1552 it was, " The doctrine of the fchool-
authors'* — " Scholajiicoriim doflrina;" — what that
was, with regard to the leading fubjecl. Purga-
tory, has been briefly mentioned in our"" Hiftory.
If the old exprelTion had continued, the Roma-
nifts might have faid, we do not defend the
doftrines of the Schoolmen in every particular".
The prefent expreflion confines all difpute to the
doftrines which the Romanijls profefTed, whatever
thofe were; and it denotes the degree of each
dodtrine a^ually exi/ling-, fo that it would not
avail for the Romanifts to defend /ow^ regard for
facred painting or fculpture; fome refpecl for
real relics; except they could defend what a^ftu-
ally appeared in Popilh countries relating to one
or the other, when the Ai'ticle was made.

IX. " WorJIiipping

^ Sea. 1 1 .

" Bellnrmin profefles to differ from the Schoolmen about
Images; Ice Forbes, 7.2. 27, &c.— One might fay, in general,
that the Romanifts have, fince the complaints of the Reformers,
endeavoured to moderate the doftrines of the Schoolmtn, in
exprellibii, explanation, theory ; but fo as to leave room for
the fieoi'le to be as weak and credulous as their education inclines
them to be. Yet from Forbes, 7. 1. 17. we fee, that even
fome fchoolmcn did not like Dulia for worfliip of Saints ;
becaufc men are their fellow-fervants. Biflwp Hard oppoles
folemn forma of rituals, canon?, and councils, to the private
writings of Romilli Divineb, On Prophecy, page 384.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. IX— XI. 129

IX. *' Worfhipping and adoration-^'— m Latin,
*' veneratione et adoratione;'' — thefe words have by-
no^ means fo determinate a fenfe as to prevent all
difputes, or even to fugged one invariable idea to
the tnind of a thinking man. They may exprefs our
regards to tlie Supreme Being, they would not be
too ftrong for our attentions to a lacred human
character. ** Worfhip" in modern Enghfli feems
appropriated to the fupreme Being; but at the
time the Articles were made, it fignified merely *
refped, reverence, honour: as indeed appears by
the Latin word of tlie Article, " Veneratione."—
WorQiipping feems fometimes to be ufed in our
EngliOi bibles for the eaftern profiration, and may
therefore correfpOnd to the expreffi* ,n of the Coun-
cil of Trent, '' procumbmms\'' Adorare feems to
mean x.o addrefs any one with refped:, and with
fome idea of obtaining a favour. Such addrefs
feems to have been conceived to be attended with
fome bodily geftures of a refpedful, fuppliant fort:
as bowing, &c.— the word was fometimes'' ufed
for addreffing an Heathen God, which would be
called prayer; but Tacitus ufes^ adorare vulgum for^
to bow or cringe to the common people, as can-
vaflers would do.

X. Invocation, feems to be defiring affiftance,
interceffion; though, in fad, it has occafioned for-
mal worfliip.

XI. The word ''fond;' is not modern, but
the meaning of it appears fufEciently ' from the

Latin

® This will appear more fully in Art. xxv. Seft. vr. -

P Page 202. Edit. Antv. '1596, Sefl: 2 c, Decretum de

Invocatione, &c.

^ Cooper's Thefaurus. r Ainfvvorth's Didionary. '

= I cannot help comparing /o«^ with the French /oa falle »

they feem to have been ufed much in the fame way ; to expref?
VOL. IV. , I .^van?

130 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XII. XIII.

Latin '■^ f utilise The word occurs in the Rhe-
milh Teftament twice'. — *' A fond thing ;" — in the
Jingular number : the fyftem of doctrines (as before)
is reckoned as one finale doftrine.

*' Vainly invented," — " inaniter conficla." —
foolifli and unfounded; in the eye of reafon; this
feems contradiitinguilhed to " grounded upon no
warrant of Scripture.''^

XII. "But rather repugnant" — immo, which
we fhould now tranflate nay — nay " rather repug-
nant to the word of God :" we had this word in
the thirteenth" Article, in the fame fenfe. — In our
Latin the expreffion is, — ** immo verbo Dei con-
tradicit;" — in that of 1552,, " imo verbo Dei per-
niciose contradicit j" though the Engli/h is the fame
in both; which indeed might be the reafon why
the Convocation of 1562 left out " perniciose :" or
there misiht be other reafons.

XII I. We have now gone through the Article,
in the way of explanation; but it feems proper to
mention the Popilli diftinftion between Xxr^nxy
and ^»^£Mt, and vire^SaXeix. — As alfo that between
Image and Idol. — The Romanifls, wilhing to avoid
the charge of Idolatry, have faid, that there are
different lorts of adoration ; Xar^uoi is that which

is

want ofunderf.anding ; and want oi prudence, and being under the
influence of paflion, not controlled by reafon : the Council of
Trent blames thofe who hold, '' Jlnltum efle," to pray to Saints,
ijefl'. 25, page 303, boaom. — As this seflion was in 1563, it
might aim at the Article made iu 1552 : or at fome Confeffiou
of Reformers to the fame purpofe.

' More ftriftly, the word fend occurs in Fulke on the Rhemifli
Tertament, folio, 224. 1 i:\yfoUo, as only every other page is.
numbered.

" Art. XIII. Seft. xv. — Bifhop Hallifax has exprefled the
fame thing in his eleventh Sermon on Prophecy. " All the
obfervances mentioned here are not only not commanded in
fcriptuVe, but are in diicfl violation of it." Page 351.

.1

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIII. J^i

IS due to God; ^vKhx that which is due to man;
v-m^^^sXiicf. that which is due to Chrill in his human
nature, or to his Mother, the bleffed Viroin.-—
Auguilin has fomething of the diftinction between
Kxr^nx and ^sAsta, and vXqs fervitus often ; but he
does not mention vtrs^hxstXy nor is it in any Greek
Author. Auguilin was a Latin FatJier, and might
knjow but little of the Greek language. I do
not (ee any foundation for the diftinflion between
hxT^sia. and hxsKx,, except that Xxr^noe, is more
frequently ufed for ferving God than ^tsXux. Axroi^
is a fervant, and AaAo? is a fervant. — I (hould
guefs, that the Aar^i? was more ingenuous than
the A«Ao?, but they, or their derivatives feem to
be ufed interchangeably'': and fometimes in fcrip-
ture AaT^jueiu is ufed for ferving'^ ?nen^ and ShXvjh^
for ferving^ God. But it is proper to mention in
what fenfes the Romanifts ufe tbefe words, whether
they be right or wrong.

With the fame view, of avoiding the charge of
Idolatry, the Romanifts blame us for not making
diftindion enough between Image and Idol; be-
tween fjxwy, I fuppofe, or Jimulacriim^ (the word
of the Vulgate,) and eJujAcv, It feems the Englifb
Teftament had once, inftead of " Little children
keep yourfdves fron-/ /a'o/j,"— little children keep
yourfelves from Images^. — Eij'wAov in Greek feems

to

" Compare Rom. i. 2i;. with Gal. iv. 8 — Compare alfo the
fayings of Tigranes and his wife, in the third Book of Xeno-
phon's Cyropjedia, page 144.. 147, 8vo.— Forbes, 7. i. men-
tions them, from Valla, and has more on the fubjed.

y Deut. xxvni,48. Lev. xxiii. 7, 8.^ Exod. xii. 16.- *

Epyov "KocT^^vi rev,

^ Matt. vi. 24.— Rom. vi. 22. — See particularly 1 ThefT i. g,'
in the Greek.

* Conclulion of i John.
^ See Rhemiils on the paffage.
I 2

13a BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIII.

to be ufed for any refemblance" or effigy; but
Idol, in Englifh, does icem to mean a vifible ob-
ject, which has divine zvorJJiip paid to it : the
authors of the Rhemifli Teftament fay** thus,
*' neither every idol is an image ^ nor every image an
Idol.'' That every iinaoe, or refemblance, is not
an idol, that is, not worlhipped, is clear enough ;
as well as that an image may be an Idol : the fecond
commandment forbids making a graven image^ or
the likenefs of any being% in order to bow dozen
to it, or Jerve it. But 1 feel fome doubt whether
all idols are not made for images, that is, refem-
blances, even though they have no original really
exifting; there is no fuch animal as a Dragon,
yet thote who n-iade the Idol called by that^ name,
might have fome rude belief that there was fuca
an animal.

Peter Lombard (from Origen)^ feems to make
an Idol the copy of fomething oxAy fancied ; an
tmaze he underftands to be a refemblance of
fomething real: according to this, no image could
be called an Idol. — The lxx fays, » zrotrio-fK o-fauTM
si^uXovyisSe TTxvro; ofj-oiufj-x — if here the ei^uXov is one
thing, and the o[ji.oiui[Ax another, (which does not
feem to me the meaning) then again a likenefs
cannot be called an Idol. Yet, in cufhomary
fpecch, any fubltance feems to be called an Idol,
which is an objeft of religious zvor/Iiip^ : but
in whatever fenfe w^e take the words, thefe ob-
fervations will have the fame tendency to cut

off

c Or a Gholl: fee Greek Primitives under ulv.

^ On the fame plate, i John v. 2 1 .

e Exod. XX. 4, 5.

^ Apocrypha. « Lib. 3. dift. 37, B.

^ See alfo abridgment of H. Stephens, under 'Ei^uXon. In
Stephens himlclf this is tlic Ecchfiafacol fenfe : there arc in-
ftances of Ei^a/Xci- ami Eik<u» being ufed as fynonymous.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIV. XV. I33

off difputesj and to prevent the Romanifts from
bJaming us.

XIV. We come now to Proof. — This might
afford us a number of propoficions if we carried
it to its utmoft length ; for we fliould then have to
fliew, that the Syftem of Doftrines here men-
tioned, is not founded on reafon ; that every text
of Scripture produced in its fupport is invalid,
and then, that fome texts of Scripture are repug-
nant to it : and this we fliould have to fliew alfo
of the five particulars; Purgatory, Indulgences,
Worfliip of Images, Worfliip of Relics, and In-
vocation of Saints. We will be as brief as
poffible.

XV. Firft, concerning the Article in general,
— ' Thtfet of doctrines condemned in it, are not,
on 2. general view, founded in Reafon, or warranted
by Scripture.'

When Religion poffefTes the mind, fo that the
devout affeftions are ftrong, they are apt, if not
very carefully regulated, to draw the mind im-
perceptibly into folly and abfuidity. For a while
fuch folly may be encouraged; but ere long, it
will be lamented, by every wife and difmterefled
perfon. A good man muft indeed venerate, in
fome degree, every thing that fprings from Reli-
gion, even to its very fliults ; he therefore will not
reftrain even what he cannot approve ; nay, he is
afraid to deftroy religious principles, though erro-
neous. But when we may judge freely w^e fee,
that fuch folly is a more important evil than fome
men think it. When it confifts in taking pre-
fumptions for fadts, and ailing upon them, we
can fee, that it is nothing lefs than man's taking
upon him to be the Author of Revelation ; which
may produce any evils whatever. When it coji-
fifts in forming ads of affedion into a fyftem of
I 3 religious

1^4 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XV.

religious ordinances, we can fee, that the effufions
of our bell paiTions, though not condemned at
the moment, naturall)^ excite an ingermous iliame
on a calm review, and are much too frivolous to
be colledled into a Coddy and made Duties :
though, in fome cafes, their frivoloufnefs can
be better felt than dcmonftrateJ. — When relig-ious
folly confifts in enlivening the affections towards
invifible objects by the ufe of vilible reprefenta-
tions of them, we can fee, that the attention gets
more and more fixed on what meets the fenfes,
and continually more detached from that which
isinvifible; till the judgment is perverted, and
the mind debafed. That Chriftians fhould be
Anthropomorphitcs without fuch imitations, may
furprife us; but we fee plainly, that all attempts
to enliven devotion by their means, have a ftrong
tendency to confound the ideas of God and Man
in the human mind.

Laflly, When religious folly confifcs in unre-
ferved dependence on the power of an intereRed
Priefl to punilh or forgive, we can fee, that what
might have been a reafonable ground of hope and
confidence to a dejeded penitent, becomes a temp-
tation to fin.

Thefe obfervations are calculated to fhew, that
the jet of dodlrines before us, confidered in a
general view, are not founded in reajon^ we are
next to ilicw, that they are not warranted hvfaip'
Hire. — We find fevcral paffages of Holy writ which
Ihew a kind of jealoufy of what men might call
mprovin^ upon Chrilfianity. — Asi Cor. iii. 12. —
2 Cor. xi. 3. — Gal. i. 8, Q.-Eph. iv. 14.—
Col. ii. 8. — 2 Tim. i. 13. or Jude 3. — and Rev.
xxii. 18, 19.

And I fecm to fee many paffages, which inti-
mate, that human appointments may be carried fo

far

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVI. I35

far as to difappoint their own purpofes. — As
Matt. XV. I— -9.' — Jewilh ordinances feemcd,
probably, mprovemenfs, at the time they were

made.

And particularly we find paflages which might
guard us againft making our Chriftian wor/iip to
be performed in any way by means of the fenfes.--
Johniv. 24. — Gal. iii.3.''

I fuppole, that if the Jews had made a ftatue'
of Mofes, and, ufing folemn gedures before that,
had invoked Mofes, and defired him once"" more
to mediate between God and them, they would
have broken the fecond commandment. It feems
probable that they were forbidden to make to
themfelvcs the likenefs of anything in Heaven or
Earth, becaufe it would gradually have difpofed
their minds to idolatry.

XVI. From thefe general proofs of the Article,
we pafs en to fome more particular. — And firfl ot
Purgatory. That there is fuch a ftate of purifica-
tion, by fuffering, after death, appears inadmii-
fible, becaufe it feems unreafonable that welhould
be expe6led to allow what is wholly pafTed over
when it was mofl likely to be noticed. In Matt.
;xxv. we have only two ftatcs mentioned, and they
were both " prepared" without any hint of any

temporary

» Art. VII. Se£l. iv. one might alfo confider Art. xiv.
ahoat whi-'worjhip. Bilhop Hurd, Proph. page 393, fpeaks of
Will-worfliip as an opprobrious name : not fo Dr Hammond.

"^ Thofe who took Notes at Leaure fhould be informed, that
fome texts in this Sedion were omitted for want of time; and
the whole of Seel. 13 th by miftake.

1 The Melchlfedecians are faid to have had a ftatue o/Mofe?,
in Arabia, and to have worlhipped it. Epiphan. Hsr. 55- —
Rhem. Teft. on Heb. ix. Sea. 4. Fulke.

•" Exod. xxxii. 11. 32. — Numb. xvi. 22. 46, &-C. — See alloi
Deut. v. 5. and Lev. xxvi. 46. though the tno laft relate only
fo mediation concerning the law.

14

1^6 KOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVI.

temporary fufferings to the " bleffed." — The fame
might be obferve 1 of other paflTages.— If fuch a
ftate as Purgatory is to be allowed by all men, is
it not imaccountabie, that Chrifhians fhoukl have
been fo long ignorant "? of it ? Its being admitted
at lad may be accounted for, from the notions of
the ancients, from its fuiting the wifhis and alle-
viating the fears of the People, and from its being
lucrative to the facrcd orders.

In order to prove that Purgatory is " grounded
on no warrant of y?r//)//^;-f," one fhould examine
all the texts alledgcd in fupport of it : this would
be what we have called indirect proof. Thefe
texts (out of the New Teftament) may be found
in the Rheinijli Teftament, and all in Veneer°. on
this Article. But they feem to me to have fo
little weight, that I may fafely venture to omit
them, referring to Bifhop Porteus^ for a fpeci-
men. — Indeed fome of them have been explained,
in our difcuffions, or in Billiop Pearfon on the
Defcent into Hell.

The laft thing, with regard to Purgatory is
to fhew, that the notion of it is " repugnant to
the word of God.'"'— This we fhould call direct
proof; the negative form of the Article makes here;
a trifling difference.

Now under the tile twelfth Article it was fliew-n,
that what are popularly called the good adions

of

" See a paflage from Bifhop 'Fiflier at the conclufion of this
Article.

° Texts for Purgatory copied from Veneer, page 460. on
this article; only the order changed; fome feem to be falfe

printb. Exod. i. 11;. — Numb. xiv. 32, 33. — i Sam. iii. —

2 Kings i. — Pfalmlxvi. 12. — Ifaiah ix. 18. — Mich. vii. 8,9.—

Zech. ix. 1 1. — Mai. iii. 3. — Matt. v. 22. v. 25, 26. — xii. 32.

Luke xxxii. 42. (qu." 22?) — A6^s ii. 24. — i Cor. iii. 15.—
XV. 29. — Phil. ii. 10. — James ii. 25. (qu. 13?) — i Pet. iii 19.
— I Jolin V. 16.

f Biihop Porteus, page 4R.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVII. 13^

oi" a Chriftian, though imperfed, are " pleafing
and acceptable to God, in Chrift." If fo, there
is no need of fnffi^ying. — That our forgivenefs
through Chrift is immediate^ the fcriptures'^ declare;
as is fhevvn by Bifliop Bnrnet on this Article.
— I will therefore conclude my proof with i John
i. 7. — *' the blood of Jefus Chrift" — " cleanfeth
us from all fin."

XVII. In the next place we fliould prove, of
the Doclrine of Pardons, or Indulgences, that it is
unfounded in reafon, and has no warrant of fcrip-
ture, but is even repugnant to it.

In the way of reafoning, it appears, that the
doArine of Pardons is groundlefs, becaufe their
bufinefs is to difpenfe the Treafures of merits
amalTed by works of fupererogation ; whereas under
the fourteenth Article it was fhewn, that there are
no fuch works, and, of confequence, no fuch trea-
fures to difpenfe. The effed; alfo of Indulgences
is to relieve fouls out of Purgatory \ whereas we
have jufl now fhewn, that the exiflence of fuch a
itate is not admifTible.

This dodrine is not warranted by Scripture,
becaufe the pafTages ailedged in its fupporf are
only thofe, as I conceive, which appoint the
Governors of the Church to be the Agents of
Chrift : now all appointments of Agents muft be
underflood with this hmitation, fo long as they
adt in the CharaSfcr of Agents. If an Agent un-
deniably and grofsly exceeds his Commifhon, his
principal is never obliged to ratify his ads.-— Being
the Agent of God for the fake of conduding
religious fociety, does not make Man to be God ;
any more than an EmbalTy makes an Embaflador
to be a Sovereign.

This
^ Heb. ix. 27,
* Matt. xvi. ig.— John xx. 23.

138 BOOK IV. ART. XXI I. SECT. XVIII.

This doctrine is repugnant to 2 Theff. ii. 4.
without confidci;ng that paflage as predicflive of
Popery. Whatever ftate it foretells, that (late is a
wrong one.

XVII I. The next fubjecft which occurs, is the
worlhipping of Images. And firft we (hould rea-
fon on the fubjeft, in order to fee whether it has
any foundation : But fomething has been already*
laid on the effecft of Images on the mind : the ufe
of them has been lhev\n to be aEtcnded with
danger of debafing our religious fentimenrs and
principles. Difputes relating to the \.\(t of them
are kept up by the various degree of Adoration :
but our Article takes the degree actually JuhJiJUyig
at the time it was made; this was ciiltus religiofm ;
to which our former obfervations are applicable.
— The only forcible argument for the ufe of
images feems to be, that which is contained in the
favourite expreflion, ' Images and PiiVurcs are the
Books ^ of the unlearned^ — And it is true, that de-
lineations are iefs arbitrary than words, flrike more
quickly, convey ideas to more pcrfons j more
eafily feize a" reluctant attention. No one will
hear me Ipcak anything but praife of Macklin's

Bible,

' Seft IV. and XIV.

* Rhem. Tell, on John v. 21. — Comber, in his advice to
Ent^I. Papills, page 85, quotes this as a laying of " Porphyr.
apiid Eufeb. Praepar. Evang. lib. 3."

" Mr. Collier, once High vSherifFof the Ifle of Ely, told me,
that, in order to get the fail at Ely repaired, he had prefented
to the Privy Council dra-vings of the Prifoners, loaded with
more Irons, &c. than would have been needful to fecure them,
liad the Jail been properly repaired; and expreffing th:ir feel-
ings by their countcnaiKes and attitudes : without this mea-
fiire he had defpaired of gaining the attention of the Privy
Council at that time. It was doubtful whether, tha Bifhop of
Ely was obliged to keep tlic Jail in repair. Tiie fcheme, I have
imderllood, pro<iucefl an caily decifion from the Privy Councili^
to the great alleviation of the fufferings of thofe under confine-
ment at that place.

BOOtC IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVIII. i^^

Bible, or of the charming weft window at New
College Chapel ; I am fure any reafonable Prote-
flant may receive good Irom the contemplation of
them : but then it is, becaufe they have not the
leait connexion, in his mind, with WorJJiip. The
PapifiS ufe refemblances as media in the very a5l
of worlLipping. Tf I was called upon to gaze
upon the beft ftatue or pifture in the world, as
the means of heightening my devotion in prayer,
i fliould turn afide from it : 2i'zveji window cannot
well be intended for fuch a purpofe. — Take then
the books of the unlearned into their proper place,
and there they may be (ludied with profit, and
without danger.

1 am happy to find Augujlin exprefling himfclf
in the manner he does, on this fubjed. — " Et
Idola quidem omni fenfu carere quis dubitet ?
Verum tamen cum his locantur fedibus, honora-
bili fublimitate, ut a precantibus atque immolan-
ribus attendantur, ipsa fimilitudine animatorum
membrorum atque fenfuum, quamvis infenfata et
exanima, afficiunt infirmos animos, ut vivere et
Ipirare videantur : accedente prsefertim veneratione
multitudinis, qua tantus eis cultus impenditur\"
This paflage -finely defcribes the bad tendency of
Jmages when ufed as media in worfliip, and would
be rm anhver to all that is urged by the Papifts
about the people being taught that there is no
Divinity y in them, nor any truft to be placed in
thenii even luppoie no adoration paid them which
could properly be called religious.

The

"^ Auguft. Ep. I02. al. 49.(Sid.y— 1— i.pagesii.) note i8.
jfn anfwer to fix queftions from Pagans, this Is the third; about
abolifhing rites.— It is commended by Lardner : Works, Vol. 8,
page 239, note. -It gives one a good idea of the converfion
of Pagans to Chriflianity ; I mean, that their converfion was
piade on good grounds.

y Trent, Seff. 25,-SsealfoRhern. Teft. on Ads xvii. ag.

140 BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XVIII,

The Romanifts betray a confcioufnefs of fome-
thing wrong with refpedl to the worfliip of Images,
by leaving the fecond commandment out of the
Decalogue. This was mentioned under the feventh
Article \

Nor is there any warrant in Scripture for wor-
{hipping Images, in any fenfe : the only palTage
urged which ieems at all worth mentioning, is that
in the Book of Exodus", where God comimands
Mofes to make fome forms called Cherubims on the
Mercy- feat : but thefe were not (as far as is known
to Man) Images, but Emblems'^: there was no
danger of the People's worfhipping them, becaufe
the people never came into the place where they
were; and the High Pried only once a year. —
Jehovah never bound hlmjelf to order nothing
lenfible to be ufed in the Jewifh worfhip, he only
faid, " Own ll:ialt not make unto thee any graven
Image." — Even under Chiftianit}-, water, bread,
wine, all objeds of the fenfes, are ufed in worlhip;
all emblematically, but they are not objefts of wor-
fhip; neither do they contain any llkenejs of any
thing in heaven or in earth.

Thirdly, the worfliip of Images may be faid to
be even repugnant to fcripture. It feems indeed as
if the facred writers could not poffibly liave the
precife cafe of Popifli Images before ihcm ; and
therefore we can only reafon and infer from fcrip-
turcs intended for calcs of like nature ; but Deut.
xxvii. 15. and Pfalm xcvii. 7. fhould not be of
lefs force under Chrillianity than under Judaifm.
They do indeed fpeak of the Idols of Heathens,
immediately ; bqt whether Romilh worfhip of

Images

^ Alt. VII. Seel. xiii. end.

» Exocl. XXV. 18.

*> Parkliurft, Hcbr. Lex, i*^3, may make the Cherubims to
be thought emblems, even by thofe who do iiot come into every.
idea of his.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XIX. 141

Images be Idolatry or not, the progrefs of the
mind from vvorihipping the invifible object, to
\vor(hipping the vifible image, is fo much' the
fame, whatever be the refemblance, or its ori-
ginal, that every prohibition of worlhipping images,
iTiouId be confiderq^ as reaching every cafe in
which a refemblance has anything to do with re-
ligious worfliip. If this be juft, worfliip of Imao-es
is, at leaft, difcouraged, by a great number '^of
palTages in the Old Teftament.

In Deut. iv. 12. 15. particularly ver. 16. [eho^
vah feems to let us into the grounds of his prohi-
bitions; and they muft be always^of force: thofe
who make a likenefs of anything, are faid ver. 16.
to corrupt themfelves.

And with regard to the New tejiament, St. Paul's
r^afoning with the Athenians^ feems to imply, that
Ch rift ians ought not, now that times of ignorance
are paft, to make ufe of any fenfible media in
worfhip, though to an invifible or " unhwwii
God;" that ufmg fuch is not doing all we can to
worfhip God in Spirit : — we may alfo obferve, that
whatever only^ tends to make us change " the
Glory of the incorruptible God into an imaoe,"
or wcrfliip " the creature"^ more than the Cre-
ator," is carefully to be avoided, even on fcrip-
tural authority; nay, on the authority of the Ncw
Teftament.

XIX. The next fubjeft is that of worfhipping
Relics. In the degree in which it prevails its
futility is palpable, and its tendency to promote
infidelity has been mentioned^ Whatever affo-
ciates Chriftianity with contempt, has fome effed
in making Chriftianity contemptible. It feems

Calvin
« Aasxvii. d Rom. i. 23, 3?.

142 BOOK IV. ART. XXir. SECT. XIX.

Calvin^ propofcd that an Inventory fliould be pub-
liflied of Popifli relics : no propofal can be more
fair: fuch inventory would be all the proof we
could v;ant, that " the Romilh Dodrine" " is a
fond thing."

The Romifh doftrine about Relics is not war-
ranted by Scripture. — One text alledged is Matt.
ix. 22. but the woman cured did not adore the
hem of our Saviour's garment; fhe thought no-
thing about it ; nor was fhe cured by virtue of
any relic; her Faith made her whole.

Another text is Ads xix. 12. there is a great
eagernefs dclcribed to get handkerchiefs, &c. from
St. Paul; it fliewed Faith, or an high opinion of
his fupernatural power. It might be weak, though
natural; it might fucceed, on account of the dif-
poficion which it implied; and yet fuch a flight
might not be meant as the ground of a perpetual
obfervance : to copy fuch things is filly and childifh.

That Paul fhould perform miracles on thole

who were at a diftance from him, rather furprizes
us at firft : but if God thought fit that it Ihould be
fo, diflance probably would occafion no additional
difficulty; and we can conceive, that fuch diftance
would ftrengthen the evidence in fome rcfpeds ;
and then it fcems probable, from a comparifon
with our Saviour's mode of performing miraculous
cures, that the cure would be conneded with the
perfon who performed it, hy fome vifible = tokens.
At prefent we beheve that miracles have ccafed.—
Another text is Heb. ix. 4. but the things laid up
in that cafe were records; realon and divine autho-
rity confpired in didating that they Ihould be

prefer ved.

f See Fulke on Rhem. Teft A£ts xix. 12. folio, 221, from
«• Calvin's admonition concerning Reliques."
t- Markvii. 33.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECt. XX. 143

preferved. — And the genuinenefs of the relics is
indiiputable. I do not fuppofe that the Jezvs pre-
tend to any relics nozv. If they did, and vvor-
fliipped them, the cafe would be a cafe in point.
— The care fliewn in fcripture to give decent
burial, to our Lord, St. Stephen, &c. will nor,
I truft, convert any one to the Romifh doctrine oi
Relics.

As to its being repugnant to fcripture, I will
content niyfelf with faying, that the texts brought
to prove the doftrine of Images fo, may be applied
in fuch a manner as to be fufficient for any one's
convidion. — Saint Paul would probably have faid
of this error as he does of fome others, had he
been witnefs of it; " refufe profane and old wives
fables,'' and exercife " thyfelf rather' unto god-
linefs.'*

XX. The laft part of our Proof relates to Invo-
cation of Saints. That it is foolifli, in the degree
in which we fpcak of it, (according to what was
faid in the hiftorical part and explanation,) appears
from the endeavours of the Romanifts to explain^
it away.

Saints cannot hear all who invoke them; this
has been obferved before. As to the notion that
the Angels' employ themfelves in informing the
Saints of what good Catholics addrefs to them, I
dare fay you will excufe me if I do not attempt to
difprove it : it proves to me, that the doflrine of
the Invocation of Saints, wants. fupport"".

Experience,

' I Tim. iv. 7.

^ Compare Midd. Preface, page 50, with page 156 of his
Letter, and many other parts. — And fee BoJJ'uet, quoted by Bilhop
Hurd, Proph. page 386.

' Endof Seft. VI. from Forbes, 7.1. 21.

™ I think Epiphanius's reafoning about the Virgin, is well
worth mentioning : £» yx^ AfysXaj ■sr^as-xvvE^aOa* a ^Ae» ($65?),

144 B^OK IV, ART. XXII, SECT. XX,

Experience, I think, will fhcw, that the lcrv\'er
the objects of our religious addrefl't^s are, the lower
will be the turn of our religious fentiments : and
the lefs will they be directed to the all-perfect
Being. We may fay of the Invoca:ion of Saints
as of Purgatory, that its being admitc^d, can
be accounted for, without fuppofing it to be well
founded.

In the next place, the Doctrine of the Invocation
of Saints is not warranted by Scripture. Origen
thought it poffible, that" " fome will be redeemed
by the blood of Martyrs." This docs not cer-
tainly imply the invocation of them; but it is
contrary to an obfervation of our own in a pre-
ceding" Article. — The texts in favour of our
prefent doctrine are much of the fame fiamp with
thofe for that of Purgatory; and I fliall beg leave
to ufe the fame method ^ with them all, except
thofe which direct men to intercede for each other,
as I Their. V. 25.— 1 Tim. ii. i. and James v. 16.
— Now it being allowed, from thefe, and others,
that man ought to intercede for men ; and that
one man may defire, or call upon another to do
fo; is it not to be believed, that Saints in Heaven
intercede for men, and that men may invoke them
in order to beg their Inter ceffion.? Bifliop Hurd
has thought this obje<5tion w'orthy of a very atten-
tive confideration, and he has anlwered it at length
in Lis eleventh Sermon'' on Prophecy. Bilhop

Porteus

>sroau /*a^^sl' T»}c awo A»v»)s yey£v>if*£»o»; Haer. 79. (CoUyrioians)

Seft. V. In Seft. vii. he fays, Ty,» M«g»a»r f^riSn; 'sx^oczvvutu:

and near the end of the Hser.ii M<ig»« iv tj^a, 0 Kf 510? ts^ov-

n Lardner's Works, Vol. 2, page 462.

• Appendix to Art. xi. Se;^. iv.

V A Ipecimen coUefted from Rhcm. Teft. Luke xvi. q.—

A6\s V. 15.— vii. 60.— 2 Cor. i. 11. — a Pet. i. 15 — i John ii. i
i — .Apoc. V. 8.— vi. 10.

1 Hurd on Prophtcy, page 386, &c.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XX. 14^

rorteus has anfwered it briefly'' according to his
plan. I would wifli you to read thefe anfwers,
and therefore I will only fay, if we may conclude,
that Saints are incapable of hearing our Tnvoca-
rions> the whole bufmefs is at an end : If that be
not allowed, I then reafon thusj our not being
told that we are to promote Interceffion among > j

Saints in Heaven, when we are repeatedly told I

that we are to promote it on' earth, feems a |

ftrong argument that no fuch thing is expeded of I

us, or proper for us. Still if men are determined )

to perfift, and fay that they can reafon by Analogy j

from earth to heaven, the proper analogy feems to
me to be this ; as Chriilians are required to inter-
cede for each other on. earth, fo it is probable that
Saints and Angels intercede for each other in
heaven : and this notion is confirmed by reafons
of utility. It is certainly very uleful, in a moral
light, that men fliould intercede for each' other :
it improves the mind of each Interceffor, it pro-
motes mutually beneficent principles, which effect
the genera! good : befides that placing our bene-
volence before God, viewing it in the light of his
countenance, muft needs make it of a right fort.
But the interceffion of one rank for another, has
not the fame effedls : nor can frail ignorant men
on earth give their attention to creatures in heaven,
in a ftate quite out of the reach of their knowledge
without great danger of a romantic, and fuperfti- *" , ,
tious religion.

I will now proceed to the laft thing in o^r
Proof i to fliew, that the Romifh Dodrine of tlie
Invocation of Saints, is even repugnant, in fome ^

degree,

"^ Biihop Porteus's Brief Confutation, p:;ge 23. .'

* Confider Matt, xviii. 19. in this view. f ' *

^ Dr. Ooileu on Prayer and JnrercelTion treats this fubjcil. / ^
VOL. IV. K . .'"

146 BOOK IV. AllT. XXII. SECT. XX.

degree, to the Scripture. It does not feem that the
facred writers had, or could have, the dodrine
immediately in their view, and therefore there may
be no indiredV prohibition of it made in io many
words ; but the filence being on both fides, is much
in our favour : if nothing be faid, there is nothing
to be done. Efpecially when we are told, that
we may ourfelves" ufe importunity with our hea-
venly Lord. The heavenly creatures are called our
fellow-fervants, Rev. xix. 10. and xxii. 9. and
elfewhere.

The Romanifls have indeed faid, that Diilia is
neverthelefs due to them, from Gal. v. 13. but
the A8A£t» there mentioned is clearly mutual;
and indeed means only mutual kind offices j ^tarrc

Billiop Hurd "" confiders, after Mede, the Ro-

manifts as guilty of the D^emon-worlbip mentioned

I Tim. iv. I. — And BiQiop Hallifax^ after Mr.

Mede and Bifhop Newton, appHes to them Dan.

xi. 38. according to the marginal reading : Mahuz-

zim (D'ty ') being interpreted Proteclors, or

tutelary Deities, and confidcred as including Saints

and Angels. — The texts of the New Teftamcnt

w'ould have an immediate reference to the oriental

philofophy, and the fpiritual Beings which it fup-

pofed ; as was fliewn at the end of the firft Book:

but from thofe texts we may form a tolerable

judgment what the Apoftles would have faid about

the Popilb Saints. This feems the proper idea

with which we fliould read CoJ. ii. 18. 23. —

I Tim.

" Matt. vii. 7. Luke xi. 8, 9.

* On Prophecy, page 386.
y On Prophecy, page 3C2.

* From,;j/**, or t|j?J Parkhurft's account is under ^J?. In
Walton's Polyglott the word is not interpreted. Louth, on the
place, prefers Medc's tranflation.

BOOK IV. ART. XXil. SECT. XXI. t^f

i Tim. i. 4. and iv. i, &c\— I conclude with
I Tim. ii. 5. " There is one God, and one
mediator between God and Man, the Man Jefus
Chrift."

XXI. If we fay anj^thing in the way of Appli-
cation, it fhali be concerning the mutual concejjions
which might be conceived to take place, fuppofing
the contending parties were perfeftly candid : in-
deed from mutual conceffions mull of courfe arife
improvements. I always wifh, whilft I am engaged
in controverfy, that fome refpe(5lable advedary
were prefent; in order that perfonal refpect might
prevent anything illiberal from being thrown out.

It has not been fufficiently obferved in the con-
troverfies on this Article, that he who refufes to
admit a doftrine, does not of courfe deny it. It
may be wrong, in fome cafes, either to adopt or
reject a'' notion. A man fays, you will allow
that the Planets are inhabited ; the proper anfwer
is, I neither allow it nor deny it. It feems pro-
bable from analogy that they may be; and I
fliould think any man narrow-minded who made
himfelf fure that they were not ; but the moment
you build anything upon fuch a fuppofition, I de-
clare your building to be without foundation. We
fay indeed that Purgatory, &c. are repugnant to
Scripture; but we do not mean, to any exprefs
declaration belonging immediately to the doctrine.
— This might poffibly have fome eifedt in recon-
ciling: would Dupin have been content with fay-
ing, it may be needful for our fouls to be purified
after death ? and would our Church fay the fame?
— Might it be laid, the Saints in Heaven may

poffibly

^ Col. ii. 23. H'lII occur again under Art. xxxii. — Indeed
it has already occurred.
*" Art. xvin. Seft. jx.

K 2

148 BOOK IV. ART. XXI 1. SECT. XXI.

poflibly know fomething of our adions ? this would
have effeft. — What elfe do we fay of particular
judgments of God ? — How do I know but this
event may be a judgment? Such a queftion is
enough to make us think; and to learn righteouf-
nefs; more would be prefumption and fuper-
flition.

It feems, at firft, a fhrange thing to have the
rituals, canons, councils % of a Church, fo dif-
ferent from " the private writings of her Divines,"
as we find them in the Church of Rome : but this
may perhaps be nothing more than that fome Ro-
manills are more improved than others : that the
ignorant people go on in the old track, which
was firft made in times of darknefs and fuper-
flition, and that the enlightened, though they-
dare not difturb the minds of the lower people,
endeavour, in their own perfons, to make the old
dotflrines as little abfurd as poflible ; and endea-
vour to dwell on what is right, and foften what
is wrong.

In our church many a Parifli Clerk has readings
and cuftoms which we cannot juftify, though we
let him go on : and the common people have
fuperftitions which are not the Doctrine of our
Church : our church was formed by the beft and
ableft of men, at the revival of learning; and
confiftcd of reformations of abufes, as far as it
differed from all others : and all its members who
are tolerably educated, muft be upon much the
lame footing.

Now if this be the cafe, many popifh errors
will difappear as the people improve; and ;Jie Fire
of Purgatory will gradually go out. Even Coun-
cils, Canons and Rituals, may grow obfolete, and

at
<■ Hurd on Prophecy, page 348.

BOOK IV. ART. XXII. SECT. XXI. I49

at Jaft " vanifli^ away.''— We may hope to fee this
improvement take place firftin our Countrymen of
the RomiOi perfuafion.

A change might, in cafe of improvement^ take
place particularly in what is called Adoration, The
ceremonies of bowing, kilTing things animate and
inanimate, and even of kneeling% are arbitrary, in
a great degree. At this time, or at any other, I
fuppofe Englifli Papifts might not ufe all the fame
geftures with Italians, though equally fuperftitious,
before Images andpi^flures.

It has been^ faid, that no reconciliation need be
attempted between Papifts and Proteftants in thofe
docfirines which are the occafions of accumulating
wealth : but the Clergy are by no means fo corrupt
as they ufed to be; and the Pope raifes much lefs
from his followers than formerly. — I do not think
that the God of this world has fo blinded the
minds (2 Cor. iv. 4.) of Englifhmen, Proteftants,
or Catholics, as to make them perfift long in errors
m'^rely becaufe they are lucrative.

As Billiop Fiflier confirms, in an artlefs way,
feveral things which we have had occafion to ob-
ferve, I will tranfcribe a paffage from his refutation
of Luther s.

" Multos fortafle movet Indidgentiis iftis non
ufque adeo fidere, quod eorum ufus in Ecclefia
videatur recenlior, et admodum fero apud Chrifti-
anos repertus : quibus ego refpondeo, non certo
conftare a quo primum tradi coeperint : fuit tamen
noHHullns earum ufus, ut aiunt, apud Romanes
vetuftiffimus, quod ex ftationibus*" intelligipoteft:"

And

^ Hcb viii. 13,

« One of the Canons of the Council of Nice forbids, I think,
kneeling at Prayer.

^ Art. XIV. Se<5l. vii.

8 Art. XV III. (page 496.) in Forbes 12, 8. 31.

*> There is fomething about y?«//o«j in Bingham, 13.9,3.
and Forbes 12. 8. 14. K 3

I^O BOOK IV. ART. XXII, SECT. XXI.

And he adds, " Nemo certe dubitat orthodoxus
an Pur gat or mm fit, de quo tamen apud prifcos nulla,
vel quam rarijjima^ fiehat mcntio : led et Gracis ad
hunc ufque Diem non eft creditum ejje : quamdiii
enim nulla fuerat de Purgatorio cura, nemo quielivit
Lididgentias ', nam ex illo pendet omnis indulgen-
tiarum exiftimatio : Ji tollas Purgatorhim quorsiim
indnlgentiis opus crii ^ cseperunt igitur indulgentise
poftquam ad Purgatorii Cfuciatus aliquamdiu tre-
pidatum eft."

Blfliop FiOier was Chancellor of this Univerfitj'',
Preceptor to Henr}" VIII. a principal writer againft
Luther, a Cardinal, and Biihop of Rochefter : he
chofe rather to fufFer death, than to permit any
one but the Pope, to make him Archbilhop of
Canterbury.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. I. 15I

ARTICLE XXIII.

OF MINISTERING IN THE CONGREGATION.

IT is not lawful for any man to take upon him
the office of publick preaching, or minillering
the Sacraments in the congregation, before he be
lawfully called, and fent to execute the fame.
And thofe we ought to judge lawfully called and
fent, which be chofen and called to this work by
Men who have publick authority given unto them
in the congregation, to call and lend minifters into
the Lord's vineyard.

1. It feems needful even for the purpofe of
offering our hiftorical reflexions, to confider firft,
in what " minlftering" confifts. In *' preaching,"
baptizing, prefiding at the Lord's fupper : thefe
are all particulars mentioned in our Article; but
yet we ufually include reading prayers, or praying,
marrying, and burying. — So that to mention any
of thefe occafionally, will not be thought beyond
our purpofe. Indeed the Sacraments are treated of
in the following Articles ; therefore we muft en-
deavour to fay nothing of them here, which may
with more propriety be introduced hereafter.

Our fubjccl is, the obligation which Cliriftians
are under to take Orders before they perform any
public acl of an eccleliaftical Minifter; or, as it
is fomewhere cxprcfTed, not to do any fuch adt
'-'felf-orJeredr

K 4 la

1^2 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. II.

In reviewing hijlorical fafts, we muft pafs over
the conduft of the Apoftles and other infpired
men; bccaufe that will make part of our Froof.

II. The Apojlolic Father sX^^zk. conftantly as if
thofe who miniftered had received a regular com-
miffion to miniilcr. Clemerd of Rome, in his firft
Epiftle to the Corinthians, a work alwaysvheld
genuine, is what I Oioiild call copious on the fub-
ject of Minifters ; not proving anything formally
about their commiffion, but taking it for granted.
— One fees from this work, that the Corinthian
Church had eji^icd fome minifters; for Which he
blames them. — Polycarp fpeaks of the qualifications
of good Minifters : he mentions alfo Valens's
having been difmiffed irom the Prefbytery. He
writes to the Vhilippians. — Ignatius^ writing to the
Church at Ephejus^ fpeaks of that Church as very
well governed -^ and fays a good deal on the fubject
of Epijcopal authority. And to the Church of
Smyrna he fays,

Ex£4V»i ^i^xia. E'j^x^ig-ix r.ync-^u, % xjno rov £7r»(rxo7roy
tcra, »' w ay cchTog £7nT^s]/'/i.

To which we may add, that the dlftinflion
between Clergy and Laitv {KXr,^og and AaVxot) was
known in the time of Clemens'' Romanus, and
exprellcd in the fame words in which it has been
expreflcd ever fince.

The continuance of a regularly appointed Clergy
appears undeniably from the Roman Lazes con-
cerning tlicm. Concerning their Revenues^ arifmg
from various fucceffions, contributions, &c. —their
peculiar /-«>/7/2'/;/('///J, and the modes of hfe and em-
ploymcnts which were permitted them ; of all thefe
Bingham gives an account, in the fifth, Gxth, and
fcventeenth Books of his Antiquities,

III. Things

» Bingham's Antiquities Ciem. ad Cor. r. 5. end of Sed.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. III. 15*

III. Things feem to have gone on in much
the fame train, with fome exceptions which need
not be mentioned, till the twelfth Century. Then
the corruptions prevailing in the Church, began
to let fome men of good minds and fimple man-
ners, upon feparating from the main body of
their Chriftian Brethren. Thefe were called Wal-
denfes : they lived in the Mountainous country of
Piedmont, bordering upon France; in the Vait- //
dois^; and feem to have had chiefly in view to
bring back the Church of Chrift to its primitive
fimplicity. In order to do that they would have
a great deal of church power to prune away ; and
fo it is faid that they held, that any man might,
in fome degree, exhort and expound. Yet it is
alfo faid, that they had fomething in the way of
our three ranks ; I mean of Bilhop^, Priefts and
Deacons. In truth, the age in which they lived,
and their own obfcurity, though they were very
numerous, have left many doubts concerning
them. Their defcendants ilill remain in the fame
country, and Protcftants have been called upon,
not many years ago, to relieve them when under
perfecution.

IV. At

*> See Maclalne's Note on Mofheim's Ecclef. Hlft. Cent. 12.
%. 5. I r, 12. Tiiefe vallies were called Vaudois, on account of //
the Waldenfes, or Vaudois coining to inhabit them. Their
head, Petrus Waldus, or Vaud: Cave fays, Petrus Waldius,
that is, of Waldi. Moflieiin fays, we mull dijlinguifh care-
fully between Waldenfes and Vaudois ; but Machine oppofes
this.

The Waldenfes are fometimes called Albigenfes', but Molhcim
makes Albigenfes to mean (oi^xz Pau'iciar.s, on Manicheaiis, in
the 1 ith Century, from Albigia, or Albyin France; lee Mofh.
Cent. xi. Part ii. Ch;;p. v. Seel, ii, iii. with the Notes of Mac-
hine, who differs from Molheim. When differences arife, re-
lative to matters not eflential, between perfons of charafter,
who have ftudied thofe matters ; we generally content ourfelves
with flaiing b.iefiy the different opinions maintained.

154 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. IV. V.

IV. At the time of the Reformation^ the ufual
appointments of Minifters continued in the Church
of Rome, and in the Church of England; but in
fome countries abroad, on Bifhops'' refufmg to
ordain thofe who were fcparating from the RomiQi
Church, they had recourfe to ordination by ElderSy
or Prefbyters, which kind of ordination has con-
tinued ever fmce in thofe countries ; and was
transferred from thence ^ into Scotland by John
Knox.

In the Church of Rome, Ordo being made a
Sacrament, it will occur under the twenty-fifth
Article. The Romanifts boafl of a regular fuc-
ceflion of Bilhops, from St. Peter down to the
prefent time , but fome Proteftants have conceived
themfclvcs able to prove % that they had full as good
a claim to fuch an honour. The fubjed is much
too complicated for iis to meddle with : and may
belong to t'iie thirty-fixth Article rather than this;
or perhaps not be at ail neceirary.

V. Sochius found a difficulty arifing from the
Reformation: Some of his friends'" urged, that by
that event, the Church (confidered externalises as
a vifible Society) was cnllapjcd, or fallen to ruins;
and that no lefs power could rebuild it, than had

built

« Heylln'sTraiSls, page 228.

•^ Baxter pleads tor the legality of Ordination by Prelbyters;
but, in ftriflnefs, he does not Teem to bring an inftance of it,
except in cafes of neceiuty. On Councils, page 485. Bifhop
//o;;/^ declares againlt Ordination by Prefbyters; and maintains
the ncceliity of a/wrf^/Fow of ordaining Minifters. Charge 17QI,
page 23.

« Baxter on Councils, page 471, Se£l. viii. and page 484,
Prop, vi. — Burn-t on the validity of Englifh Ordinations. —
Neal I. page 502, bottom, quarto. — Hcyliii's Hiftory of Epif-
copacv. — Archbilbop Br^m/uiII has a work on this fuhjefl,
which may be good : fee the account in b.is Lr/c, Biogr. Britan.
note (u) ; or his ivorks in folio.

^ Socinus's third Epiftle to Matt. Radecius; Works, Vol. i.
foi. page 380, &c (or Fraties Poloni) page 383, 384.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. VI. 155

bulk it originally :— that is, a fupernatural mira-
culous^ power muft again be difplayed on earth,
otherwife no man could ever have the fatisfa(5lion
of thinking, that he was a member of the true
Church of Chrift.

This was not a notion to be born by one who
was juft eftablilhing a new religion, or Seift ; So-
cinus therefore combats it ftrenuouily : — any
affembly, he holds, may form themfelves into
a Church ; as to fucceflion, and election after any
particular mode, they are nothing. Even in the
time of the Apoflles, men not admitted into
Chriftianity, and no way commiffioned, might
preach the word of their'' own accord ^ much
more may a Chriftian expound now, when Chrif-
tianity is eftabliOied : general content is all that
is wanted.

As to the Lord's Supper^ any fet of Chriftians
may meet and break ir^'^^ together : — and Baptifmy
may be changed into any other mode of admitting
one's name into the lift of Chriftians ; or even
being brought up by Chriftian Parents, is fufficient
of itlelf. Bat Socinus does not inform his Friend
Radecius^ how all this is to be carried into execu-
tion with decency and order j — how competition
and confufion are to be avoided ; or prefumptuous
folly prevented from ftopping the mouth of modeft
fenfe. The fame defedt is obfervable in the Raco-
vian Catechifm : there, innocence of life, and
fitnefs to teach, are' mentioned as qualifications;
but it is not faid who is to be judge whether any
particular man poffeiles them.

VI. The

s Oneohje£lion toMinirters which Baxter anfwers, is '* You
work no Miracles^ — On Councils, page 472.

•> Socinus refers here to A6ls viii. 4. and xi. 19, &c.'
* De Ecclefia Chrifti, cap 2, page 241,

136 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. VI.

VI. The Popifli yoke removed, men found
more liberry than they ufed to any good purpole^
Fanatic teachers fprung up, and alTumed a variety
of ftrange forms. It is not worth while to men-
tion every fliort lived freak; but, taking all the
time between the Reformation and the beginning
of this eighteenth Century, there feem to be three
leading ideas, befides our own, with regard to the
niinifterial office:

One, that the authority to execute it was to
come immediately from heaven. Another, that
it was to be given by a Senate, or Council of
Elders, or Prefbyters; both thefe allowed it to
extend to feveral congregations; but the third
idea waSy that church authority was of a confined
nature, and belonged only to one fujgle cougrega-
tion, the members of which conferred it by EleElion.
— The firft was the idea of all forts of My/iics; of
the Families, or Family^ of Love, in Queen
Elizabeth's time; and afterwards of thofe My (lies
who were called Seckers\ and of the fakers in
the time of Oliver Cromwell. — The fecond was
the idea of the Prefbyterians, before™ briefly men-
tioned ; the third was the idea of the Independents,
who looked upon each feparate Congregation as a
feparate Church. The BroivnilW^, in the time of
Queen Elizabeth, did not make a° church more
extenfive; but thofe commonly called Indepen-
dents

^ See .Art. vii. Szd.. j 11. but the Rcfonnatio Legum de Hasre-
fibiis, Cap. 16. fhould heie be read. — borne held, that any who
had a fmatteriiig of the fcriptures, (" qui facris literisutcunque
funt afpeifi,") and laid they had the Spirit, miglit teach ai:y
where, and j^ive Sutiaments, and oovern the Church ; no minif-
ters being fettled in any fixed places: rriight minifter without
any votarion, in>pofition of liaiids, or any acl of tliC Church.

' Baxter on Councils, page 471, Seft. x. — Alfo page 460,

•" ^cd. IV. " Art. vu.Scft. VI.

• Neal, \'oI. I. page 2 53.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. VI. I^y

dents made no figure till the time of our civil
wars^ in the feventeenth Century. We are told,
that they do not iniill upon Ordination, except for
adminiftring the Sacraments^. — Impofttion of hands
Teems to have been ufed by moft or all feds of
Chriftians who praclifed Ordination ^ The Pref-
byterians have two hay-elders for each preach-
ing Minifter, in the impofition of hands, and in
Synods: the Lutherans have Super hit endants (not
unlike Bifhops) who perform that Office',

Sometimes Fanaticifm may confound or fufpend
the obfervance of Rules : in the armies of Crom-
well, both General and Soldiers' prayed and
preached; but in every thing like a regular fo-
ciety, 1 apprehend there is at bottom fome coni'
mijjion for performing every minifterial office. —
.Wherever I fee Order ^ I afcribe it to Rnle\ and
order in a Society, to Authority. — If this be ri?-hr,
thofe who pretend to have no rule, muft liave
fome way of deceiving themfelves"; in common
civilities people do things by Rule, which they
can fancy are from the mere choice of the
moment.

The Methodifts, I am told, reckon no Ordi-
nation valid except that of our Bilhops ; thofe
amongfl: them who have not been ordained and
yet fometimes harangue, are faid only to give a

" word
? Veneer, page 523, kc.
^ Dr. Prieftley, Hilt. Corr. Vol. 2, page 64.
^ See Dr. Zach. Grey's Preface to Hudibras. Originally the
liidependents do not ieem to have ordair.ed ; after their uniting
with the FreiLyterians, they fometimes did, and'then they ufed
Impofition of Hands.

^ Heylin's Preface, Seel. 23.
^ Neal 2, page 252.

■'' The Cluakers are mentioned Mofheim, Cent. 17. Sed. 2.
Parti. Chap. 4, end, (or 8vo. Vol. ;;, page 44.) and their
iilent meetings accounted for. -See alfo Book Jii, Chap. xiv.
Sed. .XII. of this wonk,

158 BOOK IV. ART. XXIir. SECT. VII IX.

"word'' of Exhortation:" yet they feem to be
diftinguilhcd in Tome way; and appearances are as
if they were maintained.

VII. The rertlbn why uninterrupted fnccejfion'xs
{o much valued, is, becaufe the incapacity of any
one perfon who ordains, might be fuppofed, in
ftridnefs, to invalidate, or vitiate, all fubfeqnent
Ordinations. — On this principle fome American
Bilhops have been confccrated in England, and
their Confecration regulated by an Aft of Par-
liament.

VIII. Dr. Priejiiey, in his addrcfs to the
Methodifts, lately'' publifhed, prefixed to Mr.
Wefley's Letters, advifes the Methodifts to form
feparate Societies with whatever rules they think
proper : and adds, *' Let any perfon whom you
think qualilicd, teach and exhort others, whether
he be in holy orders , as it is called, or not; and if
they^ be qualified to teach, tlicy arc certainly qua-
lified to adminifter all the ordinances of the Gof-
pel, Baptifm and the Lord's Supper. I know of
no exclufive right that any men, or body of men,
have to this prlvilcoc^"

IX. It feems worth while, before we clofe our
Hiftory, to obfervc, that in events which have
relation to the doclrine of our prefent Article,
there have happened many cafes of Neceffity.—
Vv'hen people have been fick, or out of the reach
of a place of Chriftian worlhip, or under perfecu-
tion, or without tolerably good laws; inluch cafes,

things

^ Ads xiii. 15.— Heb. xiii. 22.

> Tiiis was written in 1 791.

^ The word " they"' fcems to mean the fame as " any per/on;''^
fometimes perhaps they is ufcd concerning a /ii^gle perfon when
tJiey;^.v is not fpecj/ied. Whctlier Dr. PrielUey meant, by plural
foliowijig finf^ular, to include, or i-.ot exclude, _/T'>w/z/^ Minillors,
I will nut take upcm me to fay. The word "/-f" occurs jull
before " //vfy." ' . -

* Paurxxix.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. X. XI. 159

things could not take their regular courfe j prac-
tice could not correfpond to Theory. All that
could be aimed at, muft have been, to come as
near the Theory as poffible. — This kind of irregu-
larity has happened fometimes with refpedt to
Preaching, fometimes with refpedl to Baptifm, and
the Lord's Supper : it has alfo affeded Ordination .,
and Marriages.

Of a cafe of neceffity in preaching we have a
remarkable inftance in the Converfion of Iberia
to Chriliianity''. A female captive converted the
King and Queen, who preached to their People,
and converted them ; but then they fent to Con-
ilantine for a Bifhop and Clergy as foon as they
were able. — Or, not to go fo far for an inftance,
I have known Chapels in the Diocefe of Chefter,
ferved by perfons not ordained; fometimes, 1
think, ferving them before Ordination, was a con-
dition of poffeffing them afterwards.

Origen, while a Layman, taught Divinity in the
Catechetical Chair of Alexandria^ even in the
prefence of his Bifhop , the thing was blamed,
but not the preacher.

X. The cafes of neceffity in regard to Bap-
tifm, may beft come under the twentv-feventh
Axrticle : fuch as Baptifm by women, clinic Bap-
tifm, &c.

And thofe relating to the Lord's Supper, under
the twenty-eighth ; as facrament without the ufual
elements; family-facraments, &c.

XI. We have already'' mentioned, that at the
Retormation, foreign Divines, not being able to

get

^ Socrates, Hifi:. Ecclef. Theodoret, i. 24, &c.-» Forbes, 16.
6. SI . — Burnet on the Article, page 322, 8vo.

= Eufeb. Eccl. Hid. 6. 13. — Forbes, 16. 6. 22.—— Ileylin'r*
Tradts, page 294.

•» Sea. IV.

l6o BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XII.

get ordained by Bifhops, applied to Prefbyteries.
— It happened t'hac fome Englilh Divines were
abroad at the time, and were obHged to have re-
courfe to the fame expedient. Their ordinations
were allo'.ved as vaiid% in King Edward's time;
but in the latter end of Queen Elizabeth's reign
legal difputes arofe whether they could claim tithes.
Sec; and in the reign of James the Firil the vali-
dity of fuch ordinations was denied^ — In 1644,
when the Bithops declined ordaining any but thofe
who were well inclined to King Charles the Firfl,
the Aflembly of Divines^, took feveral fteps to have
ordination performed without their afliftance; but
it was only pro tempore^ ; there were then no Pref-
byteries in England.

XII. Bingham fays', that Marriages were fo-
Icmnized by the Chriftian Clergy for 300 years;
but that the mixture of Heathens and Chriftians
made many extraordinary cafes. The facerdotal
Benediction got evaded, when the laws became
Chrillian; becaufe they contained no injunftions
to fupport it; polTibly Chriftians, before that time,
wilhed rather, of themfelvcs, to have Chriftian
than Heathen marriage.— But in the eighth and
ninth Centuries, the original Chriftian marriages,
by the Prieft, were revived. — Sir William Black-
ftone" obferves, that the Intervention of the Prieft
in the marriage-contra6t *' is merely juris pofitivi,
and noi juris naturalis atit divirJ." " In the times
of the grand rebellion, all marriages were per-
\\ formed by the Juftices of the Peace; and tlicfe

marriages

« Neal I. 55. ^ Ncal r. 503, top.

8 Sec an account of tliis, Grey's Pref. to Hiidibras, page
xxviii. *

*• Neal, Vol. 2, Index, Ordination.

* Antiquities 22. 4. 2, 3.

•' Vol. I. fee Index, Marriage. Marriage mScothvd is fiid.
to be a civil contrad.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XIII. i6l

marriages were declared valid^^ by Aft of Parlia-
ment after the Reftoration.

Our Church is againft* re- baptizing and re-or-
daining. At Lavjanne a perfon who appears to be
a Layman, reads the ten commandments, in the
pulpit; as appears from the letter of a friend of
mine written at Laufanne. Laymen have ufually
read Lejjom in Cathedrals, and other places of
worfliip.

XI 1 1 . Let us now proceed to our 'Explanation'^.

The title of this twenty-third Article, differs
fomething from that of the correfponding one in
1552 : ours is, '* Of miniftering in the Cotigrega-
tion^" that of 1552 is, " No man may minifter in
the Congregation except he be called'' — The word
" called" does occur in the body of our Article^
but it feems befl not to have a propojition in a Title,
when it can be eafily avoided.

What is to be underflood by "miniftering,''
we were obliged to mention before we entered upon
our Hiftory.

" In the Congregation,'' — of the word Congregation
we fpoke under the nineteenth Article": here it

may

> Puller's Moderation of the Church of England, page 307.—
At Iflington, I am told, a Popifh prieft, turned Proteffant, does
duty, without any re-ordination. Confult Biogr. Britan.— Lifi

of Eramhall, Note (R), for an inftance of re-ofdination. in

my Parifh a woman, who had been baptized as a DifTenter,
wanted me to re-baptize her in the Church, as an adult : I
declined.

^ I fliould have thought it would have been better if the 2ad
Art. had come after this, rather than before it: the order of
the Cubjefts would then have been, 19. A Church. —20. Its
Authority.— 21. A number of Churches ading together.—

22. Who hnsa right to miniller in a Church. 23. Of Popifh

Doflrines.— 24. Continuation of Popifli doftrines; of having
public devotions in a language not known to the unlearned.
There was^ probably fome good reafon for the prefent order,
though i: does not occur to me.

" Art. xix.Sed. v.

VOL. IV. L ■

l62 BOOK IV. ART. XXTII. SECT. XIV.

may perhaps only have its moll iifual fenfe, of an
JJfembly ; or it may be thus interpreted ; an whole
Church', that is, as large a Ibciety of Chriftians as,
in any fituation, aft together by a common under-
flanding: or a feparate ^;;zi'/)', confidered as p^/Y
of an whole church. But if Congregation betaken
i;i tlie fame fenfe with E>t>cX»)(rt», that fenfe was
alfo mentioned.— E>ty.A»fl-j« does indeed, in fcripture,
though if fevcral times ftands for the whole church
of Chrift, fometimes mean merely an Alfembly ;
fomciimes a fmall one, fuch as would be contained
in the houfe of a new" Convert. — Perhaps this
ufe of the word 'E.n.xktQ^x^ might give rife to the
congregational Churches of the Independents.

At the Hampton-Court conference before King
James the Firft, in 1603, the Puritans defired
that thefe words " in the Congregation^^* might bs
omitted in this Article, *' as implying a liberty for
men to preach out of the Congregation without a
lawful call'P,"

XIV. " Public'" ("preaching/' &c.) — this mufc
be oppofed to private (preaching, &c.)— fuch as
reading a fermon to a family : or prefiding in
family devotions.— Mai. iii. 16. — I apprehend,
that teaching would be private in any aflembly not
under ecclefiaftical authority ; though there might
be o^ood reafons for not encouracrins; relisiious
harangues to numerous companies who were not
under fuch authority. What is ufually called
private Bnptifm^ as oppofed to that which is per-
formed in Churches publicly, is, properly, ad-
minillered 'in a congregation'^, as is alfo the com-
munion

° I Cor. xlv. 24.. — Rom. xvi. 5. — Col. iv. 15.— Veneer men-
tions the Athenian Ex).'Xy;o-i«i, page 526.

P Neal's Hift. Puritans, Vol. 1^410. page 415.

"5 " Regard, we befeech thee, the ruppiications of thy Con-
gregation." The prayer containinji thefc words muft, I

^ niouid

Book iv. art. xxiii. sect. xv. 163

munion of the fick; according to Matt, xvlii. 20.
and TertuUian's maxim, " Ubi tres, Ecclefia''
eft."

XV. *' Called"^'' fenr—'' chofen and calledr
" Called^'' — this is a word frequently ufed in
Scripture-, it feems to be the old Enghih for in-
vited: and it is ufed chiefly of mens being invited
into the Chriftian religion. Such invitation, or
calling, is often faid to come from God : but the
meaning only is, that fo important an event as a
man's being made a Chriftian, ought to be re-
ferred to Divine Providence, though we cannot
refer it with diftind ideas of the divine agency —
Of this referring events to God, we fpake largely
under the tenth and feventeenth Articles. — One
called^ is fometimes only a name for a Chriftian ;
as I Cor. vii. 17 — 21. and in the Parable (or
Parables) of the marriage-fupper, the invitation
denotes mens becoming Chriftians, when referred
to the divine Government of the world. God
may call by man, or by human authority. Here,
called means, more particularly, invited into the
Minijiry ; and in this fenfe it is ufed by St. Paul at
the beginning of his Epiftle to the Romans, and
of his firft to the Corinthians.

" Sent'' — is generally appropriated to Minijiers.
Our Saviour is not fent but unto the loft Iheep of
the houfe of Ifraei : (our Saviour's being fent,
occurs a great number of times) — the Apojiles take
the name of their office from being fent : and other
minifters are diftinguiftied by their being faid to
have a mijfion. — See Matt. x. 16.— xxiii. 37.—

Luke

fhould think, be one of die Collefts ufed at private Baptifm;
as fandifying the water.

' Quoted by Veneer, page 527, ♦* from Tertullian's Exhor-
tation to Challity," page 457.

L %

104 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XVl.

Luke iv. 26.— xxli. 35. — John xx. 21. — A6ls xllf.
4. — Rom. x. 15.— I Cor. i. 17.— Some notice
alfo (hoLild be taken of the pafTages which com-
pare minifters to labourers^ Matt. ix. 38. and xxi.
34. Thefc paffages were all in the minds of our
reformers when they iifed the word '■^ fenty

Chofen and' called" — when fpoken of together,
in fcripture, ufually feem to mean different Jlcps
in admifilon to Chriftianity : Calling is the firil
propofal, and chufmg the final appointment : fome
begin the negotiation, but do not complete it :
or, m.ore begin it than complete it ; or, in the
fcripture flile of comparifon j ^^ many are called,
but/>w are chofen."

The word chofen, as well as called, is fometimcs
tjfed with relation to the Miniftry : — lee Ads i. 24.
— ix. 15. — xxii. 1 4. — 2 Tim. ii. 4 — but there is a
variety of exprcffions for the lame thing; ordained,
r.ppointed, feparated, &c. it might be ufcful to fee
the marginal references. Acts ix. 15.— When chofen
relates to the Miniftry, it feems to be Ibmething
prior to called ; but more commonly /)(3/?d'r/(?;- ; one
old edition of the Articles h3.sfent, called, chofen:
(lee Bennet's Collation, page 87).

From this interpretation of the expreflions of
Scripture it appears, that being called to the
Minillry, does not imply anything of fuch im-
mediate comnnunication with heaven that we muft
be lenfible of it at the time : does not imply any
luch thing as the Infpiration of the myftics; who
feem to miftake the meaning of fuch expreflions.

XVI. lean fee one difficulty ; it may perhaps
be afked how thole who propofe themfelves for
orders, can be faid to be called^ When a man
propofes himfelf, he only declares, that if he is

appointed,

^ Called, Art. xvii. Se^t. xnv. — Cliofcn, Art, xvii.

SC(^. XL.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XVI. l6^

appointed, he will accept the appointment : and
the nature of human affairs make this mode necef-
far3\ Though it might be the moft perfedt
method, if perfons in authorit)^ did keep fo exa(5l
an account of the charadlers of all men, that they
could adtually invite to the Miniftry all thofe who
vyere likely to do the moft good in it ; yet if we
fpeak with relation to the prefent imperfed ftate of
things, we muft fay, that no ecclefiaftical mao;if-
trate can know of all who would accept the office
of minifter J and this method is as inconfiftent with
felf-ordering, as any * other.

Calling means inviting; now inviting ones felf
to the houfe of a friend, does not deftroy the
elFence of his invitation; though the form may
be a little changed. But, what is moft to the
purpofe, thofe of whom it is faid in fcripture that
they were called, did generally, no doubt, propofe
tliemfelves for Baptifm. At leaft, any one who
had propofed himfelf, and had been baptized,
would have been fpoken of, on looking back upon

the

' The Puritans, In Synods, determined, that no one Ihould
ofFer himfelf for Orders; every one {hould be really calledhy
feme Congregation.

Neal I , page 2.3 r.— — See alfo Latimer's Sermon on St. An-
drew ; Vol. I, page 160, 8vo. where there are feme good
things on Patrons calling proper Minifters; but his advice to
men not to become Minillers except they be called, might
perplex a modeft man, or encourage an enthufiaft. Yet he does
not feem to mean more than that no one Ihould take orders
from views of mere worldly advantage; or from pride, vanity,
&c. for he fpeaks of that as a man's vocation to which he has
been regularly ♦' brought up." If therefore a young man were
to fix upon the Miniltry as his Profeffion, and go througli a
courfe of Education fuited to make him fit for it; or was to be
invited into the Church by a pious patron, he would, I (hould
imagine, come under Bifhop Latimer's notion of one called.
•^Korah, See. Numb. xvi. were uncalled ; or impious xA'
{riders.

l66 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XVII — XIX.

the whole of the tranfadlion, as called-^ that is,
called by the Providence of God, ufing what means
icemcd bed to his infinite vvifdom.

Baxter, at the end of his Hiftory of Councils,
enumerates fome particular adls of the Government
of God in calling Minifters.

XVII. " By meji" — that is by men immediately,
the call may be referred to God, as has been feen.
A minifter is lawfully appointed, though without
fupernatural powers ; without being injpiredy (o that
he can be immediately fenfible of the infpiration ;
without having a power of working Miracles ; — and
yet fo called, he may be called of God"".

I fuppofe the minifters of our Church have had
it objedled to them, that they are not true minif-
ters, becaufe they have not the Spirit : and becaufe
they work no miracles.

XVII T. '"^ V/ho have public authority given unto
them in the congregation'''' — this feems to leave the
manner of giving the power of ordaining, quite
free : it feems as if any religious fociety might,
confiftently with this Article, appoint officers, with
power of ordination, by eledion, reprefentation,
or lot ; as if, therefore, the right tO ordain did not
depend upon any uninterruptedyr^^r^o;;''.

XIX. " T^he Lord's Vineyard''^ — this expreffion
does not feem to be ufed merely for ornament ;
but becaufe the Church of God is fo frequently
called the Lord's vineyard in fcripture; indeed the
fimilitude is fo much dwelt upon, that there feems
ground for reajoning from it, and even deriving

rules

" Not feeing this has occafioned a wrong notion of the
whole aftair of Church-authority, amongft the Prelbyterians :
its that notion defcribed by Dr. Balguy, Ser. 7, page 114 and
116. retcning to page 15, bottom. — See alfo before, .Art. xx.
end of Sed. ii.— And Baxter on Councils, page 471, 472.
Objedion 10. ^ 12.

' ticc I'oibcs, 16. 6.— Eilhop Home as before, Se6t. iv.

BQOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XX— XXII. 167

ndes for pra6tice. The Jews were once the Church
of God; and Chriftians are'' fo now. — Coniblt
Pfalm Jxxx. 8—16. — Cant. viii. 12. — If. v. 1—7.

— Matt. XX. I — t6. — Matr. xxi. 33—41. —
The Pfahn may relate properly to the Jewifli
Church; the Prophecy to the Jewhli Church pri-
marily, or perhaps to the Church of God in
general : Matt. xx. to both Jewilh and Chriftian.

— Matr. xxi. to Chriftian only.

XX. This Article is not to be fuppofed to make
any rules or laws, or any provifion for cafes of
necejfity. They make provifion for themielves \
Neceffity has no Law.

XXI. We now come to our Vroof.

I do not fee that there need be more than one
propofition.

XXII. * It is not right to minifter in any re-
ligious fociety, without an appointment from tliat
fociety^.'

This muft be proved from Scripture, though
really fcripture only fpeaks, as it were, incidentally;
taking for granted that religious fociety cannot be
carried on in any rational or cffedual way, without
an appointment of minifters.

With regard to the old Teftament, there can
be no doubt but Priefts and Levites, and prophets
were diftinguiflied from other men : and ievere
punifliment inflided when this diftindion was
invaded: fee Numb. xvi. Punifliments were of

courfe

y Taylor on Romans, Key, No. i^^. 133.

* There might be another proporuion, affirming, that ordi-
;iatIon may be valid, without the intervention (as fai- as wa can
difcern) of any thing fupernatiiral. But as ideas of fuperna-
tural powers being given to Minifters, have arifen from a
wrong interpretation of thofe texts, which fpeak of the Agency
of God, and of referring events to his Agency, and as the
meaning of thofe pa/Tage; has been explained, a fecond propo«
fjtion feems needlefs.

L 4

100 BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXII.

coLirfe fupernatural where the Government was fo.
I will therefore only bring paffagcs from the new
teflamcnt, and that in the order ia which they
now (land.

The tenth chapter of St. Matdiew fliould be
read entire, and ftudied by every one, who c'/ciicr
propofes to be a minifter, or is called upon to
appoint others.

See next, Matt. xxiv. 45. — xxviii. 18, &c.

Johniii. 27. — x. 16.— xxi. 15, &c.

Ads i. 22.— viii. 17. — x. 3 — 5. — But Afts xiii.
?. the folemn^ feparation of St. Paul, muft ftrike
as fomething extraordinary, after his miraculous
converfion before related, namely, in Chap. ix.
A.ny one properly attentive, fixing his thoughts on
this, Vkould naturally exclaim, ' it was not enough,
then, to authorize Paul to go and preach the word,
that he had been ftruck blind by the immediate
and fupernatural power of God ! that the general
defign of divine Providence, in teaching men a
new religion, had been exprefsly communicated to
him by a voice from Heaven ! that Ananias had
been fent to him, as to a chofen veffel unto God,
to bear his " name before the Gentiles, and Kings,
^nd the children of Ifrael," to deliver him from a
blindnefs of three days ! — this chofen veflel muft
ftill be confecrated '-'■by men\'' men muft faft and
pray over him, and lay their hands upon him,
before he could be a legitimate preacher of the
holy Gofpel! — nay, that very perfon muft be thus
commiffioned by the inftrumentality of qien, vvho
could fay of himfelf with more propriety than any
other minifter of the Gofpel, that he was "an
Apoftle not of men, neither by man." (Gal. i. i.)'

We

' IIow inconfiftent is all this with Socinus's notion and Dr.
Prieftley's that any man may minifter! This inconfiftcncy ftiould
be mark'-d new and then, in going through thefe texts.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXII. 169

We fliould alfo confuk Ads xiv. 23. and xx. 28,
29. where thofe meafures muft be fuppofed to be
enjoined, which are neceffary to defend the flock
from wolves : an end not to be anrwered without
authority.

Rom. X. 13, &c. has been mentioned in the
explanation : as have feveral texts which are to our
prefent purpole.

1 Cor. iv. I, 2. Stewards are not felf-appointed.
Chap. xii. 16. 19. 27. 29, 30. — Chap. xiv. in

general, but the laft verfe feems of itfelf fuffi-
eient.

2 Cor. V. 20. — Eph. vi. 20. (" in bonds'*^) — A-n-
hajfadors are not felf-appointed.

Eph. iv. II. — 1 Tim. iii. i. — 2 Tim. ii. 2. —
Titus i. 5. — Heb. v. 4, 5, &c. and 12.— -Heb.
xiii. 17. compare with ver. 7.

One might alfo venture to bring as Proof, fome
conliderations from the nature of cultivating a
'vineyard. AH cannot prefide, and dired: ; all can-
not do the nicer parts of the work ; fome mufl
dig, and do the more ordinary offices, and follow
the inftruftions of others. — This muft be the cafe
even if the Lord was prefent; but when he is away,
he muft neceifarily have officers to reprefent him,
and enforce his authority''.

With regard to reajoning on this (ubjed, Dr.
Balguy's two Confecration Sermons are fo perfedt,
without any fuperfluity, that I need only recom-
mend them to your perufal. If you chufe a fpe-
cimen, I v^ill take one from the" latter fermon. —
Certainly, if minifters be felf- ordained, modeft
merit will never be called forth ; prelumptuous
vanity will be ever ready to obtrude itfelf ; noify
ignorance will overpower diffident wifdom : and

what

•» Matt. xxlv. 45.

«= Dr. Balguy, Ser. 7, page 122. *• On the other hand," &c»

lyO BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXIII. XXIV.

what will hinder vicious men from rifing into
power ; efpecially if any confiderahlc emoluments
are annexed to the Miniftry r — Nay, what can
hinder dodtrines oppofite to each other from being
taught ; to the utter extirpation of all religious
principle ? What can hinder different men from
officiating in fuch different ways, as to produce
difturbance and confiifion, and put to flight all
religious affedion? And how can it be brought
about, that certain appearances, modes of drefs
and behaviour, fhall be fo aflbciated with piety
and virtue, as inftantly to produce good feelings'*
in the mind? — Befides, the learning requifite to
make a man a good miniftercf Religion, requires,
that the Miniftry ihould be made a fcparate Pro-
feffion. How much the opinions of that profeflion
fhould weigh with the People has been fliewn in the
Jecond Book.

xxiii. I will here reft my direct proof : fome
little indireSi (cems proper under this Article.

XXIV. Sodnus" produces JcJs viii. 4. and xi. 19.
as proofs, that men could preach in the time of
the Apoftles without being ordained ; nay, preach
with fuccefs. But thofe who, in thofe paffiges,
are mentioned as being difperfed by perfecution,
and as going into foreign countries, might be only
on the footing of the captive^ in Iberia, or of the
Ifraelitifli niaid, that attended^ on the wife of
'Naaman : — they being themfelves members of re-
vealed religion, could not but recount, in conver-,
fation, (xaX«yT£?'', Ads xi. 19.) the wonders be^

longing

„ ^ No ft.ige-pla\'ers ufed to be allowed to become minifters ;
Bingham, 4. 4. 7.

*= Opera, Vol. i, page 3S3. — See Se£l. v, of this Art.

*" Seft. V, i z Kings v, 2.

•* The word Ads viii. 4. and A£ls xi. 20. is ivxfyi>^i^u, to
\d\ the good news of j iva[-/0.i^i\v ihi-j'^t-^ix^, viKr.i, SiC. to teH

the

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXV. iy|

longing to it; and might very well be fuppofed to
make converts. — Not but Tome of the difperfed
might have received a regular commijjion to preach;
the paflages contain nothing to the contrary : at
all tin:ie5 there have been many converts made by
private conference ; fom'etimes by minifters, fome-
times by private perfons : this cafe of fpreading
the tidings of Chriftianity during difperlion, occa-
iioned by perfecution, does not feem to come up
to that of publk preaching in a regular Chriftian
congregation.

XXV. Afecond objeftion may be this;

Many of the texts quoted in the Proof jufl now
given, relate to the appointments of the Jirji
teachers of the Gofpel, who had miraculous powers
committed to them. Such teachers muft be li-
mited, as to their number, and commiffion.

I fhould anfvver, that no texts of fcripture are
proofs, but after fome kind of parity of reafoning;
as was mentioned feveral times under the twenty-
fecond Article, and proved in the eleventh Chapter
of the firflBook: difference of circumfiiancesmxull
be attended to. Let then the texts be read over
with this view ; let a reafonable man fee how many
things there are in them not peculiar to teachers
endued with miraculous powers. How' many
things, which would have been faid had it pleafed
God to truft the reception of Chriftianity to rea-
foning only ; or to prophecies, and fuch proofs as
we now poflefs.

Baxter (on Councils, page 465) fpeaks of tzvo forts
of Minifters— i . to teach men new doclrine, and

2. fianding

the good news of Liberty, Viftory, &c. (fee Parkhurll's Lexi-
con).—Hence an Evangelijl (2 Tim.iv. 5.) may beany perfon,
Biftop, Deacon, or Layman, employed to ad; as a Mijponary,
where Chriftianity was yet iinkmzvn; ivafyeXi^etv Xoyov, or
Xgjfov, to tell t/ie good news, of the fFord, ovot Chrilt; any
one might do that.

lyZ BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVI.

z.Jianding do6lrine : but there are as many texts as
ieein natural, circum (lances confidered, implying
a fuccclTion of minitlcrs having no miraculous
powers. I Tim. v. 22. — Tit. i. 5.— i Pet. v. 2.
— Heb. xiii. as before : nor can we conceive Matt,
xxviii. 18. or John xxi. 15, he. to be temporary;
or Afts XX. 28.— Paul's reparation Ads xiii. 2.
feems a precedent for after times ; his miraculous
powers, and immediate revelation might have fuf-
ficed for him. — John x. 16. looks to after times.
■ — Rom. X. 13, &c. is not reftrained in its fenfe by
times. — Nor is i Cor. xiv. 40. — The Fathers rea-
ibncci on fcripture thus. — See Heylin, page 242.
SeA. 13. .

XXVI. I will next take fome notice;, of what
has been quoted from Dr. rriefiley. To m\it feems
confufed, and inconfiftent with itfelf. — Confufed^
as not fhewing in what charader the Methodifls
are addreiTcd. Are they addrefled as DifTentcrs,
or as members of the eflablifhed Church ? if as
Dlffenters, and they will acknowledge themfelves
to be fuch, I fee no great difficulty ; let them
follow his advice; let them appoint perfons to
preach and give the Sacraments, in the way they
think beft; and may fuccefs attend them! may
virtue and piety be the refult ! they do nothing
inconfiftent with our a^rticle : fuch perfons are not
felf-ordered. Who knows too but in appointing
they may ufc prayer, and impolition of hands ? —
But if they infifl that they are members of the
Eftablifhed Church of England, then they perhaps
may be addrefled as fuch by Dr. Prieftley :-— and
can members of any fociety be rightly perfuaded
to violate the Laivs of that fociety ? for " the
lef^al defignation of particular perfons to thefe
offices" (the facred offices of religion) " cannot but

piean^^

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVI. ij^

mean, if it means anything, tliat all who are not
appointed, are' excluded."

Perhaps the main purport of Dr. Prieflley's
advice may be to induce the Methodifts to carry
the matter o'l exhortation farther than they do; or
fhall thofe who exhort, Zidm\m?itv facraments ? this
mioht occafion a greater diflindion or diftance
between the Methodifts and the Church of Eng-
land than at prefent fubfifts; but that end we muft
not fuppofe to be the end particularly defired :
and I fee no good purpofe which it could anfwer
to religion in general. The Methodifts in Eng-
land do not feem to be any way reftrained in their
exhorting; and they are not, that I ever heard,
in want of a greater number of Minifters than
they already poffefs, for the adminiftration of the
Sacraments.

The paflage before us appears to me not only
to be exceptionable on account of its confounding
fituations, but on account of the inconjijlency of
its different parts; as I underftand them. Dr.
Prieftley firft fays, " let any perfon whom you
think qualified, teach, exhort, and adminifter
Sacraments :" and afterwards declares (as I under-
ftand, for the expreffion is not totally free from
ambiguity) that no fet of men have an '* exclu-
live right" to teach, exhort and adminifter lacra-
ment; but if certain men were appointed by the
methodifts, in preference to others, to perform
thefc offices, would not they have an excluf.ve
right to perform them? — furely it cannot be faid,
that Dr. Prieftley does not advife the Methodifts
to appoint : the word appoint is ,not ufed, but
Ibme perfons are fpoken of as " qualified" in fuch
a manner as to imply that others are dij quali-
fied j and who are qualified or difqualified,. the

Methodifts
* Dr. Balguy, page 122.-

174 KOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVII. XXVIII,

Methodifts are to determine; is not this, in fub-
fiance, appointing? Nor will it, I hope, be urged,
that minifters fo appointed have no exclufive right
to preach, &c. becaufe they cannot exclude other
minifters; thej'- exclude all thofe from whom they
are diftinguifhed and feparatcd ; which is all that
can be meant. No Papift would fay, that ordi-
nation, even in his Church, gives fuch an exclufive
light of miniftering, that no one can lawfully
minifter in aTurkilh mofque. — But enough.

XXVII. I here put an end to our Proof, direft
and indircd; and proceed to the Application.

It may not perhaps be amifs here to take a lliort
form of alFent.

' It is contrary to fcripture, and to reafon, that
any man ihould act as a Minifter in an ecclefiafti-
cal fociety, merely from his own choice : he ought
to be appointed. And though it may become
him devoutly to refer his appointment to the Provi-
dence of Gody he is to a5l upon it as an ordinance
of Man-y and to conlider himfelf as receiving it
immediately from thofe, who are vefted with autho-
rity for conferring it, by the religious Society to
which he belongs.'

XXV III. There feems alfo room for a few words
on the fub]e6t of mutual conccjjions.

Though what has been laid down about the ap-
pointment of Minifters, is very tnie^ yet it has
not an invariable force in all cafes. Let us take
two extremes. In a large monarchy, with various
ranks of men, if there be a church eftabliftied,
felf-ordering, in fuch a church, would be greatly
inconvenient and hurtful ; for the Church would
be a large body as well as the State; and every
large body requires a great number of fubordina-
tions to reduce it to unity in action ; and when
there arc many ranks of citizens, nice rules are

wanted

BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXVIII, lytf

wanted in order that each rank may feel die in-
fluence of Religion, by means of the Miniftry.
Ambition and intereft too, in the cafe fuppofed,
offer flrong temptations to worldly men to pufli
themfelves into the facred orders.

But take the other extreme, and much fewer
rules and appointments are wanted. As in fmall
feled companies, and focieties, you fometimes fee
every one know his place, the moll accomplifhed
take the lead, and things rightly conduded, by a
mere feeling of propriety; fo can one almoll con-
ceive it poffible for a fmall religious fociety to pro-
ceed, if compofed of men unafFededly pious, and
aiming at the general good. Perhaps a ftate of
perfecution is moil likely to occafion fuch a fociety,
efpecially if the people perfecuted, are, like the
Wddenfes, of great limplicity of manners. Yet
this, I fear, is rather too Utopian : Religious af-
fedions want much regulation; and that is not
always fufpeded ; fo that men are run away with,
before they are aware : the pride of teaching reli-
gion, fets fome men upon teaching it before they
are duly qualified; while the habitually modeft
want drawing out, and compelling to fliew them-
felves, by a judgment fuperior to their own. Or-
dinarily then, in pradice, no religious fociety ought
perhaps to be left without fome regulations deter-
mining who (hall teach and prefide in it; but yet
the nearer any fociety approaches to this extreme,
the fewer rules it need be reftrained by. In all
intermediate cafes, more rules will be neceflary
than in this extreme, and fewer than in the other;
and as you approach to the other, before-m.en-
tioned, regulations, fuch as are really wanted, will
continually be found more numerous and com-
plicated.

As to thofe who- infill upon it, that all teaching

ought

I^S BOOK IV. ART. XXIII. SECT. XXIX.

ought to be giiided by immediate and fenfible in-
fpiration, we can only leave them to their own"
feelings, if what has been faid is ineffeiftual.

XXIX. If we conclude with any hint refpecling
Improvement^ we may fay, that a right agreement,
and a ready perception about the nature of cafes of
Necejfity, and the duties arifing from them, might
be of confiderable ufe, in a fubjecl where they fo
often occur. When men ad irregularly through
neceflity, we excufe the paft, but expect regularity
in future; the return to regularity is to be with
as little delay as poffible; and reftitution and com-
penfation are to be made as far as ability reaches.

It would alfo be very ufeful for men to know
habitually, and feel familiarly, as it were, how in-
ftitutions may be afcribed to the Providence of
God, without their being lefs conlidered as the or-
dinances of man on that account.

^ See Dr. Balgiiy, page il6; referred to before. Art. xv.
near cndt

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I. l']^

ARTICLE XXIV.

OF SPEAKING IN THE CONGREGATION IN SUCH
A TONGUE AS THE PEOPLE UNDERSTANDETH.

IT is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of
God, and 'the cuftom of the Primitive Church,
tohavepublick Prayer in the Church, or to minifter
the Sacraments in a tongue not underftanded of
the people.

1 . The principal part of the HiJIory of this
Article, comes into a fmall compafs. The Church
of Chrift got divided, as to the part which we
are mod concerned with, into Eqftern and fVeJierUi
or into Greek and Latin : Conjlantinople being the
capital of the Eaftern empire, became the capital
of the Greek Church : and fo Rome of the Latin
Church. Liturgies muft of courfe be made in
Greek for one country, and in Latin for the other.
In both parts of the world, fuch Liturgies would
fpreadi they would alfo become venerated and
facred; on that account they would be continued,
and perfifled in, even when they became unintel-
ligible to the common people. To change them
would have been to alter *' the univerfal* order of
God's Church." The ignorance of the people,
and their fuperftition, made barbarous devotions

not
* Rhemifts on i Cor. xiv.

VOL. IV. M

1^8 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV, SECT. I,

not unacceptable to them j the abufe was carried
on till it was checked, in the weftern church, by
the Reformation''.

This is the chief part of our Hiftory; but it
may be proper to mention a few more fads which
have fome relation to the fubjed of forms of devo-
tion in words not commonly underftood.

There feem to have been myftical cannina
in many ages. — Magicum carmen: — Magorum
Carmina. — Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom, i.
mentions fome Heathens, " who thought thofe
prayers mod effedual, which were uttered in a
barbarous language." (Comber's Advice, page 82,

One Elxaij a leader ot a Chrlftian (cdi in early
times, is faid to have ordered liis followers to ufe
an unintelligible prayer. We have the words in
Epiphanius's nineteenth Hcrefy : as Epiphanius
did not underftand them, xve may conceive it pof-
fible, that they were not underllood by thofe who
ufcd' them.

The Jews fpoke Syriac and Greek, in common
converfation, when they ufcd pure Hebrew in their
Synagogues'^. It has been thought, that the ear-
lieft Chriftian Liturgies were in Hebrew. (See
Brerewood, chap. 26. page 185.)

The Copts^ or Chriftians in ^gypt, have fer-
vice in the old Egyptian, or Coptic^ though even
the Pricfts themfclves underftand very imperfedly
what they pronounce. Arabic is, as I liave been

informed,

•> By what degrees t)ie Latin ceafed to be a vulgar tongue in
Italy, Gaul, &:c. how far by incurfions of barbarous nations,
how far by other caufes, is a difHcult fiibjt-d. Sonietliing upon
it may be found in Brere-.oooH^s Enquiry, Chap. 2. 4. ^. — And
in U/iitr, ca.p. 4. — .'ind Wharton's addition, c;ip. .<.

' See Lardner's woiks. Vol. 9. page 514.

^ See Locke's Note on i Cor, xiv. 4, page 129, quarto.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT I. 179-

informed, the language commonly ' ufed in ^gypt
fince thefixteenth Century.

Many Greek Chriftians do not pray in the
Greek which they commonly talk, but in pure
Greek ^: and this, in all their Monafteries, though
in Africa. The Romani/is allow the propriety ^ of
pure Greek when ufed; and they do not objedl to
Hebrew\

The Rujfians are did to ufe the Sdavonian^
(which is fpoken of as an extenfive or general lan-
guage) in their places of worfhip\ — And the
Mohammedans Arabic; where it is not the verna-
cular tongue.

Notwithftanding thefe inftances, it does not
appear, that in the Chriftian Church there was
any notion of prayers in an unknown tongue, as a
thing fettled and defended, for 600 or 800, or
perhaps 900 years. Bingham fays' 1000 ; but
mufh not Latin, &c. have ceafed to be vernacular
in lefs than 1000 years?

There is a famous pafTage in Origen's work
againft Celfus*', in which he replies to an objeclion

made

■^ Book I. Chap. ix. SeiSl. v. But Brerewood thinks, that
the Coptic prayers are in Syriac, or in a fecond fort of Chaldee.

^ So, I think, Ricaut fays. See Veneer, page 634, and

Brerewood, page 196, bottom.

s Fulke on Khem. Teft. fol. 294.

'^ The Engliih Chaplain at St. Peterfburgh informed a friend
of mine in 1790, that the common people underftand this
Sclavonian, but imperfedly.

Brerewood fpeaks of Ruffian, as a dialed of Sclavonian, page
200 : he fays too, that i;ciavonian is the vulgar tongue of more
than one third of Europe; that fixty nations fpeak it. .

* See Fulke on i Cor. xiv. in Rhem. Teft. Seft. 8. and 15.
— Brerewood, Chap. 26, page 185. and Bingham, Book 13.
Chap 4. Se6l. i .

^ Orig. contra Cel. Lib. 8. 13. The God of all languages
hears men pray in all languages, as with one voice. — Ben/ieton
this Article has this paffage : (that i?, in his DireBions^ &c.J
For Valentinians fee Appeadix to the firft Book, bed. x v i n.

M 2

l8o BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I.

made to the Chriftians, as if they addrelTed Angels
hy barbarous names, and thought their prayers
would have no effect if they did not : this might
be true of Valentinians, &c. but in clearing Chrif-
tians in general, he fays, ' O TO-a<r»if SixhtKTH xuciof tuv

Here I will read a paflage from our Homily on
Common Prayer and Sacraments, (page 279, 280,
oflavo.)

In Jeroni's^ works we have an account of the
funeral of his Difciple Paulay a Roman Macron :
multitudes from the cities of Palefline attended it :
In order that every one might have a clear under-
ftanding of fome part at leaft of the Service,
Pfalms were fung in four different languages;
Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, Latin''-'. Dr. Fuike gives
a pretty tranflation of a paffage in the Epitaphium
iSIepotiani, ending with, " the favage nature ot the
^^j"," " have now broken their harfli language
into the fwcet fong of Chrift."

It appears, that Latin was fpoken by ordinary
people in Africa, in the time of Augufiin-y he fayb»
that he learnt it by hearing his Nurfes" talk it;
and that he fometimcs uled expreffions, as did
other perfons, which were rather vulgar, in order
to fuit himfelf to the more ordinary people'' : thefe
expreffions muff Ix- ia J^aiin.

Pope

' T. 4. Ed. Ben. Epitaphium, ad Eultochiuri); Eudochium
was the daughter of Pau!;i : fee Fulke 011 Rhem. Teil. i Cor.
xiv. Seft. 8. The Roman Paula, of noble birth, had left
Rome, and travelled into Palelline, kc. where (he had founded
Monafteries, I've, there (he died

"» The word Hehre^i) is not in all the MSS.

" Ad Heliodorum, Tom. 4. Edit. Bened. Heliodorus was

the Uncle, I think, of Neporianus. — Bejji, in Thrace; to the S.
of the moH foutliern part of the Danube.

° ConfeflT. 1. 14. mentioned by Fulke on i Cor. .\iv. Se^. 14.
Rhem. Teft.

f A\:ig. in Pfal. 123. 128. Et de Doft. Chrill. 2. n-— -

Fulkr

BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I. l8l

Pope Leo III. however, as alfo a Pope Bene-
dicts ordered, that the Nicene Creed Ihould be
ufed in Greek, even in the Latin Church £ during
public worihip : left to revov rrf <J'i«AejcT» fliould
crive occafion to fome blafpkemy. — To rtvov, &c. is
tranllated (by Unier% 1 luppo'fe,) " idiomatis an-
giijlia ;" the Greek account of this matter is from
a fragment of Phoim. — M all times, probably,
one great reafon for not ufing the Vulgar Tongue,
has been the fear of Profanation.

Cave' mentions that Pope John VIIL whom he
places in 872, did, in the year 880, when the
Moravians were converted, allow them " facra
peragere lingua vernacula;" that is, in the Scia-
von i an.

Innocent III. (the depofer of King John of
England) held a Council of Lateran, (that is, in
a Church dedicated to St. John at Rom-e, and
called Lateran, from the Palace' on whofe fcite it
(lands) in 1215. Apart of Chap, ninth of the
Afts of this Council, is translated by Dr. Fiilke";

in

Fulke ibidem. Here might be mentioned Jujiinian ; placed by
Gave A D. 527; (but the Ncvellce conititutiones after 535.)
who ordered "Priefts to fpeak fo as to be heard and underftood,
Novell, 137, cap. 6. (page 682 of Corpus^, 8vo. Tom. 2.) this
mentioned by Fox, page 9. Martyrology (or Afls and Monu-
ments,) and in our Hornily on Common Prayer and Sacraments;
and in Bingham.

1 Benedia the third, I fuppofe; though there were feveral
fhort- lived Popes between Leo and him.

' See Ulher, de Symbolis, page 25.

' Hift. Lit. T. 2. page 61, or Index, Joannes VIII. Papa.
But Dr. Fulke gives this to Pope Nicholas I. (him Cave places
in 858,) Rhem. Teft. on 1 Cor. xiv. Seft. 8. — -He does not fay
Moravuiyis, but Scahonians. Burnet alio mentions the fad.

' Chambers fays, in his Diftionary, Lateran w^s firft the
name of a Man, then of the Palace where he lived ; then of
the Church, Sec. built from that Palace.

" On Rhem. TeA. on 1 Cor. xiv. Sed. 8.

^^ 3

l82 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I.

in which it is ordered, that in thofe places where
men of different nations mix, proper perfons fliould
be provided to celebrate divine fervice in their (.Wi-
{event /anguages, and according to their '^ different
ceremonies. Yet this fame Pppe oppofed the
people of Metz (Metenfes) about their having the
Scriptures in their Vulgar Tongue ; but not in any
Council : In this Council of Lateran, Cave fays,
there were many Orators from foreign Courts.

It feems as if the Schoolmen might be reckoned
amongft the adverfaries to Prayers in an unknown
tongue. Archbifliop Ufher (de Scrip, et Sacris
vernaculis, page 235,) has fomeching to the pur-
.pofe. Thomas Aquinas owns, that, prayers were
in the vulgar tongue in the time of Chrift. I fee
alfo, he fays, that though Chrifl could have Ipokcn
different languages, he (poke only one; becaufe
he fpoke only to one nation. Dr. Comber tells
us, that Gabriel Biel pleads {Irongly for having
prayers in a known tongue. (Advice, &c. page
84.)

The authors of the Rhemilh Teftament fliew
no referve in defending the ufe of prayers, &c. in
Latin ; I mean, by thofe who do not underlland
it : they ufe many arguments in favour of their
opinion ; fuch of thofe arguments as feem to have
any weight, may be examined by and by. — We
have in the margin, " The Peoples'' devotion
nothing the leffe for praying in Latinc."— And,
*' It is not neceffarie tounderftand ourprayers^"

The Council of Trent is more guarded; it orders
frequent explanations'' to be made by the Paftors,
of what is ii\id at Mais ; thefe arc to be made

on

'^ Brcrewood mentions this, page 1 S9.

y On I Cor. xiv. Fulke's Sett. 1 3 and 1 4.

* Here one might read Sir Edwin Sandys's Speculum Europe,
page 7.
» SefT. 22. Cap. 8. — Alfo Canon 9.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. I, 183

on Sundays and Holidays : — And that, left the
Jfieep of Chrift fhould be hungr}', and the babei
want bread. — Yet thofe are anathematized who
fay, that Mafs ought to be celebrated only in the
vulgar tongue.

Duphi " allows that divine fervice may be per-
formed in the vulgar tongue, where that is cufto-
mary'':" yet he " excufes the Latin and Greek
Churches for pieferving their ancient language;" — <■
and " alledges, that great care has been taken that
every thing be underflood by tranjlatmis.*"

We may laftly mention colledtively fome emi-
nent Romanifts who favoured our opinion :

Cardinal Cajetan, who died 1534, and Nicholas
of Lyra, who died 1340, go fb far as to prefer
prayers in the vulgar tongue, as Comber men-
tions'. Gabriel Biel was fpoken of juft now as
being of the fame way of thinking. More may
be feen \^ U(her de Scripturis et Sacris vernaculis,
cap. 10^.

Brerewood alfo would furniih more inftances
of different languages amongft Chriflians ; but
thefe may be fufficient ; fo here I clofe my
Hiflory.

1 1 . The Explanation need not be long.

The difference between our prefent Article and

the

•* Mofheim, Appendix, as before.

' Comber's Advice, page 84. See alfo Veneer, page 63^,

•who mentions Mercer the lamous HebvailL In the prelent age
the celebrated Financier Necker wifties his Church would give
up the ufe of unknown tongues in public Devotions.

«* By Wharton, '690, 4to. this feems to contain a great deal
of learning, but more about the people's reading the Scriptures,
than about Sacra being vernacula, in ancient times. Cap. 8.

Se(5l. 4. page 235. is the paffage lately referred to Bingham,

13. 4. gives the title of this Book more fully; Hiftoria Dog-

matica, &c. He has alfo, I perceive, feveral of the faine

inftances^ which have been here made ufe of.

M 4

184 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. II.

the correfponding one of 1552, is fo didinflly
marked out by Bilhop Burnet, that I refer to him.

The word " Speaking," in the title, is explained
in the body of the Article, to mean praying and
adminiftering Sacraments; preaching is not men-
tioned, becaufe, I fnppofe, Sermons are every
where in the vernacular language : they are fo in
France^ and, I doubt not, the cafe is the fame in
other" catholic countries.

" Piiblic prayer"— fo that here is nothing of
private prayer; — this however is fpokcn of as being
fometimes in an unknown tongue, (unknown to
him who prays) as well as public : by the Rhemiftc',
and in our Homily^ ** Of common-prayer and
facraments." — Private prayer in any tongue under-
flood by him who prays, is allowed in the fecond
Preface to our Prayer-books.

Topics of reafon and utility are omitted in our
Article, but they are ufed in our Homily : — and
rightly : efpecially as fcripture could not treat the
precife queftion before us.

" A tongue not underftanded of the people,"
includes, in the reafon of the thing, a voice that
is not audible. — I believe it is common in the
Roman fervice for the Priefts to perform Maflcs in
fuch a voice : thefe may be what are called private
Maffes : — the French Diftionary of the Academy
calls this fort " bajfc mefle\"

I know

' SirF.dw. Sandys, fpeaking of the Roman religion in gene-
ral, oiipofes the Sermons to the Service, when he calls the

latter '^ -xLampe put oa/," &:c. page 8. S',)eculiim Europa*

And it is implied in the direAions to Pallors given by the
Council of Trent, jiift now mentioned, that the explanations
which they arc to give, muft be in the vulgar tongue.

f I Cor.xiv. Sedl 13. (Fulke). e Page 277, 8vo.

•^ In the 9th Canon, lately mentioned, of the 22d Seflion of
the Council of Trent, thofe arc .inathematizeJ, whocond-nm
the rite of the Romifli Church, quo fummilTa voce pars canoras
et verba confecrationis proferuntiir.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. II 1S5

I know not whether the meaning of the words
*' primithe Church" is quite agreed upon. Ben-
net, in his direftions, gives the above-mentioned
paffage of Origen as a proof, that the primitive
church allowed the ufe of different languages :
but, literally and properly, the primitive church
fliould mean the firji church ; or the Church of
Chrift in the A-poftoUc age. Indeed Bennet might
reafon, as' Wall does, thus;

Origen was born about 80 years after St. John
died'': confider when his grandfather might live;
— he might know from his grandfather if the
praftice of the primitive Church ftri(^Hy fo called,
favoured fuch a fcheme as worfliipping in lan-
guages not imderftood : — thus the writings of
the Fathers of the three hrft Centuries afford
good probable proofs of cuftoms in the Apofto-
lic age. — But yet the Church of England, at the
Reformation, was jealous about allowing any au-
thority but Icriptural; therefore the bcft expla-
nation of " the cuftom of the primitive church,"
feems to be, the cuftoms mentioned in fcripture. —
And confequently, " the word of God and the
cuftom of the primitive church," together, ihould
mean, the direftions and practices recorded in the
fcriptures.

But thole who wifh to go farther down, may
confult Bingham's Antiquities, Book 13. Chap. 4.
— And Uflier's " Hiftoria Dogmatica controverfias
intra Orihodoxos et Pontificios de Scripturis ec
Sacfis Vernaculis." — Efpecially the fourth and fifth
-Sections of his eighth Chapter. The title of the
fourth Section is, " In Ecclefia Primitiva, com-
mune officium vulgari lingua celebratum fuit."—
But his authorities are only the Apoftolic Conftitu-

tions,

» On Infant-Baptifm, Preface.

^ Origen is placed by Lardner in 230; he was born in 185.

l86 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT, III.

tions, which though ancient, are not now eflcemed
genuine : and a Liturgy called St, James's, but
probably not to be depended upon as compofed
by an Apoftle. Thefe feem to be his only autho-
rities that pretend to belong to the ApofloJic age :
he quotes from Jcrom, Clemens Alcxandrinus,
Auguftin and oihcrsj and ufes the Liturgies ot
Bafil and Chryfottom; but if thefe give us the
cuftom of the primitive Church, ftridiy fo called,
we can only believe, that they do fo on fuch pro-
bable grounds as have been lately explained.

III. \Vc now proceed to Pro^.

According to what was laft explained, we need
but make one propofition. — * It is contrary to di-
redions recorded in Scripture, to have Liturgies
in any language which is not generally intelligible
where they are ufed.*

This matter could not be diredly difcufled in
Scripture, as has been^ oblerved of feveral others;
but the fault mentioned i Cor. xiv. of ufing the
gift of tongues through ofhcntation, when it would
perplex inftcad of informing, is open to the fame
arguments and expoftulations with that of which
we are fpeaking, having Liturgies in unknown
languages". We may therefore apply, almoft im-
mediately, the paffagcs of that chapter to our pre-
ftnt purpofe. The whole chapter might be read,
but we may diftinguifli fome verfes as particularly
appofite; 2, 5. 6. 9. II. 16. 17. 19. 20. 23. 26. 31.
— From thele and feveral other paflages, it is very
clear, that thofe who had authority in conducing

religious

' Art. XXII.

»" See Warburton on the Spirit, page 21. See alfo Locke

on the 4th verfe, where he mentions, tliat Lightfoot looks upon
the unlnoivn tongue to mca.T\ Jleire^.n. Now if any Jew, turned
Chriftian, iifed Hebrew in Chnftian AfTemblies becaiile it w.ns a
Jaertd language, that cafe comes nearer our prcfcnt one than
Ipeaking with tongues, in general.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. III. 187

religious aflemblies, were to adapt their rules and
laws to the moral and religious improvement of the
generalit}^ as alfo to their comfort.

The unlearned are mentioned repeatedly ; and
all are enjoined to a6t like men ot mature under-
Jlanding. — Ont can fcarcely read this chapter to
any purpofe, or even attend to its meaning uninr
terruptedly, without Ibme idea of v/hat was meant
by the gift of Prophecying. Mr. Locke" iinder-
llands it to include three things : predicting fome
events, finging infpired hymns, and interpreting
myftical and difficult parts of fcripture by infpi-
ration : — this interpreting is diftinguilhable from
interpreting what was faid in an affembly by thole
who had the gift of Tongues. — Prophecying was
carried on in the vulgar tongue; St. Paul magnifies
its worth, in comparifon of i'peaking with tongues;
but then he meant in aflemblies where no foreigners
required information.

That the fcriptures look upon the lower ranks
of men as important, appears from many places
both of the Old and New Teftament. The para-
ble of Lazarus might be mentioned in particular.
Conned that with John xxi. 15, &c. and with
Ads XX. 28, 29. and negled in edifying the poor
and unlearned, will fecm no trifling matter. — And
if St. Paul infifts lb ftrongly on our attending to
principles of Utility, it may be confidered as a
fcriptural argument to urge, that the better prayers
are underflood, the more good they do; elpecially
if well compofed, fo as to comprehend brief and
plain exprelTions of the mod important doclrines;
and that it is in vain to compole them well, if, at
lafl, they are unintelligible.

But we fliould fay a word or two of fcriptural
practice. — Chn?i fpoke no unknown tongue: St.

Paul
° Locke on i Cor. xii. 10.

l88 BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. IV.

Paul avoided it, and only permitted "* it, as it were,
at home. The office of Interpreter was appointed
in order to prevent anything from being finally
\inintelligiblc.— The Church of Chrift fometimes
prayed collectively, as related in Ads iv. 24. and
clfewhere. We may add, that no Liturgy was ever
originally compofed in any language not familiar to
tlie people by whom it was to be uled.

IV, So inucli for direft proof; fomc arguments
of our adverfaries may fecm perhaps to require an
anfwer, or proof of the indireft fort. — Their ar-
guments in favour of their opinion, are fo many
objedions toours.

1. It has been urged, that the chapter on
which we*" build, docs not relate to public wor-
Ihip, but only to private conferences. But it feema
to me to relite to my meetings whatfoever, which
could tempt men to difplay their powers by way
of gaining admiration : " when ye come together*^
whercfoever it may be; to fing, pray, give thanks,
prophecy, hear revealed interpretations of Scrip-
ture; where the people may be required, or in-
duced, to fay Amen.

The word church occurs five times in the chap-
fer, and is bppofed to ^'- heme \' the larger the
Airembly, the greater the abfurdity of puzzling
them : the Romilh argument feems to fuppofe the
contrary.

2. It has been faid, tliat a general language is
moft convenient for Jlrangers. The number of
learned flrangcrs is very Imall, in comparilbn of
that of unlearned natives : belldes, as each ftranger
is at home fometimes, he receives moll benefit
•upon the whole, from the rule of having Liturgies
in the vukar toniiuc : I ihould have thouoht it a

" I Cor xiv. I, (with Locke's note) and 59,
' I Cor. xiv.

great

BOOK IV ART. XXIV. SECT. IV. 189

great pity, when I was at Church in Holland, that
a Dutch congregation fhouid lofe the edification of
a Dutch Liturgy, for any good I (hould have got
from their ufing a Latin one.

3. The Romaniils are ready to fay, that their
Latin Liturgy is made intelligible by tranflations,
explanationSy ceremonies^ : but translations are not
uled in church j I mean, by the Minifters; the
mind does not go with the words by means of a

tranflation only publilhed, not publicly read.

Thofe who cannot read, are as much at a lofs in
that cafe as without tranllation. Explanations
may give a general idea; but that is very imper-
fed work : ceremonies make but little impre/Tion
on thofe who do nor underftand the words which
accompany them. An unconneded word may be
explained, fuch as Amen, Hallelujah, Hofatma; or
fuch fhort fayings as Ku^je eXsTxrov, Dominus vobif-
cumi but a fentence is quite a different thing;
what mull a feries of fentences be 1

4. We are told, that we might fubmit to unin-
telligible prayers, becaufe, in any vulgar tongue,
many things occur, which are not underftoodt in
the Pfalms, for inftance, and Prophecies. It inav
be fo; our knowledge is imperfed, and lb are our
underftandings; we muft labour to improve our-
felves j but that is not to be done by purpofely
making things obfcure, where obfcuricy can be
avoided.

To impofe ignorance by choice, in matters of
revealed religion, is to counterad revelation ; wliick
mud be a good, however men may have -it in their
pov/er to pervert or mifreprefent it. — The faculty
of fpecch is a good, though the imperfedions in
language are great : no one would be willing to
lofe the faculty on that account ; yet to pray in

« Dupm as above.^ — Rhem, Teft. &c.

190 BOOK IV. ART.S'xrV. SECT. IV.

an unknown tongue is to deprive many human
beings of one important ufe of it. But when
Pfahns, Prophecies, &:c. are the moft difficult, all
people receive fome benefit from them ; fome reh-
gious ideas, fome pious feelings.

5. Sometimes difpute has been carried fo far,
that it has been faid, there is good m the common
people's not underftanding Liturgies. If Chrift
bad thought fo, he would have only given us the
Lord's prayer in Phoenician, or in Hebrew : and
would have forbidden its being ufed in any other
language. The people may doubtlefs want inftruc-
tion, and, deprived of it, may attach wrong ideas
to religious expreffions ; but every day's teaching
may leifen this evil, and, at the fame time, mend
the heart, as well as the underftanding, of both
thofe who receive inftruftion and thofe who
give it.

6. Laftly, It has been held, that men are more
devout for being ignorant : or, according to the
proverbial exprcffion, ' Ignorance is the Mother of
Devotion.^ — That ignorance may occafion fome
kind of rude, barbarous emotions in the mind,
when attending to fuperior beings, will fcarccly
be denied ; hut what kind of devotion is that 1
the favage trembles at an Eclipfe, the ignorant
attributes the effects of eledlric fire to the imme-
diate agency of Satan"; but this is very diftbrenc
from the devotion arifmg from religious " truth
and foberncfs'.'* Fanatical terrors have very little
effedf in giving the minti fteady and rational prin-
ciples of adioii : Ignorance may be the Modier
of Superftition or Enthullafm ; it may even con-
ceive and biing forth Hypocrifyj but it will

never

' Art. x.Sc(^. L. where is a paragraph from Doomfday-book
of St Julian's Shrewfbury.
* Afts xxvi. 25.

SOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT, V. IpTt

never give birth to that Love of God and man ;
which, the better informed it is, has the greater
tendency to make the Chriflian uniformly and ef-
fedually virtuous, '^ fteadfaft, unmoveable, always
abounding in the work of the Lord."

I will mention no more arguments, or objec-
tions; you may think I have already mentioned
too many, in fo plain a cafe; but it has fome-
times feemed, that objedlions might lead to pro-
fitable oblervations, when they are not formidable
to any important truth.

V. What little I (hall fay, in the way of Jp-
plication^ may be placed either to the head of
mutual conciliation, or to that of Improvements:
in the prefent cafe what conciliates, improves.

An ancient dead language, it mull be con-
feffed, has, by being fixed, fome advantages for
religious worfliip . it is venerable, free from vul-
garity, nay it is fometimes, as we find from our
Latin Articles, even more perfpicuous than an ob-
folete vernacular tongue. If fuch language be
general^ it has ftill more advantages; as Latin is
amongft learned Europeans, French amongft the
polite; and the lingua Franca amongft the mer-
cantile that have any connexion with any fliore of
the Mediterranean. The Helleniftic Greek ufed to ^y
be very general in our' Saviour's time. — If there
could be fuch a thing as a facred language, that
would have llrong efFeds; in the fame manner as a
facred edifice; fet apart entirely for purpofes of re-
ligion. And if fuch facred language could ht fixed
and geiieral^ it might be worth while to hav£ Litur-
gies compofed in it, for the ufe of the more im-
proved in all different nations of the Globe. The
intercourfe of Nations with each other increafes
daily, and will increafe as the world improves".-— I

do
' Book I. Chap. vi. page 77. " If. xL 9.— Hab.ii. 14.

192 BOOK IV. AP.T. XXIV. SECT. V.

do not fee any impropriety in ufing Latin Prayers
in Univerfitics; Dr. Heylin fpeaks of their being
uied at Cliiift Church, Oxford, at early fervice,
when only members of the - Univerfity are fup-
pofed to be prefcnt : and he fays, he does not
underftand that, at the Reformation, it was " meant
but that the morning and evening fervice might be
uled, in Colleges and Halls of either Univerfity, in
the Latine Tongue, where all may be fuppofed to
undcrftand it." — Private prayers are exprefsly al-
lowed to be '* in any Language that they them-
felves" (the perfons who pray) " do underfl:and\"
— Whatever may be permitted or contrived, of this
fort, lliould be calculated, not to promote pedantry
or oftentation, but fpiritual improvement. *' Let
all things be done'' unto edifying'^ This muft be
the univerfal principle j and, in any flate of which
we can have the leaft conception, it cannot fail to
lead us to provide, in every nation, a Liturgy in
the vernacular tongue. However, it is one thing
to fay, that a thing ought to be done, and another
to fay, that people have always been unpardonable
for not doing it: — there have been times of fuch
grofs darkncls, that, when we look back upon
them, we feci almod in a (late of indifference about
the language in which the people prayed ; it occurs
to us, at the monienr, tliat they might have been
improved ; but then again we recoUect that the
Clergy were little more enlightened than the peo-
ple : and we apply to the church the words of our
Saviour J " it therefore the light that is in thee be
darknefs, how great is that darkncfs!" — Now, how-
ever, better profpedU begin to dawn upon us :

thouiih

CD

» " Corcertiing the fervice of the Church.'* Prefixed to

Prayer-l onks, inSp.irrow's collcv^ion, pagesoi. Q^EIiz. men-
tions, that the colleges had petitioned for leave to ulc L^itia
Pray errs.

y 1 Cor. xlv. j6.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIV. SECT. V. 193

though feme PopKh countries may be flow and
flnggifh in advancing towards civilization, yet that
which, is neareft to us, has, of late, taken ample
ftrides ; and it is firmly to be expected, that, if the
rage of philofopkizing leaves any fubftance of re-
vealed Religion, any Chriftian Church, of magni-
tude and importance, there will not, ere long, be
any objecflion to making the forms of public wor-
fhip intelligible to the people^.

^ I 797, 1 leave this as it was written at the end of 1 791, to
take its chance of feeming groundlefs and chimerical.

VOL. IV. N ARTICLE

194 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. I.

ARTICLE XXV.

OF THE SACRAMENTS.

SACRAMENTS ordained of Chrift, be not
only badges or tokens of Chriftian men's pro-
feffion ; but rather, they be certain fiire witnelles,
and efFedual figns of grace, and God's will towards
us, by the which he doth work invifibly in us, and
doth not only quicken, but alfo ftrengthen and
confirm our Faith in him.

There are two Sacraments ordained of Chrift
our Lord in the Gofpel •, that is to fay, Baptifm,
and the Supper of the Lord.

Thofe five, commonly called Sacraments, that is
to fay. Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matri-
mony, and Extreme Undlion, are not to be
counted for Sacraments of the Gofpel, being fuch
as have grow^n, partly of the corrupt following of
the Apoftles, partly 'are ftates of life allowed in
the Scriptures : but yet have nor like nature of
Sacraments with Baptifm, and the Lord's Supper,
for that they have not any vifible fign or ceremony
ordained of God.

The Sacraments were not ordained of Chrift to
be gazed upon, or to be carried about ; but that
we (hould duly ufe them. And in fuch only as
worthily receive the fame, they have a wholefome
effeA or operation : but they that receive them
unworthily, purchafe to themfelves damnation, as
Saint Paul faith.

I. Wc

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. 1. tl. I95

I. We have now before us fcvQn Articles upon
the fubjedt of Sacraments; this twenty-fifth treats
of Sacraments in general, and of thofe which we
tejed. It is always dirHcuk to make general ob*
fervations before thofe particular ones of which,
they confifl ; in the analytical method the parti-
culars would come firft, but it is moft ufual to
give reafonings to the world in a fynthetic form. —
The confequence, however, of treating firft of
Sacraments in general will be, that feveral parts of
our prefent Article may be paffed over, without
either hiftory, explanation, or proof; I mean thofe
which, though exprefled in general terms, relate
only to Baptifm, or the Lord's Supper.

II. Our Hijlory, according to this, need only
be of the /even Romifli Sacraments, colledively,
and of the/i.v, taken feparately, which we rejed.

I feem to have a general idea of the manner in
which the feven Romifli Sacraments might acquire
and lofe their celebrity. Men of religious cha-
rafters begin with obeying the injundions of
Chrift, and following the example of his Apoftles
and their immediate fuccelibrs ; a facred regard for
every obfervance grows ftronger and (tronger ; new
particulars fliew themfelves, in which zeal may be
manifefted and exerted; one pious man tries to go
a ftep beyond another; a third is determined to
furpals them both j ordinances, at firft fimple, get
to be clogged with a multitude of ceremonies,
and adorned with fplendor'' and magnificence. —
Reafon makes no oppofition, or when it makes
any is difregarded, or contemned ;— and thus, what
was originally rational and plain, runs into excefs
and folly. —Some at length fee this with the eyes

of

* Something of tjiis fort is defcrlbed in Mofheira, Cent.ij.
Part a. Chap. 4. Sefl. i. page 107, 8vo, Vol. 3.

N Z

196 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.

of common fenfe, and labour to impofe reflraints
and contrive regulations; others encourage them-
felves in difguft and love of novelty, and, either
through palFion or afFcclation, throw the whole
afide.

But to be more particular.

We are told, that Juftin Martyr and Tertullian
fpeak of no more*" facraments than two. — The
fame is faid of Ambrofe^ who wrote concerning
Sacraments.— Theodoret fpeaks of fome Chriftians
who were** called Enchitcc, becaufe they were for
Praj^er without Sacraments : and of fome, who
conceived fo highly of i\-\Q fpiritual nature of Chrif-
tianity, that they would allow of no matter or
element whatfoever. They had the name of Afco-
druta, A<n(.oS^>iTO(,i, and they are the more worthy of
our notice, as their notion fcems to be the fame
vi'ith that of our modern §luakers; though the
Quakers are faid, by Mofheim, to have had their
rife about the middle of the feventecnch Century.
The etymology of Afcodrutie is not well under-
ftood : even Theodoret (H^ret. Fab. lib. i. cap.
10.) feems at a lofs about them ; and I have con-

fulted

^ Veneer on the Article, page 64 t.

*^ By Bp. Bramhall ; quoted by Puller, page 274.

"^ See Rogers on the Art. he refers to no part of Theodoret's
viorks. — Euchitce (Ei;;i(;tTai) occur Hceret. Fab. Lib. 4. cap. 11.
— They were fometimes called MelTaliani, ME<7-<ra7iiavoi, and
fometimes Ev68cr«as-oj : they faid, that Bapti/m was no more
ufeful than a Razor; it cut of^m, but did not extirpate '\X.\ Sin
grew again ; fo they were for Frayer : I fee nothing about the
Eucharijl, in the account of them; they were great Enthujiafis :
They were tried, and, I think, banifhed, by Flavian Biihop of
Antioch; and written againft chiefly, by Amphilochius. — Onc
Hekrtic ConfeCiion, Chap. 19. refers to thefe if/(^//fl«/, under
Sacraments in general : and wc fee from that paflage, that the
ideas of our (Quakers were in !ieing at the time of the Reforma-
tion. Syntagma, page 67, of Part i. The Reformers feem to
have liked to refer recent errors to old times — See Synt. part 2,
page 13. Donatijls.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II. I97

fulted a number of books about the name, without
obtaining any fatisfadion. They feem to have
made this their fundamental principle, that invijible
things are not to be completed by vifible. Of
courfe they baptized not; but moreover they had no
^Hx f^vrv^ioiy no divine myjleries. This I under-
ftood as a general expreffion, though the Sacra-
ment of the Lord's Supper has fometimes the
name of the myfteries. Theodoret next fpeaks of
fome called Archontici^ A^^ovTmoi, with whom a
knowledge of God, of the myftic fort, feems to
have been all in all : thefe went fo far as to anathe-
matize To A«T^ov, x«» mu Twv y.vfnoiuv jU,5TaA7)v|/ty :—
BaptiJ'm, and the receiving of the holy M)JIeries.
— The word a.iroXvT^ua-ig, which is tranflated re-
demptio, means only, a mode of Baptizing; and
fo Wall feems to have underflood it. — On Infant
Baptifm, 2. 5. i.

Auguftin is faid, by the Rhemlfts on Gal.iv. 3.
to have fpoken of the /even facraments which are
held by the Roman ids -, and palfages are quoted
from different parts of his works in order to fhew
this; but Fulke feems to me to anfwer the Rhe-
mifts completely.— The opening for difpute in
this matter, is, that we find Sacramentum ufed in
different fenfes. It feems to be ufed for any em-
blematical adion of a facred import ; or, according
to the expreffion of our Homily% for ■=' anything
whereby an holy thing is fignified."— /^^/w^ of
feet has been accounted a facrament; and in the
Greek Church there was a Feflival called Njttti,^ ^
(and probably is at this day) in which the'Patri-
arch, or AbtDot, or whoever was the head perfon
at the place, perfonated our Saviour, and waflied

the

« On Common Prayer and Sacraments, page 276, 8vo.
* See Cave's Lit. DiiT. N.TrT,,^.
N 3

T98 ROOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.

the feet of twelve poor perfons, who perfonated
the twelve Apofllcs : in Monafteries thefe were
poor Monks; and the Steward, or Burfar, took
the part of St. Peter, and aded his reluciance;
and the Porter was Judas Ifcariot, and underwent
much ridicule and many infults.

In ancient times there was alfo a Sacramen:° of
Catechumens, in which fait was given them as an
emblem of purity and incorruption, with reference,
probably, to Matt. v. 13. and Mark ix. 50. — In
this extended fenfe, all the typical a'^s of i\\tjews
were facraments ; and accordingly, circumcifton^ eat-
ing the pafchal Lawby &c. have been called Sacra-
ments of the old Law. In this extended fenfe of the
word facran:icnt,it has been difputed, amongft Chrif-
tians, whether there were vioi thirteen^' Sacraments;
and, as Images, of Chrift, Virgin Mary, &c. mean
fomething beyond the vifible figure, it has been
afked whether they might not be confidered as*
Sacraments.

I will give you the paflage of Auguflin's Letter
to Januarius\ as it is made the beginning of
King Edward's Article. It is tranflated in our
Homily, and in Fulke's anfvvcr to the Rhcmifts
on Gal. iv. 3.

Archbifliop

8 Bingham, 10. z, i6. ^ Forbes, 9. 3. 2.

» See Forbes, 9. i. 26. The Trent Catechifm, Part 2. Sec^.
X proves that fuch 2 queilion has been afked, by anfwering it
in the negative.

'' Ep. 54. or, in a different way of reckoning, Ep. 118,

Primo itaquetencre te volo, quod eft hiijus difputationis caput,
Dominum Noftrum Jefiim Cl.rifliim, ficut ipfe in Evangelic
lofiuitur, lejii jugo fuo nos fubdidifTe, ct Gircinx levi : undc
facramentis niimero pauciflimis, ohfcrvatione fhcillimis, fignifi-
catione pra-ftantifliniis, focictatem ncv: pcpuli coUigavit, iicuti
eft Baptifitius Trinitatis nomine confecratus, commiinicatio cor-
poris et fanguiiiis ipiius, et fi quid aliud in fcripturis canoiiicis
commendatur, &:c.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II. I99

ArchbifhopBramhall fays ' concifely, " Our church
receives not the feptenary number of Sacraments,
being never fo much as mentioned in any Scrip-
ture, or Council, or Creed, or Father, or ancient
author; firft divided by Peter Lombard in 1439 ;
iirft decreed by Eugenius the Fourth 1528; firll
confirmed in the Provincial Council of Senes 1457;
and after in the Council of Trent," Here the
number mentioning the time of Peter Lombard,
muft be wrongly printed ; Cave places him ia
1141 ; — 1 fuppofe the number belonging to Euge-
nius is put to Peter" Lombard ; and fo on.

Forbes'' fays, that Hugo de Sando Vidore,
(Hugh of St. Vi(flor) whom he places in 11 30,
and Cave in 1120, feems to him to have firft
mentioned {t\tn. facraments, though Peter Lom-
bard agrees with him. —The Abbot of St. Viftor
at Paris probably knew Peter Lombard, who lived
there, though not as Bifhop of Paris till after
Hugo's death. However, it is flill more pro-
bable that Peter knew the perfon and writings of
Hugo. — At the Council of Flormce^ in 1438-9,
it feems to have been debated between the Greek
and Latin Churches whether the feven Sacraments
were to be obferved " fecundum° ufitatam in Eccie-
fia Romana formam." Whoever firft fixed on the

number

' Qiioted by Puller, page 275. A Counfellor to the French
King, Mr. de la Militiere, wrote to Charles II. King of Eng-
land, before the Reftoration, inviting him to profefs Popery,
as a likely means to get reftored : Bramhall anfwers him, in
the Addrefs from which this paflage is taken : Bramhall was
then abroad, 1 think, as well as King Charles ; but fee his
Life; the Life of Archbifhop Bramhall, in the Biographia
Britannica.

*" This conjefture is right; in Bramhall's Letter the three
years are put in the margin, all together.

" Forbes, 9. 3. i,

* Cave Hill, Lit. Tom. 2. page 233,
N 4

200 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.

number feven, was probably an happy man ; To
powerful and myflical a number'' as it is! — The
Trent Catechifm dwells upon'' it.

The number feven was not one of the things
firfl changed at the Reformation-y indeed the five
ordinances which the Romanills call Sacraments
and we do nor, are fairly to be dijUngulflied from all
others which have been called facraments in the
extended fenfe, in refpecft of their importance, if
we take extreme unftion for vifitation of the fick.
— fVickliffe did not rejed them; but then his defi-
nition of a facrament was only, *' a vifible token
of fomething invifible ^" In the NeceJJ'ary Do^rine,
he. which bears fo hard upon fome Romifli abufes,
feven facraments are explained, calmly and prac-
tically ; not in any way of controverfy*. In the
time of Edward VI. *' If fick perfons defired to
ht anoint edy there was a provifion ' for compliance
in fome degree." — Heylin tells" us, that four of the
five facraments which we now rejed, were " re-
tained under the name of Sacramentals in our pub-
lick Liturgie ," extreme undion being changed
into vifitation of the fick. But not rejecting the
five, might, with our Reformers, amount to little
more than not making a feparate clafs of our two.

The Romanijls are very tenacious of the number
feven. In the feventh SefTion of the Council of Trent,
Canon the firfl, we are anathematized if we make
either more or fewer than feven : We muft not
make thirteen any more ; nor take in the NiTrrn^ of

the

P See Cruden's Concordance under the word /even-

1 Part 2. Seft. xviii. about bacraments in general, page 137.

' WicklifFe's Dodrines may be found in Collier's Ecclef.
Hift. but I am not fure where I faw this definition.

' Yet many things in thefe explanations, differ from the
Romifh doftrine.

* Ncal, I, page 3 7. in 1548.

" Life of Laud, Introd, 6tCt. xii.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II, 201

the Greeks, or fome which the Fathers took in,
when they ufed the word Sacrament in its large
fenfe : neither muft we fay, that the five are Sacra-
ments in iome lower fenfe than the other twoj they
are all feven to be allowed vere et proprie Sacra-
menta. — We muft not fay, that facraments are
only conftituted to *' confirm" our Faith j" this
may aim at our Article. — We muft not deny, that
facraments give grace " ex opere^ operato-^'' tranf-
lated in the Articles of 1552, " of the work
'Wrought^ — John Fox blames the Romanifts for
faying, that Sacraments *'^iv^ Grace," — and not
only dio ftgnifie^ but alfo " containe and exhibite that
which they lignifie, to wit, Grace and Salvation"".'*
— The Trent Catechifm fays, *' they have in
them an admirable and fure virtue to cure our'
fouls."

The Romanifts fay, that three facraments, Bap-
tifm. Confirmation and Orders, imprefs a mark or
chora£ier {^a^ecKTYi^) upon iht foul, and alio give an
oiitivar d diiiin&.'\on; that this marker impreffion,
or fealing, external and internal, \s indelible; and
therefore, thefe (acraments cannot be reiterated: — '
(See Trent Catech. Part 2. on Sacraments in gene-
ral, Sedt. 29, &c.)

This feems only to mean, that a perfon once
baptized, confirmed, ordained, is ahuays baptized,
confirmed, ordained : — which is againft r^-bap-
tizing, re-confirming, and re-ordaining : that is,
iuppofing a man really once baptized, &c.— but
re-baptizmg, &c. have always proceeded on the

fuppofition,

* Canon 5.— John Fox fays. Sacraments are *' to excite our
Faith :" Vol. i. page 36. excitare is the word of our Arricle.

y Canon 8. — This will be mentioned under Art. xxix.

* Vol. I . page 36. Aftsand Monuments, or Martyrologie.

* Page 145. or lafl Seft. 32. of Part 2, on Sacraments in
general. — Seil. 10. is mentioned in the ninth Sedion of this
Article.

202 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II.

fiippofition, that a man's firft baptifm, &c. were
improperly called fuch. — (Like our Divorces a
vinculo matrimonii).

If prieflhood be indelible, a Church can never
withdraw its Commiffion from a Prieft : can never
degrade him.

The Rhemifts foften nothlnsr, but*" maintain
the feven facraments in the fulled and flrictefl
manner. I have already referred to Gal. iv. 3.
where, I think, the arguments on both fides are
fufficiently difplayed, by them and their anfwerer
Dr. Fulke; but other places may eafily be found.

Even Dr. Dupin ' *' infifts, that ihe^ve Romifli
facraments be acknowledged as fuch, whether in-
llituted immediately by Chrijl, or not." — In the
A6ls of the Council of Trent, Canon firft of
SefT. 7. we are told, that it is wrong to fay,—
" non fuiffe omnia a Jefu Chrijlo Domino noftro
inftituta."

The author of " Principles and Practices of
Methodifts^," mentions as a popifh dodlrine, " that
the u(e of facraments, accompanied only with an
imperfeft forrow, fo finifhes and completes thefe
religious a6ls, that they will be fufficient to juftify
M%r —Sacramental jujllfi cation is the term ufed by
Divines. — The Trent Catechifm mentions this\

Thofe whom we call the Sedaries have, feveral
of them run into an oppofite extreme to that of
the Romanifts. The Reformatio Legum, in the
part de Hserefibus, fpeaks againft the fame perfons

with

* This queftion aboat the efficacy of Sacraments, was much
agitated between the Romanifts and tlie Reformers. Limborch
calls it ylcris quajiio, Theol. 5. 66, 21 & 22, page 604.

' Mofheim's Aj)pendix, page 131, 8vo. Vol. 6.

«" Firft Letter from Academicus, to Mr. Berridge, page 73.
— This author is fuppofed to have been Biihop Green, Regiui
Profeflbr of Divinity at Cambridge.

« Page 142. or beft. 16. Part 2. on Sacraments in general.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. II. 203

with our Article, who would have the Sacraments
to be taken " pro nndis Jignis, et externis tantuni
indiciis," — *' quibus, tanquam notis, hominuni
Chriftianorum religio poffit a*^ ceteris internojci:'" ^
But in a leparate 7///^, De Sacramentis^ we have
firft a definition of Sacraments, and an account of
their efficacy; then the marks of a Sacrament, and
a declaration, that thofe marks are only found in
Baptifm and the Eucharift. After an account of
thefe two, we have fomething concerning Ordina-
nation. Matrimony, Confirmation, and vifiting
the Sick. In other titles we have fomething con-
cerning ecclefiaftical puniQiments, and excommu-
nication.—But I fee no names of any Se5ls men-
tioned.

Abroad, the followers of Szvenhfeldt are faid to
have fet afide all external ordinances, in favour^ of
internal revelations; which is like what the ^la-
kers have done lince the time of Oliver Crom-
well'' : the pretext ufed was, that Sacraments are
Jiidaical.

Mr. Glofter Ridley, in his Life of Bifliop
Ridley', tells us fomething of the Seels alluded
to. The Anabapti/Is and others, through abhor-
rence of the Romilh worfliip ot the HoJIia, and
the Lutheran high notions of the Sacrament, ran
fo far into the oppofite extreme, as to ufe low and
fcurrilous expreffions concerning it; and to fix up
Bills, or papers, againft the door of St. Paul's
Cathedral, containing fuch expreffions.

We

^ Reform. Leg. de H?erefibiis, cap. 17. — See alfo in Syn-
tagma confeffionum, the Confeflions, or Articles, of Augfbui-g,
and Scot'and, and Switzerland, page 6i. 96. 1^3. And in the
fecond Part, page 15.

g See Rogers on the Article, page 153.

'' Moflieim, Index, ^<<7ifrj-.—Bennet's Confutation of Qua-
kerifm. — Barclay's Apology, Prop. 11. Se*^. 2.

' Life of Biiliop Ridley, page 216.

204 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III.

We have, in Strype's'' Life of Archbifhop
Whitgift, a paper figned by one Anthony Randall ^
Minifter of Lydford, of the Family of Love, dated
May 31, 1581, containing the alfertion for which
he was deprived by the Biihop of Exeter : amongft
other things it is faid, '* He never thought the
Lord's Supper and Baptifm to be Sacraments, be-
caufe he had not read the word Sacrament in the
Holy Scripture. He alloweth the Adminiftration
of Sacraments becaufe the Magiftrate hath efta-
bliihed it."

I will conclude this Hiftory of Sacraments in
general with mentioning, that the 5o««/^«j allow ^
but one ceremonial priEceptum of Chrift, to break
bread :— how this is to be obeyed, will beft appear
hereafter.

III. Having finifhed our Hiftory of the Sacra-
ments taken colledively, we come to make fome
hiftorical remarks on thofe Jive, taken feparately,
which we rejedt. Thefe five ftill remain intereft-
ing to us, though we reje6t them as Sacraments,
becaufe they are changed into offices which we
efteem to be of great importance. Confirmation,
Jbfohttion. Ordination, Matrimony, and Vifitation of
the Sick : a right knowledge of thefe has a great
tendency to make the pafioral duties ufeful to the
public, as well as comfortable, or pleafing, to the
PaRor himfelf.

Firft of Confirmation. In the primitive age of
Chriftianity it appeared to the generality of thinking
Chriftians, that Baptifm included ideas both of
ijcater and the ""i/o/y Spirit. John iii. 5.— Titus
iii. 5. of which more hereafter. Perfons of inferior

rank

^ Strype's Whitgift, Appendix, page 93,
1 Racov Catechiim, page 143.

«" Cave's Hift. Lit. T. 1. page 131. 2. Anon, de Eaptifmo
non iterando, A, D. 253.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 20'

rank in the miniftry, were competent to baptize
with water, but it was obferv-able that thofe of the
higheji ° rank made ufe of prayer and impofitton of
hands for the obtaining of the Holy Ghoji-, and it
was granted to their petitions. It lliewed itfelf at
firft in ioiiit fiipernatwal effeds, otherwife the grant
might have been incredible; but the Comforter was
to be fent to Chriftians in all ages; to guide them
into all truth, to reprove" and infpire them, to
work in them both to will ^ and to do : yet he Vv^as
to be afKed*! for; what more natural mode of call-
ing down the Holy Spirit could be adopted, when
his gifts became ordinary, than one which was fome
imitation of the mode ufed by authority when they
were extraordinary' P — It fuits this account, when
Jerom calls what has now the name of confirmation,
by the terms imprecatio, and invocatio fpiritus fancti.
— " Non abnuo hanc efle Ecclefiarum confuetu-
dinem, ut ad eos qui longe in minoribus urbibus
per prefbyteros et Diaconos baptizati funt, Epifcopus,
ad invocationem fanfti Spiritus manum impofiturus,
excurrat." Dial, contra Lucifer, cap. 4. — And a
little after, " Alioquin, fi Epifcopi tantiim impre-
catione, Spiritus Sandus defluit, lugendi funt qui
in villulis, aut in Caftellis, aut in remotioribus
iocis, per Prefbyteros aut Diaconos baptizati, ante

dormierunt

" The authorities feem well colleaed in Wheatly on Common

Prayer, Confirmation -beginning, page 397, 39b'. In Cor-

jieliufs cafe, Afts x. 47._ The Holy Ghoft precedes Baptifm,
and is the caufe of baptizino-.

" John xvi. 8. 13. ° p Phil. ii. 13. ,

1 Lnke xi. 13. — See alfo 2 Cor. i. 21. and parallels. — And
I John ii. 27. might be confidered.

' Whatever is in Scripture mail be in an age of Miracles ; but
according to our reafoning about the difFerence between a firft
miniftry and an eftabliihed one, we might conclude with regard
to any particular ordinance. -See Art. xxiii. Sed. xxr.

206 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. 111.

dormierunt, qviam ab Epifcopis iny'iCcvcmuT." The
latter paflagc refers to cales of necejfity^

When Churches increafed, a ceremony would be
wanted. Uutiion would readily occur, as fuited to
notions of Jews', and Gentiles, and to many cli-
mates where Chriftianity was profeflcd. How foon
it was ufed in what we call Confirmation^ is not
agreed: iome learned men think very foon; but
Bingham" does not allow any proof of it before
the time of TertuUian : however, we may look
upon this ceremony as arbitrary, arifing from par-
ticular circumftances, and therefore as one, which
may be omitted^ though enjoined by the Council of
Laodicea, in the year 367.

Some fcholaflic writers own, that confirmation
as a Sacrament, v/as not inftitutcd by Chrift, or
ufed by the Apoftles; but that it was made a
Sacrament at the concilium Meldenfc" : Cave
mentions two; one in S45, the other in 1201;—
but he fays nothing of Confirmation in his account
of either.

One of the Scholaflic writers was the famous;
Alexander Hales, the Dodor Irrefragabilis of our
own country; called in Latin Alexander^ Alenfts.
— The matter :ind form were diftinftly exprelTed
by Pope Eugenius IV. in the Council of Florence,
in the year 1438.

It would feem very doubtful how foon Con-
firmation fliould folloiv Baptifm. In the Baptifm

of

» Thefc pafTages are quoted by Bingham, 12. i. I.

* Exod. XXX. 22. — Pfalm cxxxiii. 2. — i John ii. 20. 27.
See alfo Pearfon on Creed, Art. 2. beginning, &c. page 80.93.
And for Gentiles, page 99, folio.

" Bingham's Antiquities, 12. 3. 2.

" Confilium Meldenfe was the Council of ilffawjr.— -See
Bingham's Index of Councils. Ant. Vol. 2. page 519.

y Forbes, 9. 4. 4, and Cave calls him Alexander dc Hales.

EOOX IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 207

of Adults the fooner the better; delay would only
be owing to the neceffary avocations of thofe fupe-
rior miniilers, who were to confirm; that is of
Bifliops^. — In cafe of Infant-baptifm there would
be more difficulty; thofe who thought that the
Eucharifl: (hould be adminiftered to Infants, would
be for having Confirmation follow Baptifm imme-
diately; but others would wiOi to have Confirma-
tion deferred till any one was fit to have been
baptized as an Adult. This diftiniflion between
adults and infants, is not marked out fo plainly as
might be wiflied\ In cafes of infant-baptifm it is
probable, that the necefTity of confirmation muft
have appeared particularly ftrong, as obviating ob-
jedions incident to a contrad, in which a con-
trading party had not perfeft underftanding''.

The 7iame of confirmation was not common in
ancient times. Cyprian*" ufes confummation, or the
verb conjiimmate^ but not as a technical term. The
Greeks had different names ; but I will fpeak of the
Greeks feparately.

The Greek Chriflians ufe unflion in confirming:
the ointment is made by the Patriarch or Bifhop
alone, on the Thurfday in Paflion-week, of pre-
cious ingredients, and with a facred apparatus; it
is ufed for fome other purpofes, but chiefly for
confirmation; which always, in the Greek Church,
follows Baptiim immediately. It has the names
ofX^Kr|t*a, unclion ; Xft^oOEtrta, impofition of hands;
and tr(pfayi?, the fign or feal of the Lord. In the
Eu;5^oAo>'tov, or Greek ritual, there is an Office,
called the Office of the Holy ointment, or-AxoAb9»a5

* See authorities from the Ancients, Bingham, 12. i, i.

* However, fee Bingham, 12. i. 2.

'' This is confirmed by Limborch, q. 77. 3.
' Cave's DifTertation under ftv^o* fays, that Cyprian ufes the
word Confummation nonfemel.

208 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III.

Tsaj'iif /tAu^K, where arc the ceremonies and prayers,
and the mode of preparation. The vellel in which
this ointment is contained, lias the name of aV»ov
T» ^£>/«Aa [/.u^n. But the Greeks do not call confir-
mation a facrament ordained by Chrill''.

The Romijli notion of Confirmation is eafily
collected from the acts of the Council of Trent,
and the Catcchifm compofed by order of that
Council. In the feventh SelTion of the Council
there feem only to be three Canons on the fubjedt,
without any argumentation : the firft declares Con-
firmation to be a proper Sacrament, and not a
mere ceremony, or catechetical examination. The
fecond condemns thofe who allow no virtue to the
Chrifm. The third fays, that not every Prieft,
but only a Bilhop, can confirm ; ordinarily. In
addition, v.'e find in the Catechifm, the form of
words made ufe of; *' I fign thee with the fign of
the Crofs, and confirm thee with the Chrijm of
Salvation. In the name of," &;c. It is ah^b
affirmed, contrary to the Schoolmen here mentioned,
that Chrifl: was " the author'' of this Sacrament,
and " appointed the Rite of Chifni, and the word^
which the Holy Church ufes," &c. The autho-
rity for this aflertion is not Scripturcy but the iecond
Epiflle of S. Fabian", Bifhop of Rome : which is
fufficient to thofe that believe Confirmation to be a
Sacrament, becaufe all facraments are myiteries,
" above the reach of human nature, nor can they
be inilituted by any but by God hlmfelf." As
curious an indance of reafoning in a circle, as you
fhall meet with. This Catechifm proceeds to in-
form us, that the w^//^rof this facrament is Chrifm;

the

^ This IS chiefly from Cave's DifTertation, under Mt/f on fee
alfo Bingham, 12. i. i.

' Cave mentions no fuch Ecclef. writer. — Ladvocat places
him in 236.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 2O9

the Form was given before; that one confirmed
ought to have a Godfather, as a '' Monitor,'' a
" Captain,'* a ^^ fencing-majler;" for he has now
put on the whole armour of God ; but that there
muft be no marriage with this fencing-mafler : that
confirmation is not to be given till young perfons
have " the ufe of Reajon," and therefore it muft be
deferred till they are eleven years old, or however
till they are* fix: that Confirmation gives fpiri-
{ud[frength, as appeared from the conduft of St.
Peter, who deferred his caufe before the defcent of
the Holy Ghoft on the great day of Pentecoft,
but after it fuffered with conftancy.

The Catechifm lays down, that Confirmation
is one of thofe Sacraments which imprint a
y^ot^a-arvi^, as before-mentioned, and concludes v/ith
explaining the parts of the Romifli ceremony; the
undion why on the forehead; the fign of the
Crofs, the blow ftruck by the Bithop on the breaft=,
the giving of the Pax^. The taking of fVhit-
funtide for a feftival or feafon of Confirmation,
may be underftood from what was jufl now faid of
St. Peter.

I fhould imagine that Prejbyterians have no con-
firmation, (though they have Penance, Ordina-
tion, Matrimony, and Vifitation of the fick) as I
fee nothing relating to it in their DireEtory^ or in

their

^ The Bifliop of Lincoln, at his Vifitation, 1791, defired
that none might be brought to be confirm;;d under fourteea
years of age; which, I think, agrees with Archbilliop Seeker,
See his Sermon at the end of his Leilures on the Catechifm.

s Wheatly fays, on the cheek, page 410.— Limborch calls \i
jalapa.

*> A Paten which ferves for the top of a Chalice, which is
given by the adminiftering Prieft to the affillant Prieft to kifs, juft
before the offering j fo I underfland the French Ditftionary of
the Academy.

VOL. IV. O

210 BOOIC IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III.

their Form of Churcli-Government'; and as it is
rejefted in the Helvetic confeflion : — yet the ob-
jections made by the Puritans, as defcribed by
Neal", do not feem fufficient to juftify a total
aboHtion ; being only, that children might come
too young to the Eucharift, and that an expref-
lion in our Bilhop's Prayer has an appearance of
afcribing a Jacramental o.'^zcX. to the Inftitution.—
Yei Puritans ufed infant-baptifm.

Thofe who fet afide Confirmation, mud con-
ceive both water and fpirit to have their full elfecc
in Baptifm. The Helvetic confefTion fays, Cnn-
firmat'to et extrema tm5lio inventa funt hominum,
quibus nullo cum damno carere poteR Ecclefia.
Neque ilia nos in noftris Ecclefiis habemus ; nam
habent ilia qua^dam quce minime probare pof-
fumus.

The Church of Enzland retains the office of
Confirmation; and confines it to the BiJJiop; ic
clofely imitates the Apoftles in ufing no Chrifm,
only prayer and impofition of hands. — It defers
the ordinance till young perfons are arrived at years
of difcretion, that they may themfelves ratify their
baptifmal covenants. It docs not confider con-
firmation as a Sacrament; the reafon will befl
come into our Proof. In Theory it ufes a Godfather,
as a witnefs ; but not in praSlice.

The Baptijis are faid to be much divided on the
ufe of Confirmation' : Infomuch that thofe who
have held confirmation to be a nccelfary qualifica-
tion for the Lord's Supper, have feparatcd them-
felves,

' Publifhed In Append, to Neal's Hiflory of Puritans.

^ Vol. I. page 159, quarto.

1 Wlieatly fpeaks on this fubjeft; fee his Work on the Com-
mon Prayer, page 406. Alfo Wall on InJant Baptifm, page
4.47, quarto; or 2. 8. 6. 15. I do not perceive that the Con-
fcfnonof Auglburg declares anything concerning it.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. III. 211

felves, in celebrating that ordinance, from thofe
who have held the oppofite opinion.

An incident mentioned in the accounts of the
Hampton-Court conference, may lead us to what
may, in fa<5t:, have been the principal difficulty
relating to Confirmation. — That difficulty might
be thus expreffed ; * If confirmation be necelTary,
is not Baptifm imperfeSf P* King James the Firil,
v/ho might be prejudiced^ as a Scotchman, in
favour of the Scotch Church, expreffed a fcruple
of this fort, but Archbifliop Baicroft, " on his
knees replied, that the Church did not hold Bap-
tifm imperfeA without Confirmation j'^ that " it
was of Apoftolical inllitution, Heb. vi. 2. where
it is called the doftrine of the laying'^ on of hands.'*
—Indeed in that place (ta'dng in the preceding
verfe) it feems defcribed as one of the fundamental
principles of Chriftianity, and as following Baptifm.
- — With regard to the difficulty, it is of a fore
which often occurs amidft the imperfections of
human tranfactions. King James might have re-
collefted, that the acceffionof a King is completed
by Coronation : I fuppofe that if a King purpofejy
negleded or refufed to take the coronation-oaths,
his negled might fliake his title to the Crown ;
but it, without any culpable negled, it happened,
that he was not crowned till he had begotten a fon,
and was to die, fuch pcfthumous fon would pro-
bably inherit as if the acceffion was complete.

Baptifm then may be complete without con-
firmation, if confirmation is not to be had ; and
yet confirmation may be requifite when it can be
had. — This feems to agree with the two fentences
lately quoted from Jerom.

IV. But

•" Neal,VoI. i. quatto, page 41a,

ai2 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.

IV. But we muft now proceed to the feconA
Romifli Sacrament which we reject, viz. Penance.
—A good deal was faid on the efficacy of Repent-
ance under the fixteenth Article" ; I will endeavour
not to run into repetition. It feems as if we
could not flir a ftep without diftinguilhing private
repentance from penance confidered as a part of
ecclefiaftical difcipline; though the Latin word
panitentia may {land for both. Peter Lombard
fpeaks, as do others, of pccnitcntia exterior as op-
pofed° to interior. His idea might be the fame with
ours : private repentance is vifible only to- God ;
whereas penance is vifible to the Church, and may
be confidered as fome evil undercrone in order to
avoid excommunication : yet though thefe two ought
to be kept didind in the mind, they fometimes
run into one another. A private man may be
guided in his repentance by a minifter of the
Church, as it might, without fome regulation, be
too light or too dcfperate; and a perfon under
ecclefiaftical ccnfure, or penance, may inwardly
repent; and his penance may be, and is meant
to be, the occafion of his repentance. Alfo a
private penitent may impole penance upon himfelf,
or even apply to the Church to impofe it upon
him; independent of any rellitution or compen-
fation w4iich he may think it right to make.

Whatever relates to Penance, properly fo called,
fiiould be deferred till we treat of the thirty-third
Article : the Romifli Sacrament feems to me to
relate to private repentance, as conducted and re-
gulated by a Minifter of the Church; but let us
proceed in order.

Before we come to the RomiQi Church, let us
juft take notice of the Greek Mfravota. It was a

part

" Art. XVI. Sefl. i. ii. ui. xviii, xxxii. xxxiii.
• Sec Forbes, 9. 5. 19.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. tl^

part of the Evx^oXoyiov before mentioned, and Itfelf
confifled of man)^ parts ; amongft others we find
the following mentioned in^ Cave.

1. Eyp^»] £7r» j«€-ravo»vTwu, a prayer over the peni-
tents ;

2. AxoXsOja Tuv s^o(y.oXo'y>i[ji.zvm, an Office for thofe
who confefs.

3. Eii;;^>i £7n rm ETrjrtjwtwy xvo[x£vm^ a prayer over
thole who are abfolved from Penance.

4. Axop5*a £i? Autrtv cc(po^iTfAis h^iu;, a fervice for ^
diffolving the excommunication ot the Prieft^ con-
taining, as I iinderftand, many prayers.

From the Greek Church we*^ are told, that the
firft penitentiary formularies were brought into the
Latin, by one of the name of 'T'heodorus^ who was
of T'arfiis, a Monk, and afterwards, in the year
668, an inhabitant of England, and Archbiihop
of Canterbury.

Thai the Romilh Sacrament of Penance is moft
properly an authoritative regulation of private re-
pentance, will appear from dividing it into its
conftituent parts. Thefe are Conirition^ Confejfion^
Salisfadion, Ahjohition. — But the whole is fometimes
called by the name of a part. Our Homily " on
Common Prayer and Sacraments, feems to mean
the whole by the v;ord Abfolutiou', and that word is
iifed in the fame fenfe in the Neceflary Dodrine%
and in the works of Duns Scotus^— And the Farm
of the Sacrament is, according to the Trent Cate-
chifm, " / abfohe thee" — though indeed the
matter is faid to be Contrition and Confeffion, and
Satisfadion ".

*' Contrition

P Hift. Lit. Dlffert. page 31. ^ Cave, i. 593.

•■ Homilies, 8vo. page 276.

= Nee. Dodr. is not paged: near the begin, of Penance.

* See Forbes, 9. 5. 26.

t? Trent Catech. on Penance, Seft. 17. ig. page 245, Engl»

<^3

214 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.

" Contrition is the grief of the foul, and a detef-
tation of fin committed, with a purpole to fin no
more for the time* to come." — Its place is fome-
times fupplied by what is called Attrition^ which is
fometimcs defined imperfccl contrition j the dif-
ference feems to be, that Contrition is grief for
fin as fin ; or moral forrow and abhorrence : attri-
tion is grief for fin as producing bad confequeuces ;
one might call i: prudential forrow and abhorrence:
however, if this latter turns the wi// from fin, i:
is deemed efficacious.

Attrition is called by its name in the fourteenth
SeflTion of the Council of Trent, Chap. 4. but the
naming of it feems fometimes to be avoided; it is
well and artfully defcribed in the fifth Canon of the
fame Seffion, but not named; neither do I fee it
named in the Trent Catechlfm, though it is de-
fcribed in Sed:. 37.

The next part of the Romilh Sacrament of
Penance, is Confejjion : the word auricular is gene-
rally added to Confeffion, in order to diflinguifh it
from public and general confeffion, fuch as we open
our Service with (after a fhort fentence or two and
an Exhortation to confefs ;) and becaufe it is made
in the ear of an invifible Pried''.

Bifliop

^ Ibid. Seft, 30, or page 2>;o.

y The French Diftionaiy of the Academy fays, the confcf-
fional is commonly y^a/ ; and that two penitents kneel atone
time on different fides ; thefe penitents cannot be fuppofed to
communicate with each other: and I have underftood, that the
Prieft is net feen during Confeffion : or not always. To con-
fefs, in French, often means to confefs a Penitcut; that is, to
receive his confefiion ; conftquently the Priell, who confcfTcs
penitents, is a Conftflbr : but in Englifh to confefs, always
means to confefsy/W; fo that the penitent would be the con-
feffor in Englifh, keeping up the analogy ; but we rightly com-
ply with Popifh expreffions in Popilh bufinefs.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 21^

Bllhop Porteus'' fays, as to " private confeffion
in all cai'es, it was never thought of as a command
of God, for 900 jrears after Chrift ; nor determined
to be fuch till after 1200 :" whereas the Council of
Trent " fay, " a fandifTimis et antiqtnjjimis Patribus,
magno uuanimique confenfu, fecreia Confeffio facra-
mentalis, qua ab imiio Ecclefia fandta ufa eft, et
modo etiam utitur, [fuerit] femper commendata."

The oppofition here feems ftrong; yet Bingham
does'* affood deal towards reconcilino; the contend-
ing parties, by obferving, that though there were, m
ancient times, feverai forts of confeffion in fome
fenfe private, and though there was fuch an Office
as that of penitentiary Prieft, yet private negotia-
tions had always relation to public difcipline, and
made a part of itj notwithftanding fome things
might be occafionally concealed, . for fear of fcan-
dalizing weak brethren.

I have already obferved, that the private peni-
tent might be delirous to fubmit his offence to
the Church, in order that he fhould be properly
punillied, in this life ; neither too llightiy nor too
fever ely : and this feems no unwife plan to gain
iatisfa<5lion and peace of mind : now this was the
very bufmefs in which Penitentiary Priefts were
employed. And we may fee, that fuch a plan
would make private penitence and church-difci-
phne coincide ; or at leaft would form an intimate
connexion between them. In the whole affair of
penitence, the great difference between ancient and
piodern times feems to lie in this 3 that in ancient

times

* Brief Confutation, page 47. — See alfo Comber's Advice,
page 16.

^ SqK» 14. Cap 5.

*" Bingham, 18. 3. 11, — See alfo Wheatly on the Common

Prayer, p.ge 459.

P 4

2l6 BOOKIV.ART.XXV.SECT.lv.

times private repentance was more intimately con-.-
ne(5led with churci.-diicipline, than in modern.

The i^ouoXoyria-ig of the ancients (taken from
James V. lO.) Bingham fhews to mean the whole
of public confefiion and Penance, confidefed as
ecclefiaflical difcipline.

Dai/U has written a very good Book on auri-
cular Confjffion; the contents of which may be
found in Bingham, i8. 3. 4. which arc well worth
reading; but I would wifh any one not by any
means to excufe himfelf, if he is fcrioufly fludy-
ing the fubjeft of Confeffion, from reading the
iconclufion of the third chapter of Bingham's
eighteenth Book.

In the Romifh church, young perfons are called
upon to confefs. The Trent Catechifm mentions
this, and defcribes the very humble *" pofture in
which Confeffion is made ; it alfo mentions, that
confeffion muft be nnreferved; of evil thoughts,
words and a6lions; or of offences againft the tenth
commandment, as well as againft the other nine.
It fets forth the provifions which are made for the
fecurity of the Penitent who opens'^ his heart : yet
Comber fhews, that ' fome cafes have difpcnfation
for divulging fecrets : as when a fault concerns the
Church : this mufl give great latitude.

It icems flrange that fo much ftrefs fliould be
laid upon confeffion, and yet that it fhould be in-
^, fifted on by the Church only once^ a year : could
any one make a confeffion of all the fins, in
thought, word and deed, which he had committed
during a whole year.?

Whatever

•^ P;ige 261, Sea. 56.— See alfo Dia. Acad. Confefllonal.
•^ Setl. 64, and 74. •= Advice, p:iae 37.

* Trent Catechifm, Se(5l. 59. — French Prayei-boJK„ page 16^
" I.cs commandemens de 1' Eglife."

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT, IV. 21^

Whatever good fome kinds of private confef-
fion might do, yet the Romilh is faid to have
been in faft productive of much evil. This is
defcribed by Sir Edwin Sandys^ : Comber'' and
Eenfon' fpeak of the evil refulting from the Clergy
knowing the thoughts of men's hearts. — Indeed
if we confider, that among fuch a numerous body
as the Clergy fome may be expected to be vicious
and corrupt, we fliail be fliocked at the thoughts
of their being intruded with fecrets capable of being
turned to bad purpofes. — Yet the Romanifts feeni
ilill to value private confeffion as much as any part
of their religion ''.

To me it feems, that private confeffion, under
ecclefiaftical Laws, is bad even in theory ; that is,
mifchievous not through mere abufe; at leaft not
through any abufe but fuch as muft be expeded.
. — Why not confefs to God himfelf ? to lean on
inferior confidences, to be tried by narrow-minded
judges, muft tend to lower and debafe the religious
fentiments ; as was faid of worfliipping Saints and
Angels ; and muft hinder a man from looking up
to his heavenly Judge. And what can be expeded
from reducing indeterminate duties to determi-
nate laws, but a mechanical religion, coldnefs and
cvafion ? What man pays with generous fervour
what he is obliged to pay by law ? What can be
expedled from requiring towards ftrangers, or per-
fons of bad character, that confidence^ thofe efFu-
fions of fincerity and contrition, which every delicate
mind referves for a few intimate friends, but hypo-

crif}''

8 Speculum Europse, page lo.

•» Advice, page 37. » On James v. 16.

^ I colledl this from what I heard an eminent Englilh Lawyer
of the Romifh Church fay, when he was folliciting an Aft of
Parliament for thofe, who have fince been called protejiing
Catholics,

2l8 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT, IV.

crlfy or felf-deceit ! — but our prefent bufinefs is
Hijiory.

The church of England may fecm, from fome
things, to approach towards Romifh ConfcfTion :
*' Repentance," fays Bifhop Sparrozv\ "confiils of
three parts, as the Church teaches in the Commi-
nation ; i. Contrition^ or lamenting of our finful
lives ; 2. Knowledging or con/eJ/i;ig our fins; 3. An
endeavour to bring forth fruits worthy of Penance,
which the ancients call fatisf action :'' thus Bifhop
Sparrow ; and, of the fourth thing abfolution, the
Church of England affords feveral inftances.

CoufeJJion^ in fome fort private, is often com-
mended ^ by our Divines, and even in our Liturgy :
we may inftance in the firft Exhortation to the
Communion, and in the Vifitation of the" Sick.
— But, in the firft place, let me obfervc, that I
look upon it as always a mark of good fenfe, when
men are avoiding anything, not to do it rafhly,
and through mere difgufl; but to take every good
they can find, though mixed with evil which they
diiapprove: — In avoiding one extreme, it fhews
rational moderation, not to run precipitately into
another. — And with regard to particular regula-
tions, there is a sreat difference between reauiring
a conflant, ordinary confeflion of all fins: and re-
commending it to an unhappy man, who wants
much to unburthen his mind, in one or two ex-
traordinary fituations, and to have his difficulties
folved; to apply to one, who muft of courfe be
better informed than himfelf, and may be fuppoied
free from religious melancholy. The ordinary lan-
guage of our Church is, " confefs yourfelves to
Almighty God," and it is found even in our

firft

' Rationale, page 1 7.

•" Bingham, 18. 3.-~Biniop Porteus, page 46,

° See Wheatly, page 460.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 219

firft exhortation to the Communion; but when the
mind is tormented with fcruples, or debilitated by
iicknefs, advice is wanted : and the weak Qiould
be " ;77(?iW to get over their referve, and folicit
(pirituai " comfort or counfel."

The real purpofe of our Church, In quitting
die laws of auricular confeffion, and at the fame
time recommending Ibme confidential intercourfe
between a Minifter and thofe troubled in con-
fclence, was, probably, to throw off a yoke hard to
be born ; to give liberty w^here the fenfible and
delicate mind moft longs for it; to fubftitute
affectionate exhortation in the room of per.al laws,
and mechanical obfervances; and thereby prevent
hypocrify and evafion ; without difTolving the paf-
toral connexion and relation, or weakening the
mutual confidence and mutual kindnefs between
Minifter and people.

The next part of the Romifh Sacrament of
Penance, after confeffion, is SatisfaSiion. The
Church of Rome feems defirous to have the Peni-
tent fuffer fomethlng in confequence of his offences;
feeing, probably, that fome fuffering would be good
for him, and might be made profitable to the
Church : But how to manage, is the difficulty;
for the fyflem gives complete forgivenefs to the
penitent, even of mortal fins, without fuch fuffer-
ing. It is therefore faid, that God is fometimes
fpoken of as forgiving fins, when thofe who are
forgiven, have fome partial, tempoTa.Ty puni/Iiment
continued y and that, in a Chriil:ian, even after
penance and abfolution, there are fome Embers^ as
it were of fin, fome remains of vicious Jiabits, from
wliich. danger is to be apprehended : both, then, for
the continuance of fome punifhment, and for the
counterading of thefe remains of evil in the mind,
it is judged proper to fet iomt kind of tajks to

the

220 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.

the Penitent, to be performed after his Abfolution.
— To this it is added, that when tlie Church has
been witnefs to a man's offending, it Iliould be
able, for its latisfaction, to fee fome fiifferings fub-
niitted to as marks of amendment : and that fuch
marks will ferve as a warning to others, and make
them cautious of offending. Laftly, it is laid
down, that fuch adions as are prefcribed as fatis-
fadions, ought never to be intermitted.— The
latisfadions enjoined by the ConfelTors, arc to be
Prayer^ Jims, and Fafiing; thcfe having a refpect
to God, our neighbour, and oorfelves. But it is
alfo held, that if God is pleafed to inflift punifli-
ment hinifelf, thofe will be the fame in ef!ect as
fatisfadions enjoined by the Prieft. — The quantum
of Alms, &c. is to depend on circumflances ; as
on the fortune of the ofiender, &c. like damages
given by a Jury : this is trufting a good deal to
Confeffors.

It is held alfo, that '' one can fatisfy/or another,'^
—on account of the communion of Saints; with fome
/imitation, which I do not underftand" : indeed the
whole of this fatisfying by proxy is to me obfcure;
— it anfwers fome purpofe, no doubt : indeed one
can fee that it tends to promote a circulation of
wealth in the Church : but the moral good of it
does not flrike me at prefent. Afts of mortifica-
tion and iclf-denial, undertaken in order to break
and extirpate vicious habits, are right and rcafon-
able ; but here they appear to difadvantage by being
cramped up in a bad fyflcm.

The lafl part of the Romifli Sacrament of
Penance, is abfolution. — In order to have an idea
even of the hiflorical part of the fubjeil:, one mufl
attend to the diftindtion between miniferial and

judicial:

® It means, I believe, that if a perfon fatlifies for another,
the benefit arifing ufually to the mind of the penitent, is loll,

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 221

judicial:- a perfon gives miniflerial 2h(o\ut\on^ Vv'hen
he afts as a MiniJIer or Agent, under God as a
principal J yW/V/^/, when he adls in the capacity of
a Judge, from whom Hes no appeal. — Nor can we
proceed rightly without remarking here, that all
judicial abfolution muft confift in releafmg offenders
from puniQiments infiicled by religious fociety
amongft ?nsn, or from Church cenfures : and that all
anticipation of the day of Judgment, in abfolving,
muft be miniftcriali its end, to warm and comfort;
though every decifion of a minifter or agent will
undoubtedly be ratified, if the Agent ads in his
proper p charader, and is rightly informed; which
he cannot be, except the repentance, in any cafe
before him, be fmcere : and as he can only pro-
nounce abfolution on fuppofition of fincerity in his
penitent, his abfolution muft be, in fome forr>
conditional. This premifed, we proceed with our
Hijiory.

All Abfolution given in the Chriftian Church to
Chriftians as individuals was at firft minifterial'^ :
there was not for many centuries any mention of
the Church claiming to forgive as God. — Though,
in cafes of judicial abfolution from church cen-
fures, prayers were offered that God would forgive
the offender, as the Church had done. The forms
of abfolution which have been in ufe, are four : the
precatory, the optative, the indicative, and the decla-
rative ; they differ as do the following expreffions
— *0 God forgive this penitent;' — '■^ may God
pardon and deliver you from all your fins;" — " I
abfolve thee from all thy fins ;" — ' God pardoneth
all them that truly repent; wherefor-e, as I pre-
fume, your repentance is fincere, I advife you to be

of

P Art. XXII. Se£l. xvii.

'1 See Bingham, 19. i. i. &c, and Wheatlyon tlier Common
Prayer, page 465, &c.

222 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV.

of good comfort, and not to diftruft the divine
mercy.* The moil ancieiic of thcfe forms was, I
believe, the precatory j the optative is precatory as
to its meaning: the indicative was not ufed till
about the middle of the twelfth Century'; within
a Century after that, the Prieft's indicative abfo-
lution was looked upon as equivalent to the for-
givenefs of God.

There is one exception to ancient forms being
precatory, which comes fo near the ca(e of our
abfolution in the Vifitation of the Sick, that it
feems worth mentioning. Even in the primitive
Church, we are told that the clinical abfolution %
or abfolution given to perfons on a fick-bed^ was
in the indicative form : only certain religious exer-
cifes were enjoined in cafe of recovery, which,
when the ablolution was given, it was taken for
granted would be faithfully performed. Perhaps
it might be thought, that as perfons on a lick-bed
are apt to be dejecled, and their dejcclion is apt
to increafe their diforder, that form fuited them
beft, which was calculated to infpire the greateft
confidence'.

The Romifh notions of abfolution are to be
found, as before, in the Acls of the Council of
Trent, and in the Trent Catechifm. The Rhe-
mifli Teftament might carry us into too great
length. — It was in the fourteenth Seffion, that the
fubjeft was treated : we find it mentioned in the
fixth chapter and the ninth Canon : the wilh of
the Council feems to be, to declare even pri-
vate abfolution judicial; but the difficulties are fo

flrikingy

' Whc?.tly, pr.j»e 467.

» See Dr. MarfhaU's Pcnitenlial Difciplinc, page 104, quoted
by Wheativ, page 468.

' On this fubjefl we fiiul recommended, Archbilhop VPi£r\
Anfwer to the Jefuit's challenge ; and Dr. MarJhaWi t'enittntiai
Difciplinc,

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV. 22^

flrlking, that they are obliged to fofcen the ex-
preffions. However, in the Canon the matter
ftands thus; any one is to be anathematized if he
fays, *' Ahio\ntionen\ facramentalem facerdotis, non
efle adum Judidalem, fed nudum mini/lerium pro-
nunciandi et dedarandi remiffa effe peccata," &c.
— Where I can conceive fome evajion to be de-
rivable from the word Jacramentalem ; for any man
who beheves there is fuch a thing 2iS facramental ab-
fokuion, will believe it to ht judicial; and what is
affirmed is affirmed of no other. — But in the
Chapter, we have ftill greater caution ; the abfo-
lution of the Prieft is owned to be, alieni beneficii
difpenfatio; it is called, ad injiar aftus judiciaHs.
^In the" Catechifm, made for the inftrudlion of
the People, we find, that when the Priefb ufes the
words, Egote ahfolvo, he pronounces that the finner
has obtained from God the Pardon of his Sins. —
Nay this is faid of a penitent who has not con-
felfed, but only has had the wi/h of Confeffion;,
though by the ninth canon any one is anathema-
tized who fhall fay, non reqiiiri Confeffionem Peni-
tentis, ut Sacerdos eum abfolvere poffit. — In fome
cafes, ftill farther relaxation is allowed : for the
Prieft is direifled to abfolve his penitents, if he
only finds, that diligence in reckoning up fins,
and grief in detefting them, have not been " alio-
get/ier zvanling,"

We come, in the laft place, to Abfolution as it
is pradtifed ill the Church of England. — Our
Church ufes three of the four forms already men-
tioned ; the declaratory near the beginning of the
fervice; the optative, which is in fenfe precatory,,
in the communion; and the indicative in the visi-
tation of the fick. But Biifiop Sparrow rightly

obferves,
" On Penance, Se6l. xix. page 346,

224 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. IV/

obferves^ that '•' thefe feveial Forms, in fence and
virtue are the fame;" and illuflrates his obfer-
vation by the inilance of a Prince commiflTianing
an Officer to fet at liberty all well-difpofed Pri-
foners : it feems immaterial which form of words
he ufes. The indicative form was once, by the
Kubric in the office of vifiting the fick, direfted
to be ufed in all^ private confelfions when men had
fcruples of conlciencej but now, in the firft ex-
hortation to the Communion, though abfolution
ispromifed to thefcrupulous, the form of it feems
to be left to the Prieft, only it is (hewn to be minif-
terial; and to be built, not fo much on private
judgment, as on " God's holy word."

I will clofe this account of Abfolution, with
obfervlng, that though our expreffion in abfolvinff
the fick, " I abfolve thee from all thy fins," founds
as if the abfolution were purely indicative; yet, if
we take all the expreflions of the form at once
into our minds, we muft perceive, that the abfo-
lut.on is exprefsly called minillerial; and that it is
alfo declarative, and optative; and therefore, that
the concluding expreffion cannot Be rightly un-
derftood but as confiflcnt with thofe forms to
which no member of the Church of England
obje£ts.

Having now gone through the four parts, we
may conclude by taking notice, that m the Ro-
milh Sacrament of Penance, the matter is, the
part of the Penite-nt, (Contrition, Confeffion, Sdtis-
fadlion'; the Form is, the part of tlie PridJ; Ego
le abfolvo.

In the Directory of the Prefbyterians I do not
; fee Abfolution mentioned; but the Minifter is to

comfort

* Rationale, p?.ge 19.

y bee King Edward's f.ifl Liturgy, Rubric in the Vlfitatlon
of the Sick. Or Wheatly on Common Prayer, page 469.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. V. 225

comfort the fick, to declare God's mercy to peni-
tents, to hinder the indifpofed from being too
much cafl down, &c.~and in cafe oi fcruple, " in-
ftrudions and refolutions fhall be given to fatisfy
and fettle him."

V. The next Romifh Sacrament, after Penance,
which we reject, is Orders : but on this we need
not dwell very long. Indeed our principal con-
cern is with the Romifh Church, as we have
already, under the twenty-third Article, given fome
account of church-minifters in general; and as
we (hall have occafion to fpeak of the Englifli
Ordinations in particular under the thirty-fixth
Article. — However, if any particulars occur,
which have not been mentioned before, and which
t^ow any light upon the Romifli Orders, they
may be admitted .

Bingham gives* an account of feveral forts of
Ministers in the ancient churches, which in our
church are not ufed. As Deaconejfes^ that is,
elderly widows, attending on Baptilm and other
offices relating to females. Subdeacons, Cwvi^iTxi,
afliilants to Deacons, &c. in the ceremonies
of the Church; a fort of agents or meffengers,
and at the fame time Pupils, to the Bifhops*
— Acolythifis, (or Acolyths, or Acolytes) attend-
ants for lighting candles, and providing wine for
the Eucharifts. — Exorcijis., whofe bufinefs it was to
attend the En^yv^ivoi, or Demoniacs, or pofleffed,
and pray with them. This ofRce of Exorcifts feems
flrange to us, nor do 1 perfedly know the nature
of the diforders under which the Energumens
laboured, and were conceived to labour: religious
fervours have frequently difordered the intelleds,
efpecially in a new religion, when oppofed by

friends

? Bingham, 3. 3.
VOL. IV. P

226 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. V.

friends who could raife the affcdtions, and occafion
great agitation in the mind : in the plans of ancient
churches we lee, that two fides of the cloyilers of
the outward court were occupied by thefe ener-
gumens^ — As to the Exorcifl's driving away the
unclean fpirit at Baptifniy that might be partly em-
blematical; and partly owing to the notions of
men not free from fuperflitious weaknefs, concern-
ing the nature and end of that Inftitution.

There were alfo, in the ancient churches, Rea-
derSy who read the fcriptures aloud in fome ele-
vated place or reading deik : all tliefe were probably
in training for higher offices. Even the OJtiariiy
or doorkeepers, had a kind of ordination from the
Bifhop, as far as that name could be applied to a
ceremony of folemnly delivering to them the K«^s
of all the facred things with which they were to be
entrufted''. — Befides thefe, there were Catechijls,
and feveral inferior clerical Officers; but I need not
defcribe any more : indeed there is no end of the
different modes in which men may worfliip God;
and fcarcely any of the different officers who may
be employed in very large religious alfemblies,
where the ceremonies are complicated and con-.
du6led with a magnificence calculated to ftrike the
eye and warm the imagination.

Cave, in the alphabetical Diflertation before-
mentioned, has an article Xfiforovta, or office for
ordaining different clerical minifters. He informs
us, that the OJiiariuSy Exordji^y and Acolythijl^ are

not

* Frontifpiece to Wheatly on the Common Prayer. I have,
been concerned with fevenil perfens who would have occupied a
place in one of thefe Cloyftcrs, While the Gofpel was fpread-
ing, mod, or many mad people would take a religious turn.
. '' Tlic OJiiarii were not confidered as Laymen.

^ When the difordered in mind were not fuppofed to want
fryer, &'C. one who had the care of them would only be like

a keeper

ISOOfc IV. ART. XXV. SECT. V. 227

not now held clerical in the Greek Church : but
that there are rituals in the Euchologion for ordain-
ing Bilhop, Priefl, Deacon, Subdeacon, Reader,
&Ci He mentions Morinus as a learned writer on
fuch fubjeds.

The Romifh church try to keep up a connec-
tion between the ideas of Priefthood and Sacrifice,
with a view to their mafs. They have five orders
below that of Deacons ; which are enumerated in
the twenty-third Seflion of the Council'' of Trent;
Subdeacons, Acolythifts, Exorcifts, Readers, and
Door-keepers. Thefe are the fame names which
we have found in ancient churches ; but we are
informed, even by Cardinal Bona, that, in reality,
the ancient offices had ceafed in his time ; and
that the perfons called by thefe names, were chiefly
boys, and men hired, but initiated by no^ kind of
Ordination,

In the atfts of the fame Council, Order is de-
clared to be a proper Sacrament, inftituted by
Chriji; but the unElion, though declared requifite,
does not feem to be exprefsly called the matter of
the Sacrament : impolition of hands is mentioned,
and the Grace of Godj but only from the Epiftle
to Timothy : and no fcriptural Form of words is
produced.— Order is faid to be one of thofeiacra-
ments*^ which imprefs an indelible 'xx^o.v.t^^.

In the Trent Catechijm the proof tliat Order is a
proper facramenc, feems^ very iame : it informs us,
however, that by the JJiaving of the crown, ant
entrance is opened into the Sacrament of Order,

and

a keeper of a mad-houfe : he need not have any fpiritual or
clerical chara£ler.

** Cap. %.

' I. 25. 18. Bona, Rer. Liturg.— Quoted by Bingham, 3. 3,
end.

f Sedl. XI. E Sea. xx.

P 2

228 BOOK IV. ART, XXV. SECT. VI.

and that the fhaven circle grows with ecclefiaftical
dignity. It alio fets forth " the dignity of door-
keepers'";" gives us the ufual forms, by which
they and other inferior Clerks are ordained, or ap-
pointed : and mentions, that Baftarch and perfons
deformed^ are difqualified for Ordination.

It feems reafonable that there Ihould be a num-
ber of ecclefiaftical officers in any place, propor-
tioned to the greatnefs of the congregations in that
place, and to the number and grandeur of the
ceremonies. In our Cathedrals we have Precentors,
&c. which we have not in our inferior churches j
not to mention Vergers.

VI. We now come to the Romifli Sacrament of
Matrimony; but of this fome Hiftory has already
been given ' under the twenty-third Article : We
need only fpeak of Romifh Matrimony and our
own.

The Council of Trent declares" Matrimony to
be a facrament inllituted by Chrift himfelf, but
mentions neither matter nor form ; nor ufes any
argument, that I Ihould call fuch, befides that
paflage' of the Vulgate, erunt duo in carne una.
Sacramentmn hoc magnum eft. — It feems"" there
have been great difputes amongft the Romanifts
whether all marriages could come under the notion
of a Sacrament.-— The Church of Rome is not
only againft Polygamy but Divorces. As Matri-
mony is with them a Sacrament, it is indiffoluble;
not that it is one of thofe which ftamp a x*? '*'*'''*'?»
becaufe, though indiffoluble for life, it may be
difTolved by death : nor i:? it inconfiftent with fepa-

ratioH^

^ Se£l xxxl. Marglh. ' Art. xxui. Seft, xii.

^ Seflion 24.

' Eph. V. 31, 3a. See Seel. 11. of this Article, about Sacra-
mentum.

■• See Limborch's Theolog;)', 5-77. end.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VI. 229

ration^ a mensa et toro; but only with divorces
ftriclly fo called ; a vinculo matrimonii. Yet any
marriage not confummated, is diflbluble by one of
the parties going into a Convent or Monaftery, or
entering into any religious order. The prohibi-
tions and difqualifications, from confanguinity, &c.
are numerous ; more fo than thofe in Leviticus ;
and the Romilh Church claims a power of adding j
but eafe is to be procured by means of Difpenfa-
tions. Now the greater ftridnefs there is, the more
frequently mud difpenfations be fued for.— I will
only obferve farther, on Romilh Matrimony, a
leeming Angularity j I mean, that an inllitution
fhould be deemed a facrament only by thofe, who '/
mbft commend abftaining from it!— to commend
abflinence from a facrament, would appear to us
(omewhat ftrange.

It is natural here to take fome notice of our
own cuftoms concerning the inftitution of Matri-
mony.

We feem to go on this principle, that a fociety
formed in order to bring up youdi in the nurture
and admonition of the Lord, ought to be formed
with fome folemnities of a religious fort. And
whatever infpires religious fentiments, will refine
the fexual appetites, and hinder them from dege-
nerating into grofs brutality : will tend to melio-
rate love by a mixture with friendfhipj andfenfual
defire, by efteem of moral perfections.

It is of courfe that we rejed: unhmired inter-
courfe of the fexes^ but moreover, we reject cgu-
cubinage ; not only in the modern fenfe of the
word, but that kind of unequal marriage between
mafter and Have, or fervant, which ufed to be
called concubinage in very ancient times. We
place the hufband and wife in one rank, and make
their reciprocal claims on each other's perfdn and
P 3 property

230 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VI.

property to be equal — We reject alfo Polygamy
entirely.

We adopt the prohibitions and impediments, in
refpeft of confanguinity, &c. which are mentioned
in the Mofaic law : but, it may be, they are fuch
as would refult from the moral principles of Incefl,
applied to the prevailing culloms of the part of the
world which we inhabit".

We look upon Adultery" as diffolving the mar-
riage contraft, and therefore, on proof of it, allow
of divorce y but we take all methods to encourage
honouring the wife as the weaker velfel; and we
inculcate not only gentlenefs and courtefy, but
patience : of which our Homily is a refpeciable
proof: the compofition of fome one who well
knew, not only fcripture, but human life.

In our Service, the Union between Chrift and
his Church, is fet in the right light; and becomes,
inftead of a foolifh argument for a Sacrament., a
rational and affecting inducement, both to Chriftian
piety, and conjugal love.

One objedlion to this account, with refpeA to
the equality of hufband and wife, is flriking ; the
wife contracts to obey, which the hufband does
not. And it is true, that no fociety can be carried
on without authority lodged fomewhere; but fuch

authority

" See Wheatly, page 425. Lev. xviii — The table was drawn
up by Archb.fhop Parker ; who infers from one fcx to the other.
The Romanills liacl tov many impedimenrs from coufanguinity,
&c. we w anted to leflen tiieir number ; what wav more unex-
ceptionable, or lefs likely to be excepted to, than for us to take
the Levitical impediments ? Extcncin j thjin to both fexes made
them feem more numerous ; and therefore nearer to the Popifh ;
but the lews niufl have extended them in like manner, by parity
of reafoning.

° This do£s not mean the Law of England, as it ftands ; that
allows no divorce, (fee Blackftone, Index, Divorce); we mean
thofc prir.ciples on which anew Law may at any time be madcj
and on which new Statutes are framed occafionally.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VI. 23I

authority as is lodged with the hufband, is only
for the fake of unity ; in order that education, &c.
may not abfolutely flop: conjugal authority would
be abufed, according to our principles of marriage,
if it gave any honour, privileges, accommoda-
tions, to the hufband, above the wife : the wife
of a Duhe is a Dnchefs, of a Peer a Peerefs^ and
fo on ; though in ancient times fome forts of wives
were httle better than flaves; having little or no
claim on the perfon or property of the hufband.

It may be faid, why could not conjugal au-
thoCT:y be divided^ and given to the hufband
in fome things, to the wite in others ? It feems
probable, that if that had been done, the
wife would not have had an influence fo great,
or fo fuited to her powers, as llie now has: the
conjugal fociety is formed fo much upon fenti-
ment, that the exercife of its authority may be
left more indeterminate than that of other focie-
ties. The Magiftrate ought indeed to have a
power of proteding a wife from perfonal danger,
or from what, in her rank, would be called indi-
gence; but to make general laws that the wife in all
families (and only general laws could be made)
lljculd have fo much conjugal authority, and no
more, might be probably, in effect, preventing
the hufband and wife from governing tacitly ac-
cording to their refpcdlive powers of governing to
good purpofe.

The American Liturgy omits our exprellion,
*' ivitk my Body I thee worJJiip;" the omifTion makes
the form appear to me very blank : zvorjMp is an
old word for honour ^ or rcfped ; and by the formu-
lary uled in oiy Liturgy upon putting on the ring,
the hufband engages to treat his wife as an eqiiah,

ja
P Art. XXII. Se£t. ix,
P 4

1^1 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII.

in perfon and property^ that is, not as a concubine^
fuch as Hagar was to Abraham. Now to change a
form whicli does this, {o as to make it only engage
for refpedful and honourable treatment in regard to
property., is furely to cut off a material part; cfpe-
cially if we confider what St. Paul fays, i Cor. vii. 4.
I do not fay that American hufbands do not treat
their wives with perfonal refpecft; I fpeak only of
the propriety of a verbal Form. Yet I think the
Englifh Liturgy was formed by a wifdom fuperior
to that which dilated the American.

The Prejbyterians feem only to fimplify the rite
of Marriage; whether with good efted:, I fhould
much doubt. The account of the marriao;e-
ceremony ordained in the DireSiory., as given in
the preface to Grey's Hudibras, might not be too
long for me to read to you.

VI r. We come, laftly, to the Hiftory of the
Romiflrfacrament of Extreme UnSlion.

The primitive anointing of the fick has been
generally accounted the gift of healings though
Papifts muft m.aintain alfo a facramental und:ion.
— In the fevcnth Century, we are told, Chrilbans
praAifed un6lion with a view of curing their bodily
difeafes. This was not merely a medicinal appli-
cation of oil ; it was religious, or rather fuperlli-
tous : fuperftitious people, in different ages and
countries, have run into a kind of religious'*
quackery. — But in the twelfth Century the bodily
cures failed fo often, that it was thought bell to
hold the anointing to be b^fneficial to the 5ow/,
rather than the Body; and to the Body, onlv when
bodily health would do the Joul no harm. — When

this

1 See iiijiindllons of King Edward Vf. in Sparrow's Col-
le£lion, page 9. — Fiilke on the Rhcmitls, fol. 433, mentions a
cuftom of carrying home wattr, after it had been ufed for bap-
tizing, in order to apply it to bodily fores.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII. 233

this came to be the notion, thofe parts of the body
were anointed which are confidered as inftruments
of>^

Cave gives' us an account of an Office or ritual
ufed in the Greek Church, and called Evx^xaiev, or
prayers for the ceremony of extreme unction; it is
part of the Euc/wiogion, and is titled more fully. The
Service of the Holy Oil, to be Ring by /even
Priefts, coUeded in the Church or Houfe : that is,
the fick man was to be brought to Church to be
anointed if he was flrong enough to bear it; but
if he was very weak indeed, ** graviter affliftus
et projlratus,'^ the /even Prieds were then to hng
this iervice at his houfe: many myflical reafons are
given why the number lliould be feven; and there-
fore we may fuppoie that it was never lefs. —
Extreme undion, though praftifed in the Greek
Church, is not there reckoned a Sacrament: nor
was it of old, by Chryfoftom; or indeed in the
Latin Church by the venerable' Bede.

In the fourteenth SeiTion of the Council of
Trent, we find three chapters and four Canons
upon extreme unction. It is called, in the chap-
ters, a proper Sacrament, intimated [irijinuatum'^)
by Chrill: in St. Mark's Gofpel, and recommended
and publilhcd by St. James. From a tradition
concerning the pallage of St. James, Chap. v. 14,
&c. the Church has learnt what that Apoftle
teaches ; namely, that the matter of this Sacra-
ment is 0/7, the Form, thefe words, " Per ijiam
un£lionem, he. — the efeci, to ivipe off fins, and to

promote

' This from Wheatly, page 475, See.

» l^ilt. Lit. Diff. page 28.

' See Fulke againft the Rhemifts on James v.

" Tliis word injinuatum was a corre^tcn in the council : — a
thing might be intimated in one place, and inftituted in another;
but, in that cafe, the Inrdtution would be the thing men-
tioned.

234 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII.

promote the health of the Body, when that is ex-
pedient for the Soul. — Tlic Elders mentioned by
St. James, mean Priejls. This Sacrament is to be
adminiftered to perfons who feem to be " in exitu
vitj:\' — from which it is fometimes called *' Sacra-
vientum exeunthim.'" — The Canons are not content
with faying, that this Sacrament was ^^ injinuatum'*
a Chrifto; they fay it was a Chrifto Domino
" noflro injiitutiim'* ]n other things they only
repeat what was faid in the Chapters, annexing
Anathemas.

The Trent Catechifm tells us moreover at length
what is the Form of this Sacrament; " God in-
dulge" (or pardon) "thee by this holy undion,
whatever offence thou haft done through the fault
of thy eyes, or nojirils, or touch :" — And fays, that
the Inftitution " came from Chrift,*' and after-
wards was pitblijlied by St. James : it was rather to
heal the Soul than the Body. This Sacrament is
to be adminiftered to fuch as are ^^ grievoujly fick,'*
but before they lofe their fenfes, — Befides the parts
of the Body mentioned in the Form, fome others
are to be anointed : the ears, the mouth, the hartd,
i\\Q feety and laftly the reins, (only in men, not
in"* zvomen^) ** being the leat, as it were, of plea-
fure and luft." — And the facramcnts of Penance
and the Eucharift, are to be received as a prepa-
ration for that extreme undion. — This Sacrament
is faid to require great 'Triijl, and to be fometimes
lets cffcftual than it might be, through want of
Faith m him who receives it.

The NeceJJary Do£lrine fays, that extreme unction
(which it calls a Sacrament) is to be miniftered to

fuch

* I do not fee this diftinftion in the Catechifm, but it is
mentioned in Z,//A^5;v^, 5. 77. 21. where the account of thts
Romilh notions is concife, and feems accurate.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VII. 23^

fnch as require it; that it is called extreme, or lajl^
becaufe it comes after other un5iions : it may be ad-
miniftered more than once, and ought to be, *' in
the entrie of ficknefsj" and the Eucharift ought to
be received after it.

King Edward VI, retained ^ the cuftom of
anointing for fome time, as a temporary indulgence
to the prejudices of thofe, who had been brought up
m Popery : but in h\s Jecond^ Liturgy it was omitted.
Wheatly gives us the form, out of King Edward's
firft Liturgy, in which the Priefl addrefled the
fick perfon, when he anointed him, "upon the
forehead and breafl only." He ajfo obferves, that
this unftion might be ccnfidered as the remains,
not of the primitive, but partly of the ancient, and
partly of the Popifli unftion.

In our Liturgy, as it has ftood ever iince the
publication of the fecond Book of Edward VI.
we have no unftion; but we have a Vifitation cf
the Sick. Of this I may be expeded to fay fome-
thingj but my obfervations have been anticipated,
either under the fubjed of Confc[fion, or under that
of Abfohition. I feem now only to have to read to
you the lixty-feventh Canon, which leaves the
whole method of inftrudling and comforting the
fick to the dijcretion of the Minifter, if he be a
licenced preacher : it he be not one, he is then
" /£> infiru5i and comfort'''' the fick *' in their dif-
trefs, according to the order of the Communion'
book\''

P. S. In

y Mentioned Scft. 11.

* See Neal, page 37, Vol, i. 4to. and Wheatly on Common
Prayer, page 471. 477.

* See the Canons of 1603 ; and Wheatly, Jntrod. to Vifit
Sick. — He fays, it may be quejiioned whether " by the Aft for
Uniformity of publick prayers, we be not reftrained ^Koxapri-vate
Forms.**

23^ BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VIII.

P. S. In Wall's Infant Baptifm it is ^aid^ that
the Englilh Baptijls ufe extreme unftion, though
rarely, and in hopes of recovery.

viii. At length we have finifhed the Hijlory of
this twenty- fifth Article, and we come now, in
courie, to the Explanation.

Our prefent Article has that for the firft para-
graph which was the laft in the Article of 1552;
and has that for the lafl, which was the firft, aftejf
a fentence'' from an Epiftle of Augullin to Janu-
arius : in the middle it has a rejection of five
popilh facraments, which in King Edward's Article
were not mentioned. — It has omitted one fentence
of the former Article, concerning the effed of
the Sacraments being '* ex opere operato" -^in the
Englifh, " of the work wrought :" retaining the
Jenj'e^ in the reft, but dropping the phraje^ with the
remark upon it.

The firil paragraph of our Article contains a
definition or a Sacrament; which it is no very eafy
matter to give : we have one in our fhort Cate-
chilm; to thofe who find one of thefe intelli-
gible, the other will be fo too. — It fcems to me a
good way to get at the meaning of our Church,
to confider what opinions Ihe wiihes to avoid.—'
With regard to the nature of a facrament, flie
wifnes firil to avoid the notion, that it is a mere
hadge^ by which Chriftians are diftinguilhed from
Heathens; and next the notion, that it acts
mechanically upon the Soul, as a powerful medicine
does upon the Body. Jf the inquirer finds any
fpace between thefe two notions, the Church of
England feems willing that he lliould range in it
freely. We mufl fuppofe fome outward y7^;/, and
fomc inward meaning; this meaning mull imply

fome

•> Part 2. Chap. viii. Sedl. 11. page 446, quarto,
« Seft. Ji.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VIII. 237

fome ^00^ affeding our minds, and the/tt/«r^ hap-
pinefs of our Souls; and appropriated to ourfelves
by our own voluntary adts; and then other parti-
culars, if any there be, may be left unafcertained.
—My own idea of a Sacrament is, a ceremony,
which exprefles by vifible words (as Auguftin"* calls
them) fome great Benefit bellowed by God on
Man; which may be fome beneficial _;?«/(? or con-
dition, leading to great good : a ceremony imme-
diately injoined by divine authority : — It is called
an outward '* fign of an inward and yp/n/z/^/^r^c*?,"
01 favour; but inward, is only oppofed to outward-,
tind means, the benefit fhadowed out by the cere-
mony : and any benefit (or grace, or favour) may
be C3.\\edfpiritual, which relates to the future hap-
pinefs of our Soul or Spirit, or to the im.provement
of the ?nind : fpiritual is oppofed to the material
fign; and its fenfe beft got by taking it fo. — If it
appears to any Chriftian, that God's Holy Spirit
muft be concerned in a facrament, he may fatisfy
himfelf thus. When we come to confider attentively
how great and w^onderful a thing it is, that God
fliould inftitute a ceremony for us-, and how grate-
ful we ought to be for the benefit which it fhadows
out, and how diligent we ought to be in fecuring
and rightly applying that benefit, we muft feel
very great moral improvement'' : and all fuch im-
provement it is our duty to refer to the affiftance of
the Holy Spirit. The nature and manner of fuch
refejence belongs to the tenth Article. — This moral
improvement, this difpelling of our weaknefies,
this warming of our fentiments, and confirming
of our good principles, is called, with refpeft to
the Lord's Supper, " \\itflrengthe71ing and refrefJiing

of

«* Contra Fauftum, 19. )6. cited by Forbes, 9. i.'32.
« P. S. I think our Reformers had much the fame idea: Sec
Reform. Legum, de Hserefibus, cap. 1 7.

Z^S BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. VIII.

of our fouls."— I fhould think, that this might
ferve as an Explanation of the firft paragraph : ta
me it makes that paragraph intelligible.

The fecond paragraph needs no explanation.

In the third fome expreffions may be noticed.

" Thofe five commonly called facraments" — v»'c
fliould not exprefs oarlelves fo notu, but the five
were very commonly called facraments when the
Articles were made.—'* Sacraments of the Go/pel;^*
— this is oppofed to ^acr amenta in the large fenfe,
as meaning any emblematical aftions of a facred
nature.

In the remaining part of the Article we have
feveral inftances of the plural number being ufed
when only one fingle thing is meant. — The Pnri-
tans^ objeded to this, at the Hampton Court Con-
ference ; making confirmation to be included in
both exprcffions " corrupt following" — and, " al-
lowed"— at leaft that is the bell fenfe that 1 can
make of the objedion. Corrupt imitation" of the
Apoftles, may relate to confirmation, orders, and
extreme unciion, or it may mean only the lad ;
but '"'' Jiates of Life allowed in the Scriptures,"
fcems to mean Matrimony alone : our Homily ''
fays, ^^ godly Jlates of life," meaning the fame thing.
— Afterwards, '* Sacraments" are not *' to htgazed
upon,'' &c. is applicable to the Lord's fupper only:
*' duly life them" may indeed include Baptifm, be-
caufe confecrated water ufed to be carried home
and given to the difeaj'ed\ But St. Paul's" pafiagc

about

*" SeeNeal, Vol. i, quarto, page 41;;.

' Art. IX. " folltmiing oi Adam." Seft. xvii.

^ Pnge 277, oftavo.

* Fulke on Rhemifls, fol. 433, top; As in Sed. v 1 1 .

'' I Cor. xi. 29. — Yet Auguftin treats of the efficacy of

Baptifm as depending on the worthinefa of the receiver.

Forbes, 10. i. 20. — 10. a. 14;.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. IX. 239

about unworthy receiving, relates to no Sacrament
but the Lord's Supper.

In excufe for this ufing plural where only one
thing is meant*, we may fay, let any one try to
ufe the lingular number, and yet keep to the fub-
jed of Sacraments in general. Several other little
things may be faid, — " Ihey*^ is fometimes ufed,
wdien the meaning only is, to keep the expreffion
general, and not determine whether He or She or
feveral^ be meant. * They whom I fhall employ in
this bufinefs, will do it well. You may depend
upon it :' a perfon who faid this might employ
0//^ man, or ont woman; as well as feveral. — We
affirm concerning anything in the plural when we
are fpeaking of it as being fome /pedes, or clafs,
— Your Voltaires are dangerous people.- — Forbes"^
fays, " Patres aliquando, de uno Sacramento lo-
quentes, utuntur vocabulo numeri pluralis." — And
in the Epifde to the Hebrews we find fomething
which feemsto be of the fame nature"; " fubdued
kingdoms," &c. &c. predicated of a few parti-
cular men ; Gedeon, Barach, &c. every one of
whom did not perform all the exploits there
mentioned; though they were performed by the
perfons named.

We cannot well fay more in the way of Ex-
planation without incroaching on fom.e of the fub-
lequent Articles.

IX. Our Proof m.uft be direded folely againft
ih^five Popifh facraments which we rejed ; all the
reft belongs to other places. — In difputing whether
different things can be called by the {lime name,
we are apt to run into trifling propofitions, by
uling that name in different fenfes; but here we

feem

^ Archbifhop Uiher keeps this mode of expreffion in-his Irifli
Articles.

"= Forbes, 9. 5, 6. ^ Heb.

XI. 33.

£40 BCOK IV. A-kT. XXV. SECT. IX.

feem fecure from that fnarcj for the Romira
Church defines a Sacrament much as ours does; .
and without that, it would be enough if we proved,
that the Romifh five, are not facraments in the
fame fenfe with Baptifm and the Lord's Supper.

In the Trent" Catechifm a facrament is defined,
" a thing fubjed lo fenfe which, by God's appoint-
ment, has vertue both X.0 fjgnifie and to work holi-
nefs and righteoufnefs." — " God's appointment"
cannot fignify the courfe of nature or providence,
for all Sacraments are held by the RomaniflsP to
be appointed by Chr'ijt. In this definition there
2s^four parts correfponding to the four parts of
ours. — I. An external pare — 2. An appointment
of Chrift.— 3. A fignify ing, or fign, or pledge. —
4. An invifible efficacy.— This fettled, we may
briefly remark on the ^Qn\\^\five.

Conf.rmntion feems fufficiently authorized as an
holy ceremony, but it has no external rite ap-
pointed by Chrift. Irapofition of hands is not
peculiar to it, and Chrifm is of human invention.

PcnancBj or penitence, public or private, is an
important thing; but it has no tolerable preten-
fions to inftitution of Chrift as a vifible cere-
mony. The confcflion mentioned Janies v. 16^
is, in fome way, mutual. And the effeds of Popilh
penance may be expected to prove fuch as are de-
icribcd, Ezck. xiii. 10.

Ordination^ or Orders, is very well authorized;
but Chrift never ordained with any vifible fign, nor
ever inftituted any for his Apoftles : they ufed im-
pofition of hands, but not for ordaining only.

Matrimony was not inftituted by Chrift, in any
fenfe ; he confirmed it as a contrad, but not even
as a [acred contract : nor did he appoint anv rite

for

•» Page 131, or Seft. x. of Sacraments in general.
P Trent Scff. vii. Canon i .

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT.X. 24I

for the execution of the contraft. And It is one
in which the Supreme Being is no Party. As to
Eph. V. 32. — the marriage of Chrift and his
Church is certainly a my fiery, ^xur>if«ou, which in
Latin is rendered [acr amentum; but the meaning
only is, that Chrift is not literally married to his
Church, but only meta-phorlcally, or myftically.—
This is only an argument in one language; tranflate
it, and it vanifhes into nothing.

Extreme imEiion, if enjoined at all, was enjoined
not by Chrift, but after his Death. — Mark vi. 13.
relates cures merely of a bodily fort ; and even in
bodily cures oil was not always ufed by Chrift. —
James v. 14, &c. feems to me to mean nothing
beyond the compafs of ordinary practical piety
and benevolence; as I will endeavour to ftiew more
at large.

• Our Homily'^ on Common Prayer and Sacra-
ments (hews thefe five to be no Sacraments in
about one page.

How different are they from thofe two which
we retain ! inftituted for the moft important fitu-
ations; for a change of life on entrance into the
Chriftian covenant ; for a profpe<5t of eternal hap-
pinefs, to be attained by the Chriftian facrifice ;
confined to no rank or order of Chriftians ; in-
ftituted, both as to their external rites and their
influence on the heart, with a plainnefs wholly in-
controvertible ^ !

X. As the Romifli Sacrament of Extreme
Unclion is founded on one fingle paflage of Scrip- .
ture, James v. 14, 15. I think our end will be beft
anfwered if I give you my idea of that paflage.

I found

^ Page 276, 277, oftavo.

^ St, Paul feems to me to make quite a feparate clafs of Ordi-
na|\ces, of our two Sacraments, in 1 Cor. xii. 13. — See icc/fc'^"
Paraphrafe. — The Rhemifts take no notice of it.
VOL. IV. Q^

24- BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. X.

I found I had not a fatisfaflory notion of it, and
therefore I fet myk-lf to confidtr it withoirt coa-
fuliin;^; commentators. It appeared to me to have
the following meaning. — ' I am giving vou (St.
Jmncs is fnppofed to fpeak, or write) mifcellane-
cuG moral and religious diredion?, as is ulual at
the dole of an I'^pillle ; let me direft what is to
be done in cales of fuknefs : Is any one indifpofed
amongfb you? he will of courle take all human''
means of recovery : that need not be advifed; but
let him not neglccl religion : ficknefs is favourable
to piety, and fhould always be confidered, though
with due modefty and diffidence, as the vijitation
ot God. And it is He who muft give a hleffing to
tht heft judged mcdiJne, betore it can be effectual,
(Pikhn cxxvii.) Let then the fick man act as is
moft hkcjy to promote pi-.^ty in himfclf, and to
draw down the Liclling of Almiglity God upon his
endeavours. — I^vlan was not made to be alone; as
little in fickncls, and as little in Religion, as in any
thing el e; let the Tick man (hen invite iome grave
elderly Chiiftians, amongft wliom will naturally be
fome ot lacred characters; and let them form a
little dcniejlic religious Jociety, As a focictv cannot
p;oceed without Iome ceremon\'\ let fome one of
ihcfe reiptctable perions, as by conimiiTion from
them all, make Iome application o\ lomeching
ufually eftcemed mild and lenient^ t(3 tV.Q Body of
the indifpofed: tliis is to be done religicu/Iv, or
^' in the name ot the Lord :" and the ceremony
will dilpofe the company properly tor what is the
frin:!pal thing, doincjiic prayer^ and Intcnejion. —
" O how amiable" mull fuch devotion be! how
improving to the minds of all! how likely to d:aw

<\o\\\\

• See in Spanow's Rtuioruilc, pape ^oo, a decree, that
Phyficiaiis Ihall diicd their patients to fend lor Divines. Tlic
f.uiic in WiiLMtlv.

BOOK IV. ART XXV. SECT. X. 243

down the blejfing of " the Lord !" Surely he will
hear the prayers of his faithful fervants; fnrely
there is ground for confidence, that he will raife up
the dejected! — and as our Lord jomtdforgwenefs of
lins with bodily healing; the whole of one of his
bleffed cures will be accompliilied ! — Perhaps the
indifpofed may be troubled mmind; O, let mutual
confidence, in all fuch cafes, open the heart, to Co
venerable a fraternity ! that muft needs give new
flrength to interceilion. Think not that I direct
you thus without reafon and example; I have
juft now mentioned the ''patience of Job " let me,
in like manner, fuggeft to you the fuccefsful Inter-
ceffions of Elijah.*

As this interpretation is not the fame with that
given by Commentators, they generally taking St.
James's unftion either for a facrament, or for an
exercife of the miraculous gift' of healing, it may
be proper to ofFer fome reafons for my own
opinion.

1 . The word aSsm does not feem to denote any
grievous or dangerous'' ficknefs ; nothing which could
give occaiion to the name oC extreme un<5lion, or re-
quire the help of a miracle : the fick man is fuppofed
well enough to invite the Elders.

2. It feemed to me, that Elders might mean
elderly Chrifiians, whether in orders or not : the
Apoftles ordain Elders; but that does not feem to
prove that elderly Laymen, or elderly men as fuch,
were never called ts-^?aSuT£^ot. — In Ftdke's anfwer
to the Rhemiils on James v. I fince find, that
Bede"", rendered •sr^fo-SuTEcot, " the elder fort :" and
I find other remarks in fupport of the' interpre-
tation.— Dr. Powell fays'', that it is not known

exadly,

' I Cor. xii. 9.28. 30.
" Lex. Steph. quotes Cyrop. Lib. 8.
^ A. D. 701; Lardner. f Page 364. Thefis.

0^2

244 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. X.

exaiflly, what was the nature of the Prefbyters in
the Apoftolic age.

3. The life of Oil feems to prove nothing, as to
any cure being miraculous : it is ufed Mark vi. 13.
in miraculous cures ; but it was only -as the clay
and fpittle which Chriil ufed in curing the Wind.
Sometimes impofition of hands was ufed, and
fometimes all externals were omitted. Oil may
be ufed in any emblematical ceremony, as well as
impofition of hands in Ordination; it was fo ufed
in early times of the Chriftian Church, as we favv
under Confirmation*.

4. It is not the Oil, but the Prayer wliich is
faid to fave (a-u^eiv) him who labours under infir-
mity, (jca/xvovra.)

5. The expreffion ^'■Jball fave the fick," looks
at firftasif a miraculous cure was meant ; but '■'■/fuill
fave,* cannot be taken literally ; becaufe fomething
is fpoken of which i$ to be done to all fick Chrif-
tians, and if '■'■ Jhall fave,'^ was to be taken lite-
rally, or the cure was miraculous, none would ciie.
— Why, in that cafe, Ihould the example of FJias
be brought as an argument, or as a perfualive?
Bcfides, is prayer never unluccefsful.^ the inllance
could only prove that prayer may fave.

6. I'he Lord's raifing up the fick man, implies
nothing miraculous; in the language of Piet)', the
Lord raifes up every one who recovers.

7. As to forgivenejs ot fin, it is in fo many
places joined with healing, fome of which have
nothing^ miraculous in them, that 1 look upon it

as
» Sea. III.

» See Pfalm ciii 3. with Bi(hop Lowth's note on Ifaiah
xxxiii. 24. and liii. 4. — Sec alfo Matt. ix. 5. (with proverb ii\
Whitby's note) and its parallels, Mark ii. 9.— Luke v. 23.—
Matt. viii. 17, — Hammond cltts more texts, and mentions the
cafe of Heztkiah. — In the OKI Italic verfion la^jjrs is even
trattflaicd ut revtittatur vobis. (Michaclis, Introd, Left quarto^

ijea.

Book IV. ART. XXV. SECt. 3C. 245

as a kind of Jewifli phrafe to exprefs a cure.^^
tJnder the tenth and feventeenth Articles we men-
tioned, that the phrafeology of the Jews refers all
forts of events to God.— And on a footing of natu-
ral religion we may fay, that all evil is piiniJJiment ;
though God may in this life punifh men collec*
lively : fnfferings may fail upon mankind for the
faults or negligence of mankind. Were it eaiily ad-
mitted that ail evil is punilhment, it rtiuft follow,
that the removal of evil, is forgivenefs.

8. In order to have the example of Elias, we
muft fee that the fifteenth and fixteenth verfes are
on the fame fubject. This appears fufficiently
from the word »«9>iTf : but in two'' good MSS. the
word 81* fhews alfo a connexion. — aAA^Aot?, and utts^
osAAiiAwp, may mean, in turns-, that is, when any
one is fick, let him open his mind, and let his
pious friends intercede for him. If this was made
a cuftom, each Chriftian, (in cafe of recovery)
would be fometimes the vifited, fometimes the
comforter and interceffor. Firft it is faid, if any
one is lick, the Elders fliould, if invited, pray by
him. The inference is more extenfive; ' open ///^/^
your hearts to one another, when by turns you
labour under ficknefs ; and ^ray mutually for fick
neighbours.'

All thefe remarks occur in reading the pafTage
itfelf; others arife from fome extraneous eircum-
ftances.

I. There is no probability, that a cuftom of
miraculous healing, or a facrament of perpetual
obligation, fhould be inftituted at the conclufion

of

Sefl. 62.) Our church, tn the Office for the Vifitation of the
Sick, fpeaks of ficknefs as certainly God's vifitation; and as
what may be fent to correal and amend what is oiFenfive to
God.

" Firft New Coll. and firil Steph,

0^3

246 BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. X.

of an Epiftle, in the midd of moral dircdfons,
with ever}' thing ordinary and natural, with nothing
fimilar before or after it. I (hould imagine, there
might not be found an inftance of anything but
moral diredions at the clofc of an I'^pifHe. Nor
can we conceive, that anything fupernatural could
be inftituted in {o few words^ without any mention
having been made of it by Chri/i; or by St. Paul
when treating of miraculous gifts. Had Bnptifm
and the Loi'd's Supper been founded on only one
text each, I iliould think they refted on weak
foundations.

2. Thofe who have attended to the condud of
St. Jatnes, will not think it like his ufual pru-
dence to inftitute fupernatural obfcrvances in the
flight and fudden manner here fuppofed. — I refer
chiefly to what is called the Council" of Jeful'a-
lem. — Ads XV. 13.

3. The ceremony fuppofed in my interpretation,
docs not feem an unlikely one to take place, nor
contrary to the cuftoms of early Chriflians. Their
throwing aJJies on the head of a Chriftian on Afli-
Wednefday, was of a fimilar nature''.

4. We mull not be underftood to fay, that no
Elder, when St. James wrote, hnd that Gift of
healings which is repeatedly mentioned by St.
Paul. In the cafe before us, whatever might be
the efficacy of the religious ad, it lliould be
afcribed to prayer.

5. Without determining the nature of St.
James's injundion, we might inquire, how tar
it admitted of change in after times. — It fcems as
if the Oily on any iuppoftion, mull be change-
able; for miraculous cures were not always per-
formed with Oil; and in mere ceremonies, oil was

accidental,

^ Art. xxi.Scdl. I. — Seealfo -Art. vj. Seft. XXIV.
** Bifliop Bramhall, cited by Puller, page 275.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV. SECT. XI. 247

atcidenta), depending upon local cuftoms or the
produce of the earth. Oil feenis to have been an
eftablirhed', mild remedy in furgery; as appears
from the application ot it by the good Samaritan ;
and therefore anv other eftabiilTied mild remedy
might be^ fubftituted for it. Nor does the opinion,
that St. James's unftion was miraculous, make
much difference ; fmce a natural practice of an
ordinary fort, has been fhewn, in feveral inftances^
to follow a fitiiilar extraordinary fupernatural one,
without interruption.

XI. Such is our diredl proof; if we aimed at
any indireft, we might anfwer the weak. ohje£lion
of Anthony Randall.^ that Sacrament is not a^' fcrip-
tural term: it is in the Latin, and in the Latin
only; it could not be in the original. — But it is
not necefTary that when Scripture inititutes a tliingy
it fhould alfo give it an authentic /mot^; and yet
when Chrirtians have occafion to fpeak frequently
of that thing, they muft give it fome narne^ as they
do to other things : and they are moll ftrongly
induced to do fo when there aie feveral obfervances
which want a common name.

The word [/.vrn^iov is more confined in its mean-
ing than Sacramentum. Every emblematical action
has an outward meaning and an inward one ;
Sacramentum includes both ; but /Aur^if »oi/ exprelies
only the inward meaning. — Hence Sacramentum
is not a good tranllation of jw-urnfiov; more efpe-
cially as jtAurJi^Jow never ', in Scripture, is uied about

external

= What fay Hippocrates and Galen, of Oil?

*" The Oil would be called a Tradition , in Art. xjCxiv.

s In Ordination, Art. xxiii. Sedl. xxv. in' Confirmation,
Se£l. J n . of this Article,

^ The Quakers think this argument worth adopting: fee Bar-
clay's Apology, Prop. 12. ledt. 2. beginning.

' Limborcn, 5. 66. 10. For myfteries in the Church, (et Bing-
ham, Index, mentioned beginning of Sed. ix. of this Article,

0^4

248 BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. XI I.

external rites. I'he Church got to call leveral
things myftcrics.

XII. In the way ot /ippUcation much need not
be {aid.

If Dr. Dupin would not give up the five as Sacra-
ments, would he (or his fuccefTors) agree to make
two clajfes of Sacraments ; and let ns ufe Sacra-
vientwn for any facred emblematical adl, as the
ancient Fathers did, without determining whether
ic was of di-vine or hiwmn appointment? — the
Romanifts themfelves make a difference between
their Sacraments in point of rank. — Still extreme
undion would remain unfettled. Might we adopt
fome ceremony, in the vifitation of the fick, ana-
logous to that mentioned by St. James, according
10 the idea of it here given*'?

For my own part, I know not whether fuch
an alteration would not feem to me an Improve-
ment, A fomentation, or fomething of that fort,
might be fubftituted for unflion: fome tafks,
penances, exercifes, might be impofed in cafe of
recovery, after the manner of the ancient cli-
nic' abfolutionj any good refolutions recorded
in the prefence of refpedable witnelTes", would
be the more likely to be kept on that ac-
count. Surely a meeting of pious, difcreet, el-
derly neighbours, fome clergy amongft them,
forming a domeftic religious affembly, praying
together, under due regulation, in the houfe of
a fick man, if it became generally cuftomary,
and was held at different houfes interchangeably,
misht be the micans of promotinii mutual bene-

volence;

^ Seft. X. beginning and end.
' Wheatly, page 468.

"> Wlieatly feems to favour the idea of WitiieJJes, pa^e
468.

BOOK IV. ART. XXV, SECT. XII. 249

volence ; and might in time produce a great increafe
oi Piety and Virtue''.

" For the reafons mentioned in former inftances, I again
mention, that thofe who took notes during the Leftures, will
not find every thing in their notes, which they find here. Want
of time obliged me to omit the tenth Section entirely, and the
greateft part of the eleventh.

ARTICLE

2 CO BOOK IV. ART. XXVI SECT. I,

ARTICLE XXVI.

OF THE UNWORTHINESS OF THE MINISTERS,
WHICH HINDERS NOT THE EFFECT OF THE
SACRAMENTS.

ALTHOUGH in the vifiblc Church the
evil be ever mingled with the good, and
lometimes the evil have chief authority in the
Miniftration of the Word and Sacraments ; yet
forafmuch as they do not the fame in their own
Name, but in Chrift's, and do miniller by his
commifTion and authority, we may ufe their
MiniRry, both in hearing the Word of God,
and in receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the
efFed of Chriit's ordinance taken away by their
wickednefs, nor the grace of God's gifts dimi-
nifhed from fuch, as by faith, and rightly do re-
ceive the Sacraments miniftered un;o them; which
be effeftual, becaufe of Chrift's inftitution and pro-
mii'e, although they be miniftered by evil men.

Neverthelefs, it appcnaineth to the diicipline of
the Church, that enquiry be made of evil Minif-
ters, and that they be accufed by thole that have
knowledge of their ollcnces ; and finally, being
found guilty, by juft judgment be depoled.

I. The Hijlory of this Article fecms to lie
chiefly in the age of the Reformation; when thofe
who were heightening every evil of Popery, and

painting

BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. I. 2 i^ I

painting it, to themfelves and ethers, in the ckrkell
coK)urs, amongft other things, fuggefted and main-
taintained, that Tuch wicked minillers as the Popidi
Priefts v/ere, muft fliock every feiious man by
their preaching, inftead of amending his heart ;
and murh vitiate even the Sacraments tiiemfelves.
— Our Church (hewed its moderation and good
(enie in not running the lengths of fuch reformer?,
being foon aware of the difficulties to which their
notion muft lead. — But before we refer to any
authorities, let us look to early times, and fee
whether anything liiTiilar appears.

The idea that facraments adminiftered by Priefts.
of immoral character, debauched, drunken, " lovers
of pleafure more^ than lovers of God," fliould be
fomething different from what they ought to be,
and were intended to be, feems not unnatural. —
A facrament muft appear to the mind, an holy
ordinance, adminiftered to devout Chriftians, by
a facred officer ftiU more devout : whatever de-
ranged this conception muft feem, at firft, to
deftroy the vital fpirit of the whole ordinance. —
And though reajon might fuggeft what is urged
in our Article, yet tht feelings and prejudices would
fcarce ever be reconciled to a Sacrament given by
a , bad man : nay difficulties would arife on all
fides, and would continue to harafs the mind. Is
this, (a communicant would always aik himfelf)
the reprefentative of God? ofChrift? or even of
the Church } Noj they muft all difclaim him !
can the wicked be attended to by Him who is of
purer eyes than to behold iniquity } by him who
knew no lin? or can any man be confidered as
bearing the commiffion of that Religious Society,
whole iandity he profanes ? Such arguing, I fay,
is not unnatural : it has, in truth, occafioned the

difficulties
' 2 Tim. iii. 4-

252 BOOK IV. ART. :^XVI. SECT. T^

difliculiies which have made it worth while to
compofe an Article on our prefcnt Uihiecl:. — But
our immediate bulinefs is with the Hiftory of early
times.

Cxprian^ who is placed in 248, Bp. of Carthage, a
man of an excellent charader, tell into difputes
with other Chriftian leaders, about re-baptizing
thofe, who had been baptized in any Se^^ out of
the main body of Chriftians, or according to the
language of the times, out of the communion of
the Crt/W/V Church. Thefe difputes muft be about
the cffecl of Sacraments beins. hindered bv fome
•imperfedion or iinworthinejs in thofe who adminif-
tered them ; for there feems nothing peculiar to
Baptifm in the qucftion. Cyprian was of opinion,
that the facramcnts, in this cafe, were ineffeBualy
or, in other words, he was for the re-baptizing of
thofe, who had been baptized by Heretics. His
chief opponent, was Stephen Bilhop of Rome,
whofe opinion, in all its particulars, is not exadly**'
known.

The Dcnatijls are placed by Lardner in 312.
Their feparation from the Church was owing to no-
difference about dodrine, but at firft to a contefb
about the appointnient of a Bilhop of Carthage.
This appointment was made by fome Africans (the
inhabitants" of Africa Proconlularis) without con-
iulting the churches of Numidia: thefe laiter,-
thinking themfelves ill ufed, made all poffible ex-
ceptions to the appointment, and then difputes
arcfe about tlie reafonabienefs of fuch exceptions.
The Numidians, amongil; whom were one or two-

l.adinii

o

'' Lard. Cred. Cyprian : or Works, Vol. 3, page 137.

'^ In .'Ulrica theie were fix Roman Provinces one of which-
was Jfr'.ca Procoti/ularis, another Kuuiidia : Bingham, .^nt.
9. 2. 5.— Carthage was the Metropolis of Africa Procon-
fularis

BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. I. 253

leading men of the name of Donatiis^ excepted
particularly to the new Bifihop (whofe name was
C^cilianus) as a man of immoral charafter, in
fome refpecis ; and they excepted to his confe-
cration, as having been performed by a Traitor, or
I'raditor, that is, one who had through fear de^
jlivered up the fcriptures, in the times of perfecu-
tion, to thofe who meant to deftroy them. A
church governed by fuch perfons, they faid, could
be no true church; all its ordinances, even the
facraments themfelves, muft lofe their proper efFedt
under fuch adminiftration. Nay, when heated
with difpute, they went fo far as to re-baptize
thofe Africans, who came over to their party, if
not Europeans who had communicated with them;
which was profeffing, in the moft open manner,
the invaHdity of the facramental forms when ufed
by their adverfaries. The Donatifts were very nu»
merous, fo as to be governed by 400 BKhops.
(Mofheim.)

They had alfo a very formidable force amongft
them; a large band of Fanatics, called Circiimcel-
Hones, who ufed violence, and were guilty of ex-
tenfive and numerous majjhcres : thele were alfo
fo wild as to fancy, that they fuifered martyrdom
if they dcftroyed themfelves, or compelled others
to deftroy them.

The writings of Augufiiin and Optatus feem to
have had great. efFeft on the Donatifts ; which Qiews,
that they had fome good principles.

This affair of the Donatifts being fimilar to that
in which Cyprian was engaged, and both happen-
ing in Africa (in the larger fenfe) the latter re-
newed the idea of the former; and the writers in
the controverfy with the Donatifts, become expo-
fttors of Cyprian and Stephen. — The chief writers
on the fide of the Donatifts were Parmenianus,

Petilianus,

254 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. II.

Petilianus, Crelconiup, &c. Their adverfaries were
Auguiliii and Optauis, whofe wriiinos muft be
fludicd by any one tliat wilhes to be fullv informed
on the iubjecl:. He would find them rational and
fpirited, and agreeing with our'^ church.

Now it does not appear to me, that thefe two
celebrated cafes are exadly parallel to ours ; be-
caufe in both, the Minifters are fuppofcd difqua-
lifted ab initio, whereas our Miniilers, in thepreient
Article, are luppoled to be regularly ordained. —
But yet theie cales would produce arguments
which would arledl the lubjed now before us ;
efpecially as CaiCiliarius was acculed of immora-
lities, though perhaps unjuftly. It would thence
come to be argued generally, whether vice, in a
minifter, hinders the effect of his miniilerial
ads.

II. But not to detain you longer from the age
of the Reformation. I have not the works of
Wickliffe at hand, but J fuipedt, that, inveighing
againft the wickednels of the Romilh Priefts, he
\.\{t6y as one topic, the notion, that their profli-
gacy mull vitiate the Sacraments; or he laid fome-
thiug which his enemies might reprelent as mean-
ing that. The council of Conftance made decrees
againft him, and determined to dig up his bones
on account of certain propofitions : — One of them
was, ** If a Bifliop or Prieft live in mortal lln,
he'' ordaincth not, baptizeth not, confecrateth
not." — Another propofition faid to be taken out
of Wickliffe, as to the _/«;«', is, " The ill Lite of

a Prelate

•* Take a fpecimen in Forbes, lo. i. 8. from Aug. de Unico
Baptifnio contra Petilianurn.

'^ Thefe are the words in B;;.Yter's Hi.1. of Councils, page
431. — Thofe in page 438, are there faid to be " charged on
John ///</}," but in page 439, " ta!:en out of Wickliffe."

^ Page 438 ; fee alfo page 439.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. II. 2^;;

a Prclite fubtrafteth the fubicils acceptation of
orders, and other lacraments;" — "and yet in cafe
of neceffity," &c. But the Council of Conftance
mi-:;ht miireprefent the fayingsol the Reformers.

in x\\Q N dcelj'ary Dodriney &c. we have a pafll^ge
to our purpoie, on the fubject of the Romilh
Sacrament of Orders^, in which mention is made
of the Donatifts, and the opinions of fome ancients
introduced, as Chryfoftom, Ambrofe, and Gregory
of Nazianzum. This work agr.es with the doc-
trine of our Church.

The Anabaptilb, at the time of the Reforma-
tion, ran into this error, that the vices of JVIinifters
mud annull the force of Sacraments; as might be
expedled from their unthinking feverity and mo-
rofenefs. Luther fays of them\ ( Anabaptifl:^)
" propter hommum vitia vel indignitatem (" im-
wort/iinefsy" the exprefiion of our Article) damnant
verum Baptiliiia." And Forbes\ in his tenth Book
and fecond Chapter, fpeaks of the old controverfy,
^' de fide et probitate baptizantis," being renewed
by the Anabaptifts at the Reformation; whofe
fundamental principle I judge (from Mojheim^s
account of them) to be, that the vifible church of
Chrift, mufl be -perfect \\-\ faEl as well as in 'Theory.
In the Reformatio Le glim (de H^refibus, Cap. 15.)
the Anabaptifts are charged with feceding from the
Church, and Sacraynents^ faying, that they are kept
away, '* vcl miniftrormn improbitate, vel aliorum
f rat rum.

The Council of "Trent anathematizes thofe who
fay, that a Prieil living in mortal fin, cannot confer
a Sacrament. The Catechifm is exp relied not

unlike

g About three pages from the beginning of the fubjeft.

^ Works, Vol.2, fol. ijoj.

' Forbes, 10. 2. i. and 10.4. 11.

2^6 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. II.

unlike our own'' Article. — Thofe who follow the
confeflion of AiiiJburg, " damnant Donatiftas et
fimiles, qui negabant licere populo uti minifterio
in Ecclefia, et fentiebant minifterium malorum
inutile et inefficax' t^t.^' — The Helvetic fays'", that
the perfeftion of Sacraments does not depend on
the worihinefs or unworthinefs of thofe who give
them. And the Scotch, that for the right ufe of
Sacraments, it is requifite that their end and defign
fhould be rightly underftood by Minifter and
people. The prefbyteriansdo not feem to condemn
the error heartily.

Heylin, in his introduction to his Life of Arch-
bifhop Laud", fays, that the Church of England
joins with the Church of Rome in fevcral points,
in oppofition to SeSiariesoi various kinds; amongft
other Articles, he mentions that " of hindering
the effect of the Sacraments by unworthy JVlinif-
ters." — And Dii Pin, in his commonitorium",
makes no objection to our twenty- lixth Article.

Barclay, in his Apology for the fakers, treats
the diftinclion ufed in our Article between the
Man and the Minijler, as frivolous ; and feemingly
runs into the notion lately mentioned as held by
the fiift Anabaptills, that becaufe the Church of
Chrift is perfect in Theory, it mud be fo in fa£i ;

that

^ See alfo Catech. on the Eucharljl : Seifl. lxxi v. page 232.
— Afts of the Council, Seflion vii. Canon 12; on Sacraments
in general.

' Syntagma, Aug. Conf. Art. viii. or page 13. of fecond
part.

■" The Helvetic Churches were founded by Zuinglius ; the
Dutch have much of Calvin's notion in their dodrine : the
French Proteftants are called Calvinijis in France. (Voltaire,
Louis XIV. Cal'vinif/>!c).—QA\\\n, Intl. 17. 16. agrees with
us : See a paflage in Bingham's Works, Vol. 2, page 565, from
Archbifliop Whitgift, exprefling the opinion of Calvin.

^' Page 37, ° Append, to Moflicim.

BOOK IV. ART XXVI. SECT. III. 257

that 15, no imperfed church muft be allowed to be
a true Church. One fees what the fcope of the
reafoning is; to depreciate all facraments, by
heightening the defedls to which they may be
liable in fome particular cafes, in the prefent faulty
flate of things ; in order to draw men from ex-
ternals, and bring them to trufi: only to the in-
ternal //^/;/.— -The idea was not new in Barclay's
time. In the Helvetic Confeffion are thefe words;
Neque eos probamus, qui propter invifibilia^ afper-
nantur in facramentis •vijibiliay &c. quaies MeJ/a-
liani^ fuiife dicuntur.

III. But though we may agree with the Church
of Rome as to the perfection of facraments admi-
niftered by imperfed men; yet there is another
thing, very nearly allied to this, in which we
oppofe them : that is, the effecl of the Intention, of
a Pried when he adminifters Sacraments.

Inteniion is not the fame with Probity; becaufe a
man of a general good charader, might not intend
to give a iacrament, asfuch, on a particular occa-
sion, or he might be abfent in mind, &c. — and a
bad man might intend it. But yet thcl'e are con-
ceded'* : ordinarily, a good man will have the
pureft intention in all offices of religion. The
Romanifts mention worthinefs and intention to-
gether ^ And they defcribe their meaning by
laying, that a Miniiler muft intend, in order to
have his ads effedual, what the Church^ intends;
the Church, I fuppofe, from which he receives

his

P For Meflaliani, or Euchits, fee Art. xxv, Se»5t. 11. where
there is mention of the Quakers, and of this pafrao;e : forfomc
half converted Quakers, fee the fixth Sedion of this Article.

*i Forbes, 10. 1 . 18.

' See Council of Trent, SeJT. 7. Can. 11, 12. — And Cate-
cbifm. Part. 2. Seift.2;, of Sacraments in general.

* Council and Catechifm, ibid.
VOL. IV. R

^5^ BOOK IV. ART.XXVI. SECT. III.

his commiflion : but the Romanics conceive only
One true church. — Tliis idea of what the Minifter
is to intend, was dehvered by Pope Eugenius' in
the Council of Florence, in the year 1438. — And,
though tlie Council of Trent adopted it, yet
Caterini" argued, in that Council, as a Protcflant
would now argue".

We nuift not, Iiowever, think that the queftlon
about the intention of the Minifter, was firfl
ftarted even in the Council of Florence. vSo long
ago as the time of Athanafms, it was dlfcufled.
— Athanafius, when a Boy, at Alexandria, bap-
tized'' fome Boys, in the way of boyifh imitation;
by way of playing^ as we fhould fay, at chriflening.
But Bifhop Alexander, by the advice of his Clerg}',
held the Baptifm to ht valid: and would not have
the boys rc-baptized. — Amongft the Schoolmen,
our countryman Dtms^ fpeaks of a diflinftion be-
tween acltial^ and habitual intention, as eftablifhed,
and propofes an intermediate fort, which he calls
•y/r/Ktf/.— Cardinal Bona, in his Book on the Mafs**,
fays, of the Prieft's intention, *■'■ habitualis fuffi-
ciens non eft; a5Jualis optima atque laudabilis ;
fed non neccffaria : fufficit eiiim viriualis, ilia
nimirum quae ab afluali proveniens et non revocata
adhuc remanet fecundum fuam virtutem." — I give
this fentence at length in order to flicw what nice-
ties the fubjedt of Intention admits of. Indeed it
is fo far from being limited to three forts, that it

contains

' Forbes, 10. i. 14. " Forbes, 10. 1.27.

* See Trent, Seff. 14. Chap. 6. about a Confefor woX. hvcw'vag
a due Intention.

y Forbes, 10. i. 15. from Ruffinus, Sozomen, &c.

* Duns Scotiis. — Sec Forbes, 10. 1.22.

* Locke's dirtindtion between aftual and habitual knowledge,
is fimilarto this; on the underftanding, 4. i. 8.

" Card. Bona died 16 74, iEt. 65 :— De Mifia, cap. 1. Sea. 5.
page 180, col. 2,

BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. IV. 259

contains an infinity of degrees, and an endlefs
variety of mixtures.

If all the Romanifts faid no more than that _a
Prieft ought to intend what the Church intends, ic
might be^taken as meaning only, that whoever ads
by commijjiony ouglit to follow the intention of his
-principal; but in forae writings compofed for the
People y the bufinefs of Intention is much abufed.
We need not a ftronger inftance than the Rubric
produced by Bifhop Burnet, on the Article. —
Bilhop Porteus's account alfo is worthy to be read^
—And in the year 1788, a French Proteftant
Clergyman told a friend of mine, that the then
ArchbiQiop of Paris "had given great offence tq
the generality of his Clergy by reviving, m a note
on one of his MandemenSy the dodrine, that _ the
efficacious Grace of the Sacrament was divided
into three Portions; one of which was for the offi-
ciating Prieft, one for his affiftants, the third for
him who received : but that the Prieft might, if
he thought proper, by his Intentio, and the private
ad of his mind, take the laft portion to himfelf,
and cheat the communicant of it."

IV. I will trouble you with no more Hiftory.

Let us now fee what may be wanted in the way
of Explanation.

In this twenty-fixth Article we muft conceive
the fubjed of Saciaments in general, to be coa-
tinued. Though what has now beeii faid may
feem to relate to one or the other Sacrament ift
particular, yet if ought to relate to on? only as a
Sacrament: if it does tJiat, it may b? afiirme^ ©f
facraments in general.

The title is exprelTed in terms which were
ufual at the time: the paffsige? cite4 may fjiev/

that;

Brief Confutation, page 70.
R 2

z6o BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. IV.

that; particularly the margin of the Trent Cate-
chifm.

In this Article it is fuppnfedy that the Minifters
fpoken of, are though real, yet unworthy Minif-
ters; and that thofe who receive a Sacrament, are
worthy receivers : whereas in the twenty-ninth
Article, we fliall find the Minifters are fuppofed
worthy, the receivers unworthy.

For " vifible church," fee the nineteenth Article,
Sed:. IV. " Have chief authority"— in Latin it is
only "pr^;//," which might feemingly have been
tranflatcd preftde. The Englilh, as it ftands at
prefent, dire<5ls our views to the higheft Prelates^
but the Latin, to any Miniftcr who happens to
prefide in giving Sacraments.

The latter paragraph fecms intended to obviate
an objeftion which might be made to the former.
Men might fay, you efleem the wickednefs of
Minifters too lightly : no, fays the latter para-
graph (in effef^), the evil of wicked Minifiiers is
very great and important; but if you apply a
wrong remedy to ir, you make it ftill greater. —
Punifli the guilty, not the innocent. Proceed
againft the Minifters, but do not prevent the
people from benefiting bv thofe inftitutions, which
are intended for then- Benefit. Let no man be
hindered from doing his part; whatever ftumbling-
blocks may lie in his way, every man will be lure
to get good if he does his beft to proceed in the
paths of duty.

The idea of the efHcacy of minifterlal afts, has
been confounded with that of the duty of Minif-
ters; certainly it is wrong lor M millers to be
vicious, but if they continue to ail by com-
mlrtion.from Heaven, bcnefiLs may be received

through

BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. V. 261

through their agency'. It is zvrong for any Magif-
irate to be 'vicious, but yet the people may re-
ceive redrefs and protedion from warrants ligned
by him.

When we fpeak of " the effect of the facra-
ments," we (hould diftinguifh between their effedls
as fuch, and their accidental effeds j a facrament
given by a good Minifter, will have more effedt
in raifing pious aife6tions, than given by a bad
one; but this I call accidental: its effed as a
facrament, that efFeft which no facrament can fail
to produce when intire and regular, will be pro-
duced, though the Minifter be not a good man.
This diftindion, between accidental good effeds,
and fuch as may be called effential, Auguflin feems .
to have been mafter of ^

V. It does not feem as if our Proof need run
into any great length.

* Sacraments are not to be negleded by the
People, becaufe they think Minifters blameable.'

We may look at Matt. vii. 22.— Ads iii. 13.—
1 Cor. iii. 5. — or we may, with Bilhop Burnet,
ufe the redudio ad abiurdum, and fay, if faults
of Minifters vitiate facraments, a man can never
know whether he has been baptized or not, or
whether he has received the facrament of the
Lord's Supper; he cannot even know whether he
be a Chriltian.— We may add, that as all men are
faulty, there, can be no true Church of Chiift.
But the Article itielf contains fufhcient Proof of
what it aflerts. If an Article contains only pro -
politions which are allertions, our bufinefs is to

give

^ Trent, Sefl". 7. Can. 11. we have, " /j'^'KiWintentionem :"
now Intention may be required as Dutj, or in order Co eff^ia:y\
does the Council mean at all to leave fuch an ambiguity ?

« Sjee paflages quoted in Forbes, 10. a. \\, and 10. 3. 6.

R 3

262 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. VT.

give proofs ; but when the propofitions which an
Article contains, are themfelves arjunients, or
proofs, all additional arguments are kiperfluous.

Bifhop Burnet alfo reafons, in the fame form,
on the other point, of the Int'^nticn of the Pried
being neceiTary towards the complete effect of a
Sacrament. If the fecret afts of the PrielVs mind
can prevent admiffion into the ChriOiian Covenanr,
no one can tell whether he be a Chriflian or not.
Nay, who can tell v;hether 1^ who ads as a Prieft;
be a Chriflian ? — Salvation at the difcretion of
Priefts, not only good but wicked, is not con-
ceivable.—More need fcarce be added on fuch a
notion.

VI . We come then to our Application.

A form of Affent does not feem neceflary ; but
fomething may be faid on the fubjcd of mutual
concejfions. — If we take in the fubjeil of Intention^
\vhich does not properly belong to our Article
(if it did Du Pin would fcarccly be filent,) we
have two adverfarics; on the iub'ed of unworthi-
Jiefs, fome Diffenters; on that of Intention, the
Romanids.

I. To fuch Diflenters, or Sedaries, we might
grant, that they have good motives for afcribing
great evil to the unworthincfs of Miniftcrs ; and
that, in one fenfe, the good effects of Sacraments
are really hindered by vicious Clergy; that is,
facramcnts ill adminiftered, make a weaker im-
prelTion on the heart than when well adminiftered.
And their *' fpiritiial Grace" does partly confill in
their good cfl'ects on the mind according to the
natural courfe of things^

But then we muft expecl to have it granted, on
the other hand, that no man is to chjent himfolf
from any facramental inftitutions under pretence

of
* Art. XXV. Se^. 11.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. VI. 2.6^

of the wickednefs or unworthinefs of Minlfters.
— That every man is to do his own part in the
bed manner pofTible.— And that a perfon, as an
Agents or under a commiffion, may do valid Si£ts,
though he be of an immoral private ^ character.

2. To Romanijls, with regard to Intention, vvc
may grant, that a mere cafual, jocular fprinkling,
thougii with a facred form of words, does not
conrtitute a Bapiifm. That the receivers of Sacra-
ments ihould have reafon to think, that thofe who
adminifter, ad under commiffion from God, or
Chrift, or from a religious Society. Whence we
are led to call the boyiih fprinkling of AthanaJiuSy
no Baptifm, becaufe he could not, whilft a boy,
have any commiffion foadminifter Sacraments.

But w^e muft expedl the Romanifts to grant, in
return, that the people have reafon to think a man
regularly commiffioned, who appears in a facred
place, habited for facred purpofes, under autho-
rity.— We muft expeft to have it allowed, that
Salvation, laboured for by Chriftian obedience,
cannot be capricioully put out of the reach of the
pious and virtuous, the faithful and dihgent, by
thofe, who are perhaps more frail than themfelves.

Laftiy, as to Improvement, it feems as if fome
might be drawn from obferving cafes in human
hie, in which men ad: by commiffion, where the

fame

s Charles Lefiie has a difcourfe intitled, " who they are that
.-ire now qualified to adminifter Baptii'm and the Lord's Supper."
(Works, Vol. a. fol. page 719). — He fays Ibme Quakers, after
reading on Baptifm, " ftand chiefly upon \.\\z perfon al hoUn'efi of
rhe adminillrator:" he means /r/i;<?/^ virtue; for he fays, th.it
befides pcrfonal holinefs, facerdoial is required: — thefe half-
converted Quakers thought, " that the fpiiitual efFe^ls of Bap-
tifm cannot be conveyed by means of an unfandlified inftivi-
mcnt."— This is to our purpofe, but the Difcourfe is chiefly to
prove, that Miniflers ordained by Bi'hp:, are the pcrfons duly
iiiialified. The fifth Sei^ion, however, page 735, is upon our
qacllicn. * 4

264 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI. SECT. VI.

fame difficulties occur, but occahon no difputc. —
An Am bajj'a dor acts for his Sovcreion; if he be a
vvordilefs man his vices do harm, but his a£ls are
lalid.^ThQy are not vahd without fome kind of
inientioH', and he muft intend what his Sovereign in-
tends; yet he may be abfent in mind while he is
figning a treaty; neverthclefs his inattention will
not make his fignature of no force.

Improvement tTiight alfo arife from reflc(51:ing
how very praEiical fubjects are, which are treated as
fpeculative. Who maintains any docfbrine about
imworthinefs or intention of Minlfters, but with
fbme farther view ? — Let then Pradice be pro-
feffed, and then we can urge, doyourbeft; en-
deavour to prevent unworthinefs of every kind; to
prevent men from depending on mere external
adls, done without any intention or meaning of
virtue or piety. But judge no man.— Indeed it
muft not be denied, that when men do u(e their
beft endeavours to attain the higheft good, they
are liable to great obflrudions and hindrances from
others, even in things of a moral and fpiritual
nature : but yet if they acl with honcfky and dili-
gence, they may aflure themfelvcs that nothing
which they do, will be loft on him to whom thev
look up for a reward.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. 1. II. 265

ARTICLE XXVII.

OF BAPTISM.

APTISM is not only a fign of profefllon, and

mark of difference, whereby Chriftian men

are difcerned from others that be not chriftened ;
but it is aifo a fign of Regeneration, or New Birth,
whereby, as by an inftrument, they that receive
Baptifm rightly, are grafted into the Church; the
promifes of the forgivcnefs of fm, and of our
adoption to be the fons of God by the Holy
Ghoft, are vifibly figned and fealed; Faith is con-
firmed, and Grace increafed by virtue of prayer
unto God. The Baptifm of young Children is in
any wife to be retained in the Church, as moil
agreeable with the inftitution of Chrift,

I. The HiJIoyy of this Article might be very
long, and might draw us into a number of Con-
troverfies; I will endeavour to icled what is mofh
material, and bed fovmded. We fhould never-
thelefs divide our HiPiory '\ulo two parts; the firfl
relating to Baptifm without any regard to the Jge
of the perfon baptized : the fecond relating to the
Baptifm of Infants.

I I . Firft of Baptifm without regard to Age. —
BasTTTM fignifies to tinge, or wafh ; |3a7rT»^w much
the fame ; j3a7rT»^o/x«t, in the middle voice, is re-
fledtive, and implies wafhing one's /^^. Wafliing,

as

^66 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. 11.

as a religious rite, is not confined to Chriftlanity;
it has been practifed both by Heathens and Jezvs ;
and probablytakes its rife from the ;w//^r^/ prin-
ciples of tlK human conftitution. I kno.v not
that the natural principles of cleanlinefs, purity,
delicacy, and their oppofites, nailincrs, filthinels,
&c. have ever been philofophically analyzed ; but
men acl upon them continually, and recognize the
Icntiments which they are adapted to produce. —
Mr. Hume, in his Effays, (Principles of Morals,
Sect. 8.) fpcaks of cleanlinefs as a quality agree-
able to others^ but he fays nothing of its effeds on
one's Jelf; which neverthelefs feem to be very
powerful. Every one makes cleanlinefs a part of
merit and excellence: but there is certainly a great
connexion between bodily cleanlinefs, and purity
of Heart. No one ever thought that purit}' was
not acceptable to fuperior Beings; and thofe who
have worfhipped different janks of Deities, have
always been the more exadt in their Puyific/2lio>is,
the more noble they conceived the Deities to be,
to whom they had occafion to addrefs them-
felves.

Perhaps acls of Purification have generally, or
always, been emblematical \ they have been per-
formed as fjons of internal clcanfmg from vice :
but yet the natural connexion between external and
internal purity, makes the reprefeniation to ope-
rate as a reality : whatever exprellcs purity, pro-
motes it.— Hence it appears natural, that different
fcts of men, in different ages and countries, fliould
have agreed in the practice of ablutions and puri-
fications \

Any one who wiflies to fee a fliort account of

the

* Some rcafonlng of this fort was made ufc of in the Ap-
pendix to the firll Book, Seil. v — i .\.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. III. 267

the Luftrations oi the Greeks, may confuk Potter's
Antiquities^

The diftinftion between clean and unclean, was
very ftrongly marked in the Law of Mofes. And
the Jewifli traditions carried it Hill farther. The
fixth Order, or great divifion, of the lalmud, or
Mifna, is tlie Order of Purifications; in which t!ie
rules are very numerous" and complicated. But
we are moft concerned with the Jewidi manner of
admitting Profelytes into their Religion; they ufed
circumcihon, if it had not been uled before, but
always'' Baptifm.

It is worth while to obferve, that when a Pro-
felyte was baptized and admitted into the JewiOi
Religion, he was faid to ht born again', his Bap-
tifm was regeneration^ , — And there was fomething
of the fame fort amongft the Heathens; a perfoii
who had been confidered as dead, on account of
long abfence, &c. went through an emblematical
new-birth^ before he recovered his rights, or was
admitted to certain holy ordinances^ — Nay, Ter-
tullian fays, Perfons were baptized in the myfteries
of Apollo and Ceres, with a view to regeneration
and impunity. — (Idque fe in regenerationem et im-
punitatem perjiiriorum fuorum agere przefumunt.
— -Ter. de Baptifmo, C. 5)^.

III. In the Chriftian religion, Baptifm was

ufed

•* Vol. I. page 219. — Juftm Martyr tries to account for the
Lutlrations of the Heathens by fome notion relating to true

Chriftian Baptifm. Apol. i. page 9 1 .^-Tiiirlb. quoted by

Middleton, in Letter from Rome, page 139. •

^ See Wotton on the Mifna, Vol. i. page 160.

** Introd. to Wall on Infant Baptifm. — Wotton'on the Mifna,
Chap. S. — But fee alfo Lardner's Works, Vol. 11. page 320.

^ See Authorities in Introd. to Wall, Sedl. 6.

^ See Potter, Vol. i, page 223; Aeute^owot/xoi, or tV-'fOTror-
.^51. The Authors of the Greek Primitives make the latter to
mean, one whofe funeral pile was built in his life- time.

K Wall, page 25, quarto.

268 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. Ill,

tifcd from the beginning. *' The Law «ind the
Prophets were until John^." When John began
to preach and baptize, the Chriftian religion began
to be publiihed; but the Baptifm of John fecnis
cnly to have been preparatory : he preaclied, in a
very awakening manner. Repentance-^ and he made
-his difciples go through a ceremony of purilica-
tion, exprclTivc of Repentance; but all by way
of preparing them to acknowledge the great Per-
ibnage who fliould come after him. He did not
pretend to confer the gifts of the Holy Ghoft'.

Chrift himfell followed. There are fcveral places of
Scripture, in which it is faid, that Chrift ^ baptized j
but John iv. 2. Ihews that, in fome way, it might
be faid, and at fome time, that " Jefus himfclf bap-
tized not, but his difciples^" Whoever performed
the office, converts were admitted into Chrifti-
anity by Bapiifm, and fuch Baptiim may be called
the IBaptifm of Chrift. — As far as we can judge,
it was wife to adopt a cuftom generally received;
and one filling in with the natural feelings of all
mankind. The Baptifm of Chrift differed from
that of the Heathens as being the Seal of a con-
tract; for whatever admits any one into a Society,
muft imply conditions and contrading. Nay, this
contradl was to mankind, of boundlels extent, and
of endlefs duration. — Chrift is repeatedly faid to
bapize ivith the Holy"" G/wJiy pofiibly we may not
fee the full force of the exprcflion -, it might be,

that

^ Luke xvi. 16. — Lardner, in the phce above-mentioned,
thinks, that Baptifm was JrJ? ufed as an initiation rite, in the
Chriftian Religion, Works, Vol. 2. page 320.

' Afts xix. I — 6.

^ See Matt. iii. ii- — John i. 33.-111. 22, 26. — iv. i.

' This expreflion might perhaps bear to be interpreted as a
cc?nparative phrafe; like Matt. ix. 13. and parallels. If fo,
it would mean, that Jefus baptized lefs frequently than his
difciples.

"» Matt. iii. 11.— John i. 33. — Ads i. 5.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. III. 269

that the Baptifm of Chrift was immediately at-
tended with fpiritual gifts; as diftinguiflied from
that of Johiy which was only an emblem of Re-
pentance; or from that of fucceeding Chrillians,
which feems to have been followed by gitts of the
Holy" Ghoft, but not always immediately.

Under the fubje6t of Confirmation"*, we faw
foniething of the manner in which the gifts of the
Holy Ghoft followed Baptifm at a diftance, as
defcribed in the Ads of the Apoftles. — St. Paul
has been thought ^ rather to difclaim the office
of baptizing ; he does not feem to me to do that ;
he only mentions that preaching was his depart-
ment; and fpeaks of baptizing in fuch an eafy
way, as if he had always baptized when he had
had leifure, and occafion had ferved, and as if he
had never taken any exad account of thofe whom
he baptized. But yet the number of thofe he had
baptized at Corhilh when he wrote his firfl Epiftle,
feems to us very fmall ; and puts us upon thinkincr
how, from the nature of preaching and baptizin^^,
they muft interfere much more with each other
according to primitive, than according to modern
cuftoms : certainly many could baptize, who could
not preach, or govern.

The Baptifm by Fire^ Matt. iii. 1 1 "J. does not

feem to mean any particular kind of Baptifm to be

defcribed by an Hiftorian, or Antiquarian. The

expreflion, " He fhall baptize you with the Holy

Ghoft and with Fire'"' feems of the prophetical

kind, and not intended to be underftood at the

time of fpeaking it. It would excite a fentimenc

of dread, immediately after — *' hewn down and

€aft into the fire-^" — but it might predid the

fiery

" Aasu.38. o Art. XXV. Seft. m.

f I Cor. i. 14. 17.

^ K«( crt^i is omitted in feveral Manufcripts,

270 BOOK TV. ART. XXVII. SECT. IV.

fiery tongues which Tate upon the Apoftles : com-
pare Ads i. 5'. -

The Baptifin of Chrift, and that of his fol-
lowers, feem dill emblematical. — This is well de-
fcribed by C\prian\ where he fays, there is no
need of " foap and other helps, and a large
pool," &c,

IV. The early Fathers feem to fpeak as if Bap-
tifm had been always, that is, in all ordinary cafes, in
ancient times, performed by hmnerftonoi the whole
body; performed any where, at any Pond or River;
till Baths were made for the purpofe, in buildings
on the outfide of churches, which were called
Baptijieries. — If we confidcr how very Ihort and
general ihe directions of fcripture are with regard
to Baptifm, and how few circumftances are related
in the narrations, we fliall not wonder if we find
very great variety in the ancient rites of baptilrn
before Churches were regulated by civil Laws. —
Iren2EUS*s account of the Valentinians is tranf-
lated by Wall'; but, without repeating their ex-
travagances, we may m?ntion, that frequently
Baptifm ufed, amongft fobcr Chriftians, to ht pre-
ceded by Prayer and i^7y?%":— that the Head of
the Ferfon in the water, was put under water three
times, in which cafe writers ufe the expreflion,
trine immerjion : it feems, at firft, as if this cere-
mony had arifen from the Form of baptizing in
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and oi
the Holy Ghoft; but yet, for fome reafan or
other, a cuflom of immergmg three times, has

prevailed,

^ Thofe who are mofl converfant in oriental idiom might
inform us, whether Holy Glioft rt/.v/ fire, could mean the fame
as the Holy Ghoft alfuming a /":/;> appearance?

- Wall page 464, qu-.iio, from Ep. 69. — This ij applicable
to the fubjed oi fpnnklir,^, Seft. x.

' Part 2. Chap. v. bcit i.

^ Wall, Pan 2. Chap, ix.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. V. 27I

prevailed, both amongft the Heathens'' and the
Jews''. The trine immerfion afterwards got into
difrepute, on account of fome Heretics who nfed
it, and was ordered to be left off, by a Council
held at Toledo ^ — After Baptifm, a mixture of
milk and honey ufed to be given, and a white gar^
ment put on ; all thefe w^ere emblematical. Some
wi£tion ufed to be praftifed : and the ceremony
was never performed without an abrenunciation of
the Devil, and fome profeffion of Faith. — I men-
tioned Exorcifm under a former Article, and
how foon Baptifm was fometimes followed by Con-
firmation.

It ufed to be reckoned, that Martyrdom fupplied
the place of Baptifm ; that is, that if a convert,
who had not been baptized, fuffered Martyrdom
for the Chriftian religion, his martyrdom would
complete his admiffion into the Church of Chriil,
as much as Baptifm would have done : and parti-
cular reafons and analogies were urged in favour
of the notion. — As the perfon baptized is wetted
with water, fo is the Martyr with his own blood":

&c.

V. The rites of Baptifm ufed in the Greek
Church, may be found in Sir Paul Ri cant' s^ pre-
fent State, &c. and an account of their grand
annual Purification may be feen in Cave's Ap-
pendix, before referred to, under the v/ord ayiao-^wo? :

and

t Potter's Antiquities, Vol. i. page 221. 223. Idem ier
focios pura circumtulit unda, -^n. 6. azg.—Terque fenem
flamma, ter aqua, ter fulphure lullrat. Ovid Metam. lib. 7.
cap, ».— In the latter paflage the word^amma reminds one of
the fcriptural baptizing with Jire; though no way probably
conne6led with it.

y See Wall's Introd. page Ixi. and page 488.

* See Sparrow's Rationale, page z6o.

a Wall, Part 2. Chap. 9. Stft. z. page 466. quarto. .

•» Chap. 7.

272 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII, SECT. VI. VIT.

.iiid one chapter in Bingham's Hiftory of Lay-
baptilm, is about the Greek. Church.

VI. The Romanijis profefs, tliat pure water is
the only proper ** maiter of Baphfrni yet by rules
built on tradition, they ufe holy Chrijm : they alio
ufe Exorcifm, Salt, Spittle, the white Garment,
and burning the wax-light : and fign eight parts of
the body (reckoning the eyes two^) with the fign
of the' Crofs. — They confidcr Baptifm as valid by
whomfoever^ performed. Layman, Jew, Infidel,
Woman, &c. but only in cafes of neceffity ; that
is, they had rather have a perfon baptized irregu-
larly than not at all. Heretics who adminifter
baptilm in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghoft, and who intend what the Church intends,
are held to baptize effecftually, without any confi-
cleratlon of necelTity^.

VI I. The Reformed z)ii\\xz[-\(t^ fliew their abhor-
rence for Popery by departing more or lefs from
the Romifli cufloms. Thole who think that the
Church of England has not carried Reformation
far enough, fpeak with a kind of horror of any
Baptifm whatever performed bv^ Women. And
dired the ceremony not to be performed where
Popifli Fonts' ufed to be fupcrftitioufly placed;
they alfo omit ihc fign of tlie crojs^ and are much
fcandalized by it in others. ^1 he Lutherans are
faid, on the other hand, to ute exorcifm; the
EngliJJi^ according to their ulual moderation, drop-
ped moft popilh ceremonies by degrees^ (fee Widl,
pnge 470. — Puller, page 281.) and probably fooncr

than

^ Trent Catech. Seft. x r. or 7,

* Ibid. Sea. 61, &c. ' Ibid. Sed. 22.

2 Council ot Trent, Seflion 7, 4th Canon on Baptifm.

^ Scotch Confeflion, Cliap. 22. ino, quod magis ell //jnrv-
dum, focininis baptizare pennitiunt. t<yi!tngma, page i ^4,
fcconJ paging.

^ Dircwiory.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. VIII. IX. 273

than they would have done, had all their Divines
ftaid at home, or none of them gone to Genevay
&c. but they flili ufe Fonts, with the fign of the
Crofs.

VIII. Charles Lejlie, a celebrated writer againft
the Quakers, fays, that no one fpoke againft water-
baptifm before George Fox, whom he places in the
year 1650"^. — And Archbifhop Seeker^ ^diys, that a
" Sedt (meaning the Quakers) fprung up amongft us
within a little more than 100 years, deny" the facred
appointment of water : But it feems to me, that
fome of the ancient heretics had the fame turn
of thought with our modern Quakers ; the fame
way of underftanding, or rather, of feeling, the
Scriptures'". For there is a fort of temper, which,
in any age, if not corrected, will bring men to
aim -at being all fpirit. ^intilla feems to have
had this quakerifli turn ; and was a felf-commif-
fioned female teacher": a great rarity, I fancy,
in ancient times. —The Council of Trent has a
Canon againft the denyers of Water-baptifm ; fuch
therefore exifted°.

IX. The 5o^/W<2;/j have been mentioned before
as allowing but one ceremonial pr^eceptum of
Chrift, an injundion to break bread p.— They con-

lider

^ On Water-Eaptifm, end of Se6t. 11.— Works, Vol. 2,
page 679. Charles Leflie was a proteftant adherent to the
Pietender in 1 7 1 4 ; and would have converted him from Popery.

* Ledure 35. page 222.

*" Compare Barclay's Apology, page 386, Edit. Birm. with

what was faid in Art. xxv. of the Afcodruta;, &c. See

alfo Aug. Haer. 59. Wall, 2. 7. 7. — But with regard to the

Manichean Baptifm, Wall, 2. 5. 3. and Lardner, Vol. 3. page
490, are of contrary opinions*

n See Wall, Part 2. Chap. 5. Seft. a.

" Canon a. of SefT. 7. (de Baptifmo.)

P Art.xxv.Seil.il. from Racovian Catechifm, page 143,
—And Ep. to Radedus in Socinus's Works, fci. Vol. i.
page 380, 383, 384,

VOL. IV. S

274 BOOK IV. ART. XXVll. SECT. X.

fider Baptifm as a vifible ceremony, admitting men
into Chriftianity, when they have been Jews, or
Pagans ; but not to be uled in a Family already
CJiriJlian. — Fauflus Socinus has written a treatile
on Baptifm ''.

The Jews had a notion like this of the Soci-
■nians'.

X. I will only mention one thing more before
1 proceed to the Hiflory of Infant- Baptifm; and
that is, the cuftom oi Jprinkling or pouring water
on the perfon baptized ; or the cuftom of partial
immerfion, as iupplanting, in fome countries,
that of total immerfion. The Baptifts do diftin-
guidi between fprinkling and pouring, but to no
end that I can perceive. Indeed more attention
lias been paid to the diftinftion between dipping
and fprinkling, than it appears to me to defer ve :
two moaes of performing an emblematical acl,
may be equally good, if they be equally adapted to
circumftances.

Wail fays, that Mr. Walker has fludied this
fubjedt of afpcrfion, affufion, &c. more diligently
than any other perfon*.

In early times of Chriftianity, Baptifm was per-
formed by immerfion, ordinarily, but cliniL Bap-
tifm was always, probably, performed by atfufion,
or pouring : tiiough it was reckoned to leave a
man in fome refped:s lefs quahfied for fome public
offices. — Wall quotes a good' inftance out of
Cvpricvi : he alfo mentions the cafe of a Prifotter.

But

*i See VolTius de Baptifmo.

' See Wall on fntant-Baptlfm, Introd. Sefl 3. and $. or the
laft chapter of the Book, page 524, quarto. Introd. pagel.

' boe Wall, page 470, quarto, the title of Walker's Book is,
*' Do£lrine of Baptlfms,"

« Part 2. Chap. 9. Seft. 2. page 464, quarto : quoted Se£l.
X. — It is fcarcely needful to fay, tlut c/inic Baptifm is Baptifm
of thofe Who keep their beds.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XT. ly ^

But Co far, aflfufion was only allowed in clinic bap-
tilrn, or in cafes of neceflity.

Near the end of the fifth Century, Gennadius of
Marfeilles " fpeaks as if it was an indifferent matter
whether a man were wetted with water, or plunged
into it; but he is the firft who does fo. Indeed
the cuftom of immerfion was firft left off in France,
and laft in England ; in the time of Queen Eliza-
beth.—But ftill it is faid, that all Countries con-
tinue the praftice of immerfion, except the Wel^
tern or Latin Church ; except thoie, who are, or
have been, under the Government of the Pope,—
It is natural that the cuftom of fprinkling fhould
gain ground, as being more commodious than im-
merfion, efpecially in cold'' Countries : fome very
eminent men of our own country, have however
been defirous to reftore the practice of immer-
fion, in ordinary cafes''. It is favoured by our
Rubric.

XI. We come now to the Hiftory of Infant-
baptifm.

As the cuftom of baptizing in general, fo that
of baptizing Infants in particular, feems to have
had fome foundation in the Nature of man.— -
Parents are anxious that their offspring fhall be
fccured from dangers, and put in a way to obtain
advantages, as foon as poffible. And the fame
motives which impel parents to admit their chil-
dren into the Family of a Mafter, in the way of
Apprenticefiiip, or into any literary Society for the
purpofe of education, impel them to make their
children members of Chrift, in order that they

may

" De ecclef. dogm. cap. 74.

" In Ruflla, it is faid. Children are bathed in cold water ;
yet, generally fpeaking, Immerfion may fuit the warmell cli-
rnates beft.

y Wall, Part 3, Chap. 9. Se(5V. a. page 474, quarto.
S 2

^76 BOOK IV. ART. XXVU. SECT. XI.

may be inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven. —
By the Law of Nature, a Parent makes any en-
gagement for his Son, during minority, which his
Son would make for himfelf, if fully informed of
the benefits refuking from it : and if any bond or
fecurity is to be given, it mud be given by the
parent. Would then a youth, if for the moment
enlii^htened, and informed of all the benefits re-
fulting from Chriftianity, and of the hazards of
neo-leSing it, be baptized or not? on the anfwer
depends the redicude of baptizing a youth during
his minority^ - But thcfe mora) remarks mufl not
here be purfued farther than is requifite to fet
the Hijlory of Infant-Baptifm in a right point of
view".

Amongft HeatlwiSy there was fuch a thing as
Luftration'' of Infants : which was accompanied,
both amongft Greeks and Romans, with the giving
of a name.

Amongft the Jews^ circumcifion was performed
on the eighth day after the birth, and a 7iame was
oiven'' at that time — And what was before men-
tioned, from Wall's Introduction, about their
baptizing Profelytes, may be extended to Chil-
dren; as Wall proves from Jewirii writings'*: the
Jews had moreover, a reference to our moral prin-
ciple, the good of the child*; and they expeded

Jezijs

* Minority, In any one affair, if not fixed by Civil Laws,
muft mean the time, from birth, during which a perfon is unable
to judge for himfelf, in that particular afFair.

* This was farther explained in my Ledlures on Dr. Balguy's
Moral Syllabus, Part a. Chap. 3. Seifl. 1. Subfefl. i. 35. and

Subfe£t. 2. 3. But both the Syllabus and the Explanation are

in MS.

^ See Wheatly on the Common Prayer.— —Office of Baptifm,
page 360.

= Gen. xxi. 3, 4. Luke i. 59, 60. — il. 21.

•1 See Introd. Sedl. 3. 5. and Sedl. 1 1. of this Art.
<= Wall's Introd. Seft, 3.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XII. XIII. 277

Jews to be baptized on the coming of Elias or
Chriji'.

XII. But the moft difficult matter to fettle is,
how the Chrijiians afted, in early times, with regard
to the baptizing of infants. Wall's Hiftory of
Infant-Baptifm feems to me ati excellent book ;
clear, learned, rational, candid, unaffected ; and I
Ihould add, foeaking from my own experience,
lively : I iincerely recommend it ; not only on
account of the information it gives with regard to
infant-baptifm, but as laying open Chriftian Anti-
quity in general, and treating, in a mafterly way,
many ful^efts ufeful to a Divine 2. Neverthelefs I
do not pretend that it removes all doubts what-
foever, even on its principal fubjeft.— -With regard
to the ScriptnreSy what can be deduced from theni
lies in a fmall compafs. On the one hand, they
mtniiQTi no injiance oi infant-baptifm; on the other,
they afford no inflance of baptifm being delayed.
Some Famirtes are fpoken of colleftively, as being
baptized, but the children^ are not mentioned par-
ticularly ^

XIII. How foon any accounts of infant-bap-
tifm, appear in reputable writers, is a matter in
difpute. Some Pzedobaptifts have, in their can-
dour, allowed a longer time before any appear,

than

f This is affirmed at the conclufion of Wall's Introduaion,
but I fee no proofs : they may be in Selden, Lightfoot, &:c.
however, the notion makes the meifage of the Jtws, John i.
19—25, intelligible. Who art thou that baptized Jeixis?-^
Jews need'aax. be baptized till Ch rift, or at leait Elias, come :
art thou then the Chrift ? or art thou Elias f or who art thou?

s This Book was before recommended, at the opening of the
Pelagian Controverfy.- Art. ix. Sedl. viu.

*> Afts X. 48. andxvi. ii;. 33. and 1 Cor. i. 16.— -See more-
over A dls ii. 41. and viii. 12, or 16; where numbers are baptized
in which muft probably be fome children.

S 3

2)8 BOOK IV. ART XXVII. SECT. XIV.

than others have approved of. — Bingham' begins
his evidences from the earheft times; fo indeed
does Wall; but the firft proofs are only by impli-
cation". To thefe writers I mufh refer you: the
fubftance of the proofs is well collected in a fliort
popular dialogue done by Wall from his larger
work, and intitled, *' A Conference between two
Men that had doubts about Infant-Baptlfm."— •
From this I may read a few words about thj firfl
centuries^ — What I fhall attempt is to give you
fome of the moft remarkable things in the Hiftory,
and fuch as have had the moft influence on mens
Opinions.

XIV. I. No difpute or controverfy was ever
held in ancient times concerning our fubjeft ; all
the palTages produced in evidence, are incidental".

2. Several perfons are fpoken of in Hiftory as
having been baptized late in life: now when it
appears, on examination, that fuch perfons were
themfelves converts from Paganifm, there is no
great difficulty; but when they appear to havebeer^
born of Chrifiian Parents, it is not fo eafy to account
for the delay : however, there is another thing to
be inquired into j whether the parents were bap-
tized before the children were born ; if not, one
may fee, that fuch as were unbaptized themfelves,
would fcarcely baptize their children in infancy, if

they

1 Book nth.

^ The manner in which Wall invejiigatcs the praflices of the
Apoftolic Age, has been already mentioned under Art. xxiv.

' Conference, page 72.

"" AuguHinfays, that the Do(E^rines of the Trinity and Re-
pentance, and Baptifm, and Unity of the Church, were never
fully opened till they were controverted ; (fee Art. i. Sed. iv.)
ue may obferve, that the reafon why the praftice of Infant-
Baptifm was never fully opened, was, becaufe it was never
controverted : — And we call every mention of Inlant-Baptiim
incidental, which occurs when that fubjedl is not the point iu
difpute.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 279

they could avoid it. That fome converts did
delay their Baptifm, is clear from^ Martyrdom"
being thought equivalent to Baptifm ; and from
Gregory of Nazianzum preaching againfl fuch de-
lay:— but it feems as if our adverfaries fpoke of
fome inftances without fufficient proof".

3. One thing which makes paffages in ancients
feem lefs to our purpofe than they really are, is
the variety of names by which Baptifm is called ;
as, Regeneration, Renezval, SanSiification, llhimina'
tion, the Seal, the Grace, &c. and the originals of
thefe words are fometimes tranflated by other Eng-
lifh words :— thefe are mentioned in Wall's Pre-
face ; in Theodoret I find aTroAur^&jo-jjP : Wall quotes
it from Irenaeus**.

4. Juftin Martyr, who lived about forty years
after the death of St. John, difcourfes " of baptifm
being to us inftead of ciramcifion' :-lxtn-^\i'=, near
forty years later, mentions infants as " by Chrift
born again unto God." — Origen, about 'fifty years
later ilill, ** does, in feveral places, fpeak of infant-
baptifm as a known and undoubted pra61:ice : and
(in one of them) as having been, according to a
tradition, ordered by the Apoftles'."

5. The greatefl difficulty arifes from TertvMian^
who is placed about loo years after St. John's
death, and therefore before Origen. He, in hjs
Book de Baptifmo, cap. i8. dilfuades (and he is
the only Father who does diffuade) from early bap-
tifm, though he feems as much afraid of any one's

dying

" Sea. IV. '

« The notion refults from reading Wall's Book. Gregory

of Nazianzum preaches againfl: delaying Baptifm, Orat. 40. or,
de Baptifmo, for which fee V^all, Part 1. Chap. 11.

P Hseret. Fab. i. 10. "i Part 2. Chap. 5. Seft. i.

' Conference, page 72.

• Wall, page 27, quarto, or Part i.Chap. 5. Se£l. 3.

S 4

iBo BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV.

dying unha-puzed, as any writer: that is, he advifes
putting off Baptifm till the age ot Rea/on; but
only on this fuppofition, that there is no danger
of death. By diffuading he acknowledges the
praSlice, however difficult it may be to account
for his diffuading i and the opinion of a fingle
man, who in feveral things was excentric, is not
of fo much confequence as the pradice. But it
feems odd he fhould not know, as well as Origen,
of the Tradition, that infant-baptifm had been
ordered by the Apoffles. — Many things are faid,
with great good fenfe as it appears to me, to ac-
count for this fingular phenomenon ; and it is
iTiewn how much better opportunies Origen had
of learning what the Apoftles had fiid, than Ter-
tullian; but what occurs to me does not feem to
have been mentioned by others, and therefore 1 am
diffident about it. — He feems to me to be, when
he advifes putting off Baptifm to the age of rea-:
fon, growing a Montanift-, the followers of Mon-
tanus " did not allow the Church the power to
forgive great Sins after ^ Baptifm;'' — Tertullian
himfelf held machia to be " immundabile vitium."
Now the only reafon for which he diffuades from
early Baptifm, feems to me to be an horror of fm
after baptifm ; and he particularly diffuades fingle
perfons, and young widows, as being moft likely
to yeild to carnal luft. The auftere temper of a
Montanift feems likely alfo to make a man dread
any one's dying without baptifm, at the fame time
that it makes him dread baptizing : fuch incon-
fiflencies are apt to attend exceffive paffionsj not
lefs thofe of a moiofe kind than any others.

We may here mention Fidus's application to
Cyprian, (who is placed in the year 248,) though

It

• Art. XVI. Scft. 11.— —From Lardner's Works, Vol. g.
page 489.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 2S1

it is only the mifreprefentation of it which has oc-
cafioned any difficulty. Fidus defired to be in-
formed whether he might, in any cafe, baptize a
child ifefore the eighth day ; the anfvver w^as, yes, if
it be in danger; if there be necejjity.' This is re-
prefented as if no infant, even after the eighth day,
was to be baptized except in cafes of necejfUy. —
Whereas Fidus had had no difficulty after the
eighth day; he had baptized commonly ; but the
rite of circumcifion, correfponding to Baptifm,
having been delayed till the eighth day, together
with the objeftion or difguft which fome might
have to giving a very young child the Kifs of
Peace, and other reafons, not very forcible, made
him doubt, whether, even fuppofmg there was
fome danger, he fhould baptize. Children though
in danger, had not been circumcifed, that he knew
of, fooner than the eighth day.

6. Augnjiin lived about 200 years after Ter-
tullian ; he vtxy frequently (peaks of infant-baptifm,
though incidentally. And fays, that he never
heard of any " Chriftian, Catholic or Sectary, who
taught any other dodrine but that Infants are to
be baptized" [for pardon of fin]." — The Pela-
gians (incidentally) allow the fame''. — It feems
flrange, that neither they nor Auguftin fliould
ever have feen TertuUian's Book de Baptifmo. I
do not fee that Wall folves this difficulty. I can
conceive, that TertuUian might not ocatr to Au-
guftin when he made his alfertion ; and for this
reafon ; becaufe the ruling idea in Auguftin's min4
was not infant-baptifm, but the danger of fufferino-
from original fmj about which danger TertuUian
was no adverfary.

7. The cafe of Gregory of Nazianzum is not
free from difficulty. He lays, in an Oratioa about

Baptilm,
" Conference, page 48. « lb. page 48, 49.

282 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV.

Baptlfin, that if infants arc out of all danger of
dying, his czvn opinion is, that they fliould be
baptized when they are about three years old. An
opinion, as Wall remarks, " which would pleafe
neither the P^dobaptift nor AntipjEdobaptift." —
The P^dobaptift however fees, that the cuftom of
baptizing infants, is here allowed, as 2. fa£i i and
urges, that a child is no more capable of contraft-
ing when he is three years old, than when three
weeks old. All objedlions of any force are againft
a child's being baptized during what may be called
its minority in religious matters. This is what oc-
curs if we confider Gregory's fentence by itfelf :
but it fliould be confidered with the context.

There is certainly fomething extraordinary in
this private opinion of Gregory's ; fomething
which has a /b/uiio>i, if one could but find it out.
— The Oration is a forcible harangue ao-ainft /Je^
/erring baptifm; the pretences for deferring it, are
anlwered; and with regard to children, the preacher

urges, Nn-H-Jov fo coj •, ^y\ AaSsrw y.xioo\) ti xaxia, tK
P^i(pisg ay»a(r9>]Tco, i^ ovv^uv xa6iEfiw6iiTW tw zrviVfjLXTi : —

and then he propofes to Mothers the example of
Hannah, who made Sanmel holy immediately, as
ibon as he was born, ('yivvr]9svTot Uoov euGo? in-ojfi):
and immediately after delivering his notion about
three years, he fpeaks of the ludden dangers to
which an human being is fubjed, and advifes
fecurlng infants againft them by means of Baptifm.
—How is it then that this peculiar notion comes
jn amidfl direClions which leem inconfiftent with
it ? Wall confiders it as a compliment to the
preacher's Father ^j which, from certain circum-
ilances, feems no groundlefs conjedure. — We
know fo little of the minutiae of Gregory's Hif-
tory, that we feem urjikely to go farther than to

fee

y Wall about CctfariuSi page 306, quarto.

ROOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 283

{be an hmnfifiencr, from whfch one may venture
to conclude, that the notion of three years had
feme extraordinary origin : that it was not a natural
conception, agreeable to the fcope of the dii-
courfe, not the genuine off^prmg of Gregory s un-
biaffed underftanding^

To dwell on more particulars, would exceed
our limts^ I have laid before you every thmg (as
far as I know) that feems agmnji the cultom ot
baptizing infants ; the hiftorical authorities> that
cuftom are too numerous and extenhve to be
given : for them I muft refer to Wall ; I behrv.:
you may conclude all the numerous authorities
which I have not mentioned, to be in favour ot
Infant- Baptifm. In general, it may be mentioned
that infant-baptifm was never ordered or enjoined
by any a^/^//; was never inierted in any Creed-,
and that all eftabliOied national Churches have prac-
ticed it —Peter Brtih (perhaps Bruce), a French-
man whofe followers were called Petrolruffians, is
thou'o-ht by Wall to have been (with one Henry)
the firft Antip^dobaptift teacher who formed a
Church about A. D. 1030. The German Ana-
baptifts are placed in A. D. about 1420: theie
were mentioned formerly : it there was any con-
tinuation of doftrine from the Petrobruffians to
them, it was obfcure, and held by a few men. _ The
aim of both was to reform: to improve religion,
and make the Church of Chrift perfeft in pradice
as well as in theory.— The Anabaptifts were flow
in eettin*^ footing in England: Neal places their
^ ° full

» Rohivfon favs, this Oration was delivered to an aidlence in
which were many perfons unbapti^cd: that muft be trae; at
leaft there muft have been enow to make it worth while to per-
fuade to Baptifm : but yet by far the greateft part of tho.e
Parents who were themfeives bai)tized, might baptiz- thtrir
children in infancy. If Infant- Baptifm was unufual among{^,
fuch Gregory coaid not have ufed the Ian-liaise he does.

284 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV.

firft congregation or Church, in England, in the
year 1640. Probably Cromwell found them of
life, and encouraged them. Mr. Tombs is reckoned
their beft writer.

Serveius, who fuffered death at Geneva in I553»
on the profecution of Calvin, cenfured infant-
baptifm " with the utmoft feverity." (Mofh. Cent.
16. ^. 2. 4. 5.)

Here it may be proper to mention the fubjefl of
Sponfors. Sufceptores, or Sponfors, have been ufed
in Baptifm for a great length of time ; Bingham
(11. 8. I.) divides them into three forts.

1. Thofe who anfwered for Infants.

2. Thofe who anfwered for infirm perfons, un-
able to anfwer for themfelves.

3. Thofe who attended at the Baptifm of Adults,
as witnejjes, and thereby received a commiffion to
remind them of their baptifmal vow.

In the Baptifm of Adults, the Sponfors with us
are ufed as witneffes only ; and as perfons autho-
rized to remind the newly-baptized of his bap-
tifmal vow. — It does indeed feem improper that
fuch a folemn act as Baptifm, making fuch a
change in a man's condition, fliould go unatteded,
or be left to cafual teftimony : and as reproof or
advice to adults, though they conftantly want it,
is impertinent from thofe who have no authority to
give it, there is an evident utility in the Church's
commiiTioning fome friend to fugged occafionally
a friendly admonition, in fpiritual affairs.

Wall lliews that Sponfors were in ufe amongffc
the Jt^ws, when they baptized Profelyies. — (See
Part 2. 10. 17.)

I do not recolleft whether the Puritans had any
Sponfors: — In the Comedy called the Puritan^
amongft Shakfpeare's \vork.<, they are called *' Un-
zodmothered varlets."

And

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIV. 285

And now, what is the refult of the fa<5ls here
ftated?

1 . Could they have happened on a fiippofition
that Chriftians always baptized infants ? or, that
there never was a time, lince Chrifl-ianity was pub-
lirhed, when fome infants were not baptized ? yes,
they niight: — the filence of Scripture, confidering
how very fmail its ^ records are, is confident with
the pradice : thoufands mud have been baptized
at one age or other, whofe baptifm is never men-
tioned : more important events demanded the pen
of the Hiftorian, than the Baptifm of the infant-
children of thofe converts who had been thera-
felves baptized.

2. Could the fa<fts have been as we find them,
fuppofing all Chriftians had been plainly and pofi-
tively commanded, by written edid, to baptize
their children in infancy ? I think not. Neither
TertuUian nor Gregory of Nazianzum would, in
that cafe, have prefumed to occafion any delay.

3. Are the fads confident with the fuppofition,
that all Chriftians might baptize infants if they
pleafed ? 5'^es ; I fee no marks of any prohibition,
or difcouragement.

4. Laftly, could the fads have been as we find
them, fuppofing that as many Chriftians left in-
fants unbaptized, as baptized them? I think not;
the evidence ftiews the majority of thofe who bap-
tized infants, to be very great.

On the whole, it is probable, that many parents,
&c. baptized children, in all ages of the church ;
ver}' many, in fome : but that none were (Compelled
to baptize them in any age.

In fpeaking of infant-baptifm we have paid no

attention

* InPaley*s Hois Paulinae, we find feveral inftances ofevents
relating to the Apoftles, which are not recorded in the Ads of
the Apoftles.

286 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XV.

attention to the difference between immerfion
and fprinkling; but as what was H^id before on
{prinkhng related to Baptifm in general, or with-
out regard to age, it muft relate to all particular
forts of baptifm. — Therefore we may content our-
felves with obfcrving, that there has been a trine
fprinkling^ as well as a trine immerfion; and that
fprinkling may be more eafily juftified in baptizing
Infants, than Adults; becaufe immerfion has an
efFe(ft upon the feelings and fentiments of adults,
but no mental effeifV upon Infants.

XV. I will here inlert an obfervation or two on
what may be called irregular Baptifm ; fuch as oc-
cafions a doiibt whether a perfon fhall be re- bap-
tized.— We faid fomcthing allied to this, under
the twenty-third Article: and under the prefent,
when defcribing the notions of Romilh Church
and the reformed churches. The fubjed is very
copious, as any one finds, who reads Bingham's
Hiftory of Lay-bapti!iii.

Some ancient Chriftians ufed to re-baptize thofc
perfons, more than once, whofe firft baptifm they
themfelves accounted valid; thefe were the molt
ftridly Anabaprills : the Chrillians whom we call
Anabaptifts in modern times, baptize thole over
again who were baptized in infancy ; but it is
becaufe they look upon infant -baptifm as nut
valid. Hence they ciiuie to be called not Ana-
baptifts, but Bciplijls. — liht follcn\ers of Ivlarcion
ufed to baptize, in their own way, more than
once : and we now fee old people who wifli to be
confirmed repeatedly. — Wall fays, he knows of no
other ancient Chriftians belides the Marcionites
vvlio reiterated their own Baptifm. — (Part 2. Chap.
5. Sedl. 5.)

Irregularities
" Wall, page 468, quano.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XV. 287

Irregularities may arife from place, time, matter,
&c. but thofe Teem moil attended to, which arile
from the want of due qualifications in the perfons
who baptize. Thefe may be inferior orders of
Miniftcrs, as Deacons; or the affiftant Minifters
mentioned Article xxv. Sed:. v. Subdeacons, Rea-
ders, Acolythiils, &c. — or degraded Priefts, be-
come Laymen; or confelTed Laymen, or Women.
The validity of Baptifm may alfo become doubtful
from its being adminiftered by heretical Minifters,
though that is becaufe fuch are deemed no minif-
ters at all ^ — In our own country, Midwives have
been allowed to baptize, in cafes of neceffity :
Neal^ gives us a Form of a Licence for that pur-
pofe, and fays, with fome furprize, that notwith-
flanding fuch licences were given, Bilhop Whitgift
affirmed, " that Baptifm by Women and Lay-per-
fons was not allowed by the Church." The cafe
was, that an ambiguous Rubric had divided the
learned % and Whitgift probably fpoke his real
opinion.

As a full Hiftory of irregular Baptifm would de-
tain us too long, I muft content myfelf with a
few general remarks ; the refult, as it were, of
Hiftory.

But we muft diftinguiOi between authorizincr
certain perfons beforehand to perform any ficred
atl in certain extraordinary cafes, and confirming
ads on looking back upon them, which have not
only been irregular, but have been performed with-
out any previous authority. Acfs authorized muft

be

« Marcionites and Pepuzians are mentioned by Rogers, page
141, with reference to Epipiian. Hasr. 52, in regard to Baptifm
by non-minifters.

** See Hampton Court Conference in 1603.

^ See an account of this Rubric in Bingham's Hiflory of Lay-
Baptifm, Chap. 3. Seel. 5. — Works, Vol 2, page 567.

288 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XV.

be confirmed, however irregular ; but doubt may
arife about a perfon having gone beyond what he
was authorized to do. The greateft difficulty,
however mud arife in debating, i. Whether any
ad is to be authorized j 2. When an unauthorized
ad is to be confirmed.

1. When we debate about authorizing certain
.perfons to baptize in extraordinary cales, our in-
quiry mud turn on this; which is xho. leaji evil ;
to let a man infi'inge the rights, and intrude into
the province of the facred miniflry; or to let
men die unbaptized, in original fin. — The Scotch
Church is fliocked at the idea of Women bap-
tizing ; the Diredory forbids all private Baptifm^;
if they feel no fnock at the thoughts of an human
being not becoming a Chriftian when he might,
they ad confidently ; but ought they not to allow,
that others may be as much (hocked at the latter
evil as they are at the former? if a cafe is really one
of neceflTity, there is no alternative but irregular
baptifm, or djang in a ftate of Heathenifni chofen
voluntarily.

2. When facred ads have been performed with-
out authority, people are apt to reafon as if they
could lay down rules for neceflity; but neceffity
knows no law. Whoever ads in cafes of neceflity,
according to the bed of his judgment and with an
honed intention, mud ad rightly; and what he
does, ought to be confirmed. Men may difpute
hidorically about Baptilm in cafes of neceflity, in
order to determine what hiis been done : but if

. men

f Puller fays, " the Dire£lory did forbid very uncliaritably all
private Baptifm : notwithflanding moll of its followers now-
adays admit only private Baptifms."- — Moderation of the Church

of England, London 1679, P^g^ *^^* The Direftory was

approved by the Affembly of Divines in 1645.— For '^^ Scotch
Church, fee Syntagma, page 1 54, cap. aa.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XVI. 289

men under neceflity ad: bona fide for the beft; if
they return to rule as foon as they are able, and
make what compenfation they are able for damage
arifing from their a6ts; it fignifies nothino; to them
what the Romanifts, or what the Calvinifts have
fettled; they are right; and thofe who annul their
a6ts, are wrong.

3. But as difputes may arlfe about the effects of
Baptifm in cafes of neceffity, would it not be beft
to have fome ordinance for admitting thofe, who
have been irregularly baptized, to regular Baptifm.?
fuch ordinance need not alTert that the former
baptifm is invalid; but only fay, that if it be fo
in any degree, there is now a completion given to
it ; we have fuch a Form in the Church of Eng-
land when it is not fufHciently proved that private
Baptifm has been performed. Indeed the whole
reception of one privately baptized into the Church,
may be confidered as a completion of an irregular
baptifm. And in our civil government, when a
meafure has been taken during a recefs of Parlia-
ment, enjoined only by Proclamation, hz. I be-
lieve it is always confirmed by parliamentary au-
thority at the enfuing Seilion=.

XVI. If I have feemed too prolix on this Hif-
tory of Baptifm, it muft be confidered that Hiftory

here

e Dr. Burn, under Baptifm, fays, from BIfhop Fleetwood,
that there has been no law in England to forbid, or invalidate
Lay-Baptifm in cafes of neceffity : he fuppofes it good, and
underilands that a perfon fo baptized is not to be re-baptized.—
After the Reftoration he fuppoi'eb there might be in Wales two
or three hundred thoufand perlbns who had received only Lay-
baptifm. .

Nealgives (1661), as one of the things fettled by the Com-
miffioners for reviewing the Common Prayer, (page 612, quarto)
— " 10. Private Baptifm is not to be adminillered but by a
lawful Minifter." -^ — Hiflory of Puritans, quarto. Vol. 2.
page 614.

VOL. IV. T

290 BOOK IV, ART. X7CVII. SF.CT. XVI.

here anfvvcrs two purpofcs ; it not only relates
fa(f\s, but it contains argument?. Befides, the
Hiftory of Baptifm has been, of late, in my opi-
nion, much mifreprelented; and in a manner
likely to do harm. I mean by the late Mr. Robin-
fouy Baptift teacher'' at Cambridge. Ic came in
my way, on a former' occahon, to flievv how he
mifreprefented Auguftin; fomething of the fame
fort may be expected now. But, in truth. Wall
has already anfvvcred him; and to fee his mifrc-
prefentations, nothing more is needful than to look
into a book to which he himfelf refers. — I have
mentioned the cafes of thofe who were baptized ^ late
in life, that of Cyprian' with Fidus, of TertuUian",
Aupuftin's" ignorance of TertuUian's advice; and
the cafe of Gregory of Nazianzum° ; thefe are the
ftroneeil things againft Infant-Baptiim that I know
of in Antiquity, and thefe are fpecimens fufficient.
Let any one then who wifhes to ftudy the Hiftory
of Baptifm, compare Robinfon's account of thefe,
with Wall's ; I defire nothing more. But what
are we to think of a perfon who propofes, in an
earneft way, arguments to which he himfelf has
read complete anfwers.? — I fpeak only to thofe
who, with myfelf, think them undeniably fuch ; —
we muft: accufe no one of Vv'ilful fallhood : — mif-
reprefentation is indeed falQiood .; but there may be

things

^ In the Hidory of Baptifm, quarto, London, 1790.

' Book If I. Ch:ip. \iv. Seft. xiv.

^ Robinfon, page 218. 250.— Wall, 2. 3. — See alfo Bingham,
1 1. 4. 12.

' Robinfon, page 184. 193. partic. 195. — Mentioned page
319. — Wall, I. 6. I.

•" Robinfon, Chap. 2!.— Wall, 1.4,5.

" Robinfon, page 218.— Wall, i. 19. 17, page 174, quarto.

° Robinfon, i)ai^e 249. — Wall, 1 1 i. i. kc. One might

compare what Wall a:ul Robinfon fay about Pelagius: Wall,
pifgc 2 io. 2 1 8. - Or wliat they fay about the Council of Milcvis,
in 316; V/uU, page 197. 220. — Robinfon, page 2:6.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVll. SECT. XVII. 2gt

things to make men think differently from our-
felves, of which we have no conception : this
however I may be permitted to fay j that it is
totally above my comprehenfion how any honeft
candid lover of truth, could ufe the arguments
which Robinfon has ufed, after reading what Wall
has written. This is by no means denying Robin-*
fon the charader of an honeft man ; for many
conclufions of reafon, and didates of wifdom, may
be above my comprehenfion. — I myfelf have a
poor opinion of Robinfon's reafoning powers >
whether his underftanding or his education may
have been the caufe, I know not; or a purfuit of
eloquence ; or an indignation at the profperity of
his adverfaries; or any thing elfe. I fuppofe his
verbiage, and his quotation, will keep him from
contempt; but thofe who are able to fee no far-
ther than I am, if they allow him to be a man of
good abilities, muft read his great work, his ela-
borate Hiftory of Baptifm, if a love of Trui^
be uppermoft in their minds, with difguft and
abhorrence^

You may fay, I am prejudiced; T fhould
certainly be more upon my guard againft pre-
judice than I am, if I had ever had the leaft
diflike, either to the man, or to his dodlrines^
i never heard the leaft harm of the man ; and ^
though I prefer the pradice of our Church, yet I
think I could live upon terms of the moft intimate
friendlhip with one, who preferred the cuftom of
delaying baptifm to the age of maturity^

xVii. Our Hiftory then being finllhed, we
come to Explanation.

" Baptifm is not only a fign of profeffion," &c.
this is affirming the fame of Baptifm in particular,

which

f See the conclolion of Wall's laft Chapter but one,
T 2

igZ BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT XVII.

which in Art. xxv. was r.ffirmed of Sacraments in
general. Saying it is ** not only" a fign, implies
that it is a fign ; or that there ought to be fome-
ihing external in Baptifm; contrary to the notion'
of the Quakers.

Our Church holds as " eflential parts of Bap-
tifm," Water, and the form given in Matt, xxviii.
19, — See Rubric, end of Private Baptilm, or of
receiving into the Church.

*' It is alio a fign of regeneration " — the term
regeneration occurred in the ninth Article, and was
there explained'. From what has been faid under
the prefent Article, it appears to be a term bor-
rowed, or adopted, from the Jews (if not ufed by
Heathens,) denoting what we call Baptilm : Now
a name of a thing confifling ol Parts, is often
taken from one part; fo Baptilm denotes the whole
facrament, though flriclly it be only the name of
the external walbing; and in like inanner i^t"^^-
neration, amongft the ancients efpecially, denotes
the vvhole facrament, though ftridly it be only
the name of the internal benefit ^ or improvement;
the *•' fpiritual grace/' that is the favour, or bene-
jtit accruing to the mifid or Jpirii; in this life or the
next; which benefit may always be aicribed, with
humble gratitude, in an indefinite manner, to God's
Holy Spirit. — Nor is it inconfiiient with this, to
v.nderftand the Spirit, in the Sacrament of Bap-
tilm, as the meaning'' of the outward fign, and as
explained by being oppofed, or contradiflinguillied
to the vifible fign —The meaning of the fign is

the

1 Art. IX. Sedt. XXIV.

r An inltance of the general obfervation here made, was ex-
plained Art. ni. Seft. III.

• Sec Dr. Balguy's Lill charge, p.ige 302. Alio Art. xxv.

Sea. II.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII, SECT. XVII. 293

the fpiritual benefit annexed to it: all the expref-
(ions feem to come to the fame thino".

" Whereby" — per quod, by which fign, the
promifes of God are fealed, &c. or, in one word,
regeneration is en?cled, executed, lealcd.

" As by an mjirument'''' — I know not, that any
explanation of this word inftrument is wanted : ic
fignifies means, or a deed : here it is the means of
grafting and of figning and fealing.

The particulars which follow, feem to be com-
ponent parts of regeneration: if fo, we have, in
this Article, the notion of the Church of England,
of Regeneration, given by itfelf: which, to the
members of our Church, is an authentic defini*
tion. The firft part, or ingredient, of Regene-
ration, is being admitted into the Society of
Chriftians, or *' grafted into the Church,^* — the
Catholic church. — The fecond is, remiflion of fins
committed before baptifm, or afterwards, upon
repentance: or a promile " Of i\\Q forgivenefs of
Sin." — The third is, adoption as *' Sons of God,
by the Holy Ghoft." — The fourth is a confirma-
tion of Faith ; the fifth an increafe of Grace, or of
fuch holy, pious, virtuous difpofitions and princi-
ples, as are moll: particularly to be afcribed to the
divine afiillance. — Indeed Faith was (liewn, under*
the tenth Article, to be rightly afcribed to God's
Holy Spirit.

VVe might here afk, whether John Wefley's
conception of Regeneration is the fame with that fet
forth by the Church of which he profelfed himfelf
to be a Member, the Church of England? — His
Regeneration is iubfequent to Baptifm; which
makes his Brother fay, that with him *' Baptifm

was
* Art, X. xxxvi.
T 3

294 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XVIII.

was nothing"." — If it was not more than a mere
" fign of profeflion" his idea of Baptifm mud be
contrary to that of our Church.

Adoption ** by the Holy Ghofl^'' — is a reference
\.o Scripture. — See Rom. viii. 14. 16. but that may
occur better in our Proof.

*' By virtue of prayer'"— \.\{\% is true, bur is it not
making Prayer efiential to Baptifm .'' In the Refor-
matio Legum there is the fame idea" ; — Verbo
Dei quod intercedit, &c. — erudiuntur fideles, Sec.

" Toiin^ chlldreUy^ parvulorum : this feems defi-
nite enough : but the age of the Infants here
fpoken of, feems ftill farther defined by the Ru-
brics of our Office for baptizing Adults. From
them it appears, that a perlon may be baptized as
a child, who happens not to have been " baptized
in his Infancy." Indeed this Office for Adults is
comparatively modern, having been made in the
year 1661, after the Reftoration, in order that
any who had been brought up Qiiakers or Baptifts,
might, if they pleafed, be received into the efta-
bliflied Church: and with a view^ to Miffionaries :
But the divines who compofed it muft be con-
fidered as very able expofitors of the Church's
meaning and intention.

"In any wife," rather obfoletej the Latin,
however, is Omnino.

XV m. " To be retained in the Church i" — that
is, not given up. This exprcffion teems free from
aufterity and precifenefs. A rite may be retained
in a Church, even though every one be not com-
pelled

" Samuel Wefley, after Mr. Hutton ; fee Wefley's Letters,
page 72. — See alfo page 116. 65. 70.-^ Wall contends, that
tl-e word Regeneration is •' never ufed by the Ancients but
;\hen tliey fi>eak of Baptifm," page 3^4. 520.

* Dc Haerefibus, cap. 17.

^ See Preface to the Common Prayer-book made in i66i.—
Alfo Wlicatly on ihc Common Prayer, odlavo, page 31.

BOOK IV. ALT. XXVII. SECT. XVIII. 295

pelled to life ir. And the declaration is eafy and
liberal with regard to the particular circumftances
of Infant-baptifm, as age, kc. — Our office for
public Baptifm of Infants fpeaks the fame liberal
language ; the Sponlors are exhorted to believe
that God favourably ^^Z/owt-/// Infant-baptifn:i ; which
plainly acknowledges an iinperiedion in it : it is
called a " charitable work," and lo diftinguilhed
from an indifpenfible duty of a kind perfedly de-
terminate. The next exprcflion of the Article
is in the fame fpirit.

*' As moft agreeable with the Inftitution of
Chrift :" there is more latitude in doing anything
as fuitable to an inftitution, than as injoined by
pofitive command: in the former cafe, you may
reafon from analogy, follow your common fenfe,
and feelings; in the latter cafe, you only obey
orders ; you do not think for yourfelf.

Dr. PrieJIley (Hill. Corr. Vol. 2, page 93.)
feems to think our Church not very candid; at
leaft, he reprefents it as faying in its public forms,
*' that Baptifm is ■neceffary for Salvation." — Per-
haps the office to which he alludes, may be that
for the Baptifm of Adults; in which, the Exhor-
tation, after the Gofpel, does fay fomething very
like it : yet it clearly excepts extraordinary cafes, by
the words, " where it may be had-'' (o our cate-
chifm ; ^''generally neceffary to Salvation."

Our Church is certainly againft all negle6l of
Baptifm; the exhortation to Adults confifts chiefly
of praftical fcrptural exhortations to Baptifm, and
fcriptural reafons for them, it does not enter into
fpeculations— Moreover, our Church takes no
part in the queftion about Infants dying unbap-
tized, (except fo as not to bury : Wall, page 377,}
though it pronounces (Rubric, end of Private Bap-
tifm) thofe to be ♦* undoubtedly faved" which

T 4 die

296 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XIX.

, die baptized: a fentence in which ancient Chrii-
tians were unanimous. In fuch a calc, what can
hinder Salvation? The truth is, that we hold the
neceffit}' of Baptifm as Agents, but not as Judges.
— We think, that we do not do our part if we
neglecl what feems ordinarily a means of Salvation j
and we think it the preferable meaiure to procure
good for children, as tar as lies in our power; in
things Ipiritual as well as temporal : But we judge
no one. Three heads of our Church have pub-
lifhed this opinion.— Archblfliop Whltgift, Arch-
bifliop Laud, and Archbilhop Seeker : [See Wall,
2. 6. 8, page 377. — And Seeker's thnty- fifth Lec-
ture, near the end. J

XIX. Let us now come to our Proof.

There feem to be feven propofitions in our
Article, and one more feems wanted, in order to
juflify the modern pradice of partial immerfion, or
fprinkling, or pouring, which prevails in our Wef-
tern Church.

1. Baptilm Implies an f.v/tTw^/ ceremony.

2. It is the inftrument by which men AXt grafted
into the Church of Chrift.

3. It marks God's promife oi forgivenefs of fins.

4. It marks God's promife of adopting us for
Sons.

5. It confirms our FaiiJi.

6. It increales Grace.

7. Sprinkling, or pouring, is not unlawful, when
ufed inflead of immerfion ; (elpecially in Infant-
baptifm.)

8. Baptizing infants, is to be preferred to leaving
them unbaptizcd till they are able to anfwer for
themfelves.

We need only undertake here to give fufficient
proofs, not fuch as might be given by thole who
made the fubjedt of Baptifhi a feparate ftudy.

XX. Baptilm

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XX — XXIII. 297

XX. Baptifm has an external part, or contains an
external ceremony, in which water is uied.

This feems llifficiently clear from the word ^xtt-
T/^w, which fignifies to zvaJh.— Wt may confult
Matt, xxviii. 19. — John iv. i.— When a perfon is
faid to do a thing njore than another, the thing
muft be of the fame nature in both cafes. Now^
John's Baptifm was confeffedly by w^ater. — The
Minifler of the ^thiopian^ Queen waits for Bap-
tifm till fome water appears. — Corneliuses Baptifm
depends on water ; *' can any man forbid water," fays
the Apoftle, " that thefe fhould not be^ baptized?'*
— The Quaker's Baptifm, by the Holy Ghoft, was
iuft over.— More paffages will occur under the foU
lowing propofitions.

XXI. Baptifm is the Inflrument by which men
are grafted into the Church of Chrift. — This may
appear from the texts already quoted, as they all
fliew, that the end of baptizing, was to make
men Difciples. MaO»]T£U(raTe -nxxvrx thn, means make
Difciples [i^o(.^Yirct<;)'° of all nations; the two cafes
above-mentioned are plain. We may add i Cor«
xii. 13. — Gal. iii. 27.

It will follow from this propofition, that all
benefits which arife on any man's becoming a
Chriftian, may be fpoken of as accompanying
Baptifm.

XXII. Baptifm marks the divine promifes of
Forgiveyiefs of Sins.— A6ts ii. 38.— xiii. 38.— xxii.
16. — Epii. i. 7.— Col. i. 14.

xxiii. Baptifm marks the divine promifes of
adopting us as his Sons. — Rom. viii. 14, 15, 16, 17.
(here the Holy Spirit is mentioned.) — Gal. iii. 26,
27. — Gal. iv. 5. — Eph. i. 5.

XXIV. By

^ Adlsviii. 36. ^ A£ls X. 47.

■^ See Wall, Introd. Se<5l. 5. and page 13, quarto, or 1.2. 6«
—Alfopage 519. — Conference, page 15. 28.

298 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXIV. XXV.

XXIV. By Baptifm our Faith is confirmed. —It
muii be fo, in the natural courfe of things. You
cannot take a meafure propoled for your good, by
thofe who have a power of promoting it, wittiout
feehng your confidence ftrengthened. Whatever
feals promifcs, muft confirm faith. Any perfon,
by enhfting himfelf in the fervice of Chrifty and
receiving promifcs made on his account, mud feel
a greater Faith in Chrift. — It has been jufi now ob-
ferved, that fuch Faith may, on icriptural autho-
rity, be referred to the agency of God's Holy
Spirit; according to Gal. v. 22. — if therefore we
receive the Holy Spirit through Baptifm, we
flrengthen Faith.

XXV. By Baptifm our Grace is increafed.—
This, in the language of our Church, means,
good difpofitions and principles; as in 2 l^et. end.
— It is inconceivable that good difpofitions (hould
not be increafed by any worthy receiver of Bap-
tifm. A folemn ad of felf-dedication to a reli-
gious fociety ; to a fociety carried on under the
immediate protedion of Heaven itfclf; for the in-
ftiiution of which all mankind had been in a
courfe of preparation from the beginning of the
world; for which the greateft things had been
done, the greateft evils fufFered; fuch a folemn act
muft corredt, regulate, meliorate, the heart and
principles, if anything can. Conceive the amend-
ment of the heart and aftions to be afcribed to the
Holy Spirit, and then ftudy the expreffions of
Scripture. — John iii. 5. — Rom. vi. 4.. — i Cor vi.
II. — Eph. iv. 22, 23, 24. — Eph. V. 26, 27.—
Col. ii. fo, II, 12. — Titus iii. 5. — Heb. x. 22. —
I Pet. iii. 21. — The proof of this propofition
fhews, that Baptifm is " not only a fign of Profef-
fion," &c. but a fign of a i'piritual good aifo.

The

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVI. 299

The metaphor of putting on, iifed in the texts,
arifcs from drefang after Baptifm ; it feems con-
neded with the ceremony of the white garment' i
na)^ was probably the caufe of that ceremony. —
The metaphor of being buried, was probably the
effed: of the cuftom of immerfion. — Men were as
it were buried in the water, and rofe again to
newnels of lite: or new birth. — Ail renewing is
fuppofed to take place on the change made at Bap-
tifm; the idea is that of new birth, varied a little
in the expreffion. And Col. ii. ii. fhould be re-
marked, as juftifying our reafoning by Analogy
from Circumcifion to Baptifm. — Whence we may
apply Rom. ii. 28, 29. — Thefe metaphors muft
not be confounded; but each may be ufed. And
being aware of theni is a great help to underfland-
ing fome paffages of fcripture.

We have now gone through the feyeral parts of
Baptifm, external and internal; only two propo-
fitions remain, which regard the manner of it, and
the circumftances which fometimes attend it.

XXVI. Though Baptifm was at firft adminif-
tered by total immerfion, its validity is not de-
ftroyed, if fafety or great convenience, requires
its being adminiftered by affujion. — The mode of
, performing an emblematical ceremony, as was before
obferved, cannot well be a thing of the laft im-
portance.—The word paTTTt^w does not imply total
immerfion'^ only ; and if it did, we feem in fuch
a cafe, to be at liberty to confult om fafety, from
Matt. ix. 13. and xii, 7. — or even our great con-
venience : it fignifies to wajli : (ix(pn fignifies a
fpot : a fpot is partial : conceive firfl that the Jews
ufed to wafh their hands by having water poured
upon them, and then read, in the Greek, Luke xi.
33. read alfo Mark vii. 4.— Heb. ix. 10. — Befides

whac
= Seil. IV, T, ** Wall, page 433, quarto.

'lOO BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVI.

J

what V e call bap'izing, is not alwavs exprefTed by
jSaiTTi^cj, buc fomc[iines by Xau, wliich is cerrainly
u(ec1 it.r ordinary' walhing; generally of tlie whole
body; but not always: Ads xvi. 33. could not
be total immcrfion:-— See Eph. v. 26. — Titus iii.
5. in the Greek.

Archbifnop Sih'ker introduces Ifaiah lil. ic;. —
Ezek. xxxsi. 25. and fome other paflages which
mention fprinkhng^; but tjie word iprinkiing in
Heb. X. 22. docs not Iceni to me to mean the
external p.'irt ot biptim, but the internal, meta-
phoricall} 2; the external being expreflcd by the
following words i "and our Bodies waflied with
pure itater.*'

In general, I have felt fome relutftance to admit
the palfages cited by Arciiilhop Seeker in fup-
port of iprinkling in Baptilm. There are various
Iprinhlings enjoined in the Law of Mofes, as thofe
with afhes, water, oil, blood j and with fome mix-
tures, fuch as allies and water ; blood and hylfop,
he. — and fome of thefe are alluded to in the Nevy
Tcftament; but I feel unwilling to apply to the
external part ot Baptifm any allufions to the fprink-
ling of Blood; they feem more applicable either to
purifying the Heart, or to the death of Chrift, and
the Dodrine of Atonement. If there were, in the
ISleiu Tcflanient, allufions to the Iprinklings with
watery 1 lliould be willing to adopt them; and I

think

« Properly, utttw figniiiesto wa(h /;«//</Jr; (fomctimes to wa(h
feet) : — arXivw — to wa(h cloaths ; >.>iu — x.o wa(h the wliole body.
— — BaTTTt' does not, I fancy, make one feel, fo llrongly as the
others, the idea of aiming at cleannels ; only as cleannels comes
oi courjc iwm'imxnaiion: but it feans applicuble to a greater
number of things than tlie others.

^ 35th L.efiuic onCatechlfm, pa<re 226.

8 The fprinkling corrcfponds to thofe fprinklings which were
intended io pur if u (ft-'C Lev. viii. 15. — Hcb. ix. 18 — 22)- thefe
were made with /;!ncd.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVII. 3OI

think the Prophecies, If. lii. 15. and Fzek.xxxvi.25,
may be applicable; but 1 do not recoiled any
allufions to Iprinkiings with water: hlAi. x. 22.
may Teem to be one, as blood is not mentioned; but
of that I have Ipnken. — Neverthflefs there cer-
tainly are, in the c/d Tcriament etnblematical puri-
fications by w .ter, bo;h in the way of bathing and
fprinklini^'' ; and as that is the caie, there feems
foiiie degree of fcriptural authority for our ufing
both methods in our iacramental cleanfings : the
cafe is fuch as to admit of all kinds of arguments
and authorities : efpecially as it is not eafy to
underlland how fome baptifms mentioned in
the New Teftament, could be performed by total
immerfion^

XXVI I. Baptizing Infants is preferable to leaving
them unbaptized till they are ot age to anfwer for
themfelves.

I. This feems. to follow from reafon, and from
the principles of natural law'' already mentioned:
if an Infant was enabled to judge for himfelf, a
Chriftian, (and it is of Chriftians we fpeak), muft
conclude, that he would chufeto be admitted into
Chriftianity. — One good elfeft of Infant-baptifm is,
that it precludes the painful queftion, * when fhall
r be baptized?' and prevents that procraliination
v;lnch Gregory ot Nazianzum laboured fo much
to prevent One may conceive a young perfon to
delay bapnfm, fometimes through fear and fcruple,
fometimes deferring it to a *' convenient feafon"
with a view 01 enjoying an illicit gratification a

little

*• Numb. xlx. 19 — 31. and " diverfe wafhings/'Heb. ix. 10.
{}ia,yopoii /3a7rTJ?(xoK.) feem to include beta forts : will not
our ,'5^7rTi7^a therefore allow of both forts, bathing and
fprinkling?

'■ seeker's Left. 35, page 227.

^ Se£t. XI. beginning.

502 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XX'VII.

little and a little longer. — And why fliould not
infiints enjoy the benefits of Chriftian focicty, as
well as worldly rank and property? Thofe who
refufe them the privilege, mean well; but they aft
like a formal and precife, though well-meaning
fervant, who would ftand ftill and be ulelefs,
though much wanted, rather than do any thing
which his Mafter had not ordered him to do.

2. The Religion of Mo/f J obviates the great x>b-
jeftion to our plan, which is, that an Infant can-
not enter into a Covenant. Whereas circumcifion
admitted children into the Old Covenant by Divine
Appointment'.

3. The pradice of the firfl teachers of Chrifti-
anity feems to me, upon the whole, to be much in
favour of Infant-baptifm. I fliould imagine with
the learned Lightfoof", that as the Jews ufually
baptized the children of Profelytes, they would,
when they went out to be baptized by John, take
their young children to be baptized with them.
This is not mentioned, but the baptifm of chil-
dren feems to be taken for granted in fcripture, as
are moral" duties of the greateft importance.—
When we have not words to judge by, we muft
judge by adions or cufloms. As the children of
converts to Judaifm were always baptized, the
order to convert and baptize all nations, would, of
courfe, be underftood" to include children. — Sup-
pofe the order had been, * go ye and circiimcije all
nations ;' — would not the circumcifion of children
have been included ? — If one of our Baptifi con-
gregations was to fend out a Minifler, with the

commiflion,

' Deut.xxix. 10, II, 12. with Gen. xvii. 12, 13. and Lev.
xii. 3.

•^ Horse Hebr. on Matt, iii.— See WaU'sIntrod page Ivi.

" Dr. Balguy, page 87, beginning of 6th Dtfcourfe.

° Wall's hurod. page xlviii. and Ivi. —Conference, page
a8, 2y.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIl. SECT. XXVIl. 303

commiffion, ' Go and baptize the Indians or Gen-
toos,' I (hould think he grofsly perverted his com-
miflion if he baptized children. But if one was
Tent from the Church of England wkh the fame
commiffion, * Go and bapdze the Gentoos,* I
lliould think he grofsly negleded his commiffion if
he did noi bapiize children. When a cuftom was
once fettled, which the follicitude of parents would
flrongiy impel them to continue, not to check
fuch a cuftom was, in a manner, to encourage it,
and give it a fanftion. — And fuch a cuftom pre-
vailing, it is difficult to conceive that HoufeJioldi
would be baptized, and the children omitted,

4. Befides the pradice of the firft publilhers of
Chriftianity, thus gathered, there is a particular
paffage, or perhaps two, of the New Teftament
worth confidering.

I Cor. vii. 14. lliews, that If either parent of a
child was a Chriftian, the child might be brought
up a Chriftian, and called //o/y, or of the pecu-
liarP people of God : Chriftians have often in
Scripture the name of Saints, or SanSii. Now Wall
contends, that holy, aV»o?, means, or implies bap"
tized ; and this he feems to fupport*^ with great
force of argument.

Mr.

P Locke on the place.

H Wall, quarto, page 67. gg. 175. — Conference, page 40,

&c. — 46, &c. The idealeems to be this: — ' I (Paul) am now

giving you prudential advice of my o-xvn (ver. 12.); — do not
leave your huiband (or wife) becaufe he is an Heathen ; for the
fad is, it hath often happened, tliat the Chriftian wife hath
converted her Heiicheu hufband, fo that the map. hath been
baptized {xymra-t), ox fanaijied (a word often uled for Bap-
tized) through his wife; and vice versa. — Befides, if you leave
your hufband, what will become of your children f live to-
gether, and thvjugh he continue a Heathen, you may prevail
upon him to let your children be brought up Chrillians: (or
inadey«/K//, fancti).' Now no one, fays Wall, is called ^^/w/".

j04 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVII.

Mr. Locke's expreflion is as if the child mud
be a Chriftian "■ if born of Chriftian parents; but
he only takes the Baptifni for granted : he only
compares Chriftians with Jews; (fee his Note) and
though a child might, in fome fenfe, be faid to be
a Jew born, all things being fuppofed to go on
regularly in their ordinary courle; yet circumci-
fion, was, in ftrictnefs, neceflary to make a Jew;
and fo Baptifm, to make a Chriilian. i\s Mr.
Locke took the Baptifm for granted, {o might St.
Paul.

I will only farther mention, Mark x. 14. or the
the four verfes which make the Gojpel in our office
for the Baptifm of Infants. — " They brought
young children to Chrifi" - perhaps an Antipasdo-
baptiil would iay, why did he not baptize them?
Becaufe their parents did not bring them for that
purpofe; the parents were not yet Chriftians; Jefus
was not a profeifed Baptijl; perhaps his Difciples
might afterwards baptize fome ot thefe. What-
ever argument this fcripture may be lor the Bap-
tifm of Infants, it fhews plainly how eager parents
were, at the time, to gain every fpiritual benefit
for their young children. They cleiired that their
children might be' touched \y^ d^ii Holy Man; not
thinking he would take them up in his arms. —

From

or holy> who was not baptised. — How can we conceive that 3
tjiild, \\hofe Father was an Heathen, and mother a ChrilHan,
could be made a Chriilian any other way but by being baptized?
— Gal. iii. 27. — Auguftiii fays, (fee Wall, page 171;.) that
whatever is meant by the text, no one can be made a Chriilian
without the Sacraments.

' This may be the ground of the Socinian notion : fee Seifl.
IX. but if our reafoning here is juft, that notion is not to be
admitted; it is to be confidered as unfcriptural, if not dangerous:
and as probably arifing from prejudice againll the doftrine ot"
the Trinity.

* Compare touching for the King's evil. — Woman teaching
the hem of Clnill's {iarmeut.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXVIII. ^O^

It appears from the accounts of the other Evange-
lifls, that Chrifl took a child in his arms as an emblem
of innocence, in order to teach his Difciples how
fimple and free from guile they ought to be; chil-
dren in malice\ though men in underftanding:
but St. Mark's account gives more idea of our
Saviour's attending to the children them/elves : why
might not our Lord both feel a kind concern for
the children, and take occafion from them to in-
culcate godly fmcerity and fimplicity ? if his feel-
ings were lively, his moral would be ftrong. — He
admitted them to no covenant, but he blejjed them
afFe6tionateIy; holding them in his arms: his bene-
dicStion, furely, muft be (omt fpirittml good. — My
reafon dare fcarcely make an argument from this
intereiling ^cene; but, when I contemplate it, I
always wifli myfelf a painter, that I might give a
lading reprefentation of it. What an attitude
might not that of Jefus be! what a countenance !
looking down, with a mild and gracious benevo-
lence, on the Infant in his Arms 1 expreffing a
deep knowledge of what was in man ! other chil-
dren of diiferent ages and characters, grouped in
various employments ; the officious Difciples, with
ill-grounded apprehen lions, and needlels import-
ance, endeavouring to difperle them ; the mother
of the child in our Saviour's arms, near him, ex-
preffing, as one principal figure, in her face and
gefture, fufpenfe and hope, not without feme de-
gree of fear; joy, refined and meliorated with
parental affeftion and piety: other parents; fome
mildly triumphing in the benediftion already re-
ceived, others gently preffing forward to attain it.
- Though reafon may fcruple to draw an argu-
ment from this fcene, yet who that performs

the

' 1 Cor. xiv. 30.
VOL. IV. U

306 BOOK IV. AKT. XXVII. SECT. XXVIII. XXIX.

the ceremony of Baptifm, does not feel its effi-
cacy? the Infant in one's arms excites a fentiment
of tendernefs; the Gofpcl has been juft read; the
ceremony becomes, to the Imagination, an Imita-
tion of the" benevolence of him who appointed it :
and then this Scripture pleads to the hdart^ more
forcibly than any coarfe audible eloquence; it even '
convinces more intimately than the logic of any
precife reafoners, who, by too great ftiffnefs in ad-
hering to what is minutely right, are often found
fubftantially in the wrong.

XXVIII. We here clofe our dired proof : let
us fee whether any objedions occur, of weight
enough to induce us to dwell upon them.

Objedions may come from §liiakers (ancient or
modern), or from Baptifts.

With regard to IVater -baptifm, we have only
fuch objeftions as are made by thofe whom I call
ancient Quakers, the Afcodrutas, &c. and by the
Quakers of modern times.

The ancient Heretics would have our religion
to be intirely^/;7///(7/; but can we throw off our
earthly tabernacle in this life? are not our minds
affefted by means of our fenfes ? are not the gene-
rality of men affccled chiefly by their means? nay,
amongfl: thofe who reflect, are not ideas of re-
flexion allowed to have their firfl: origin in fcn-
fation"? — And can Chriftians fet afidc matter, one
of whofe peculiar articles ol Faith, is, the Refur-
reclion of the Body ?

XXIX The modern Quakers produce pafl^ages
of Scripture in fupport of their fpiritual notions;
but without a lound interpretation: when they
have feemed to follow Scripture, it has been

becaufe

" " This charitable wovV. of ours."

" Locke on t'le Human Underilanding.'-Book 3. Chap. 6.
unci Chap, i. Sedt. 3. 24.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII SECT. XXIX. 307

becaufe they took it in a literal fenfe; which is apt
to ftrike the people, though often grofsly wrong;
fo wrong as to be univerfally thought lb, in a little
time. Wall, apologizing ^ for Iren-^us's book
againft early Herefies, and for writers who were
obliged to confute *' fuch idle and enthufiailic
ftuff as feems to us not to deferve three words ;'*
adds, " So any book written now in anfwer to the
reafonings of the ^takers, &c. will, in the next
age, feem to be the work of a man that had little
to do\" Such books however have been written,
by Bennet and Charles Lejlie: and to them I will
refer you : contenting myfelf with a fliort fpeci-
men. St. Paul, exhorting to unity, fays% " there
is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptifm^ :" how then,
hys Barclay, can there be /wo Baptifms?— one by
water, another fpiritual ? — This argurnent is not
mentioned by Barclay in paffing, but it is infilled
on'' : yet to fay, there is only one Baptifm, there-
fore it has no water; feems the fame thing as to
fay, one thing is never compofed of Parts; the
King of England is but one man, therefore he has
no Body, or he has no Sonl. That is but one iree^
therefore it has no root, or it has no branches.

Several

y Page 43, quarto. , . /-

z I would not be thought fo far to adopt the oDiervation of
Wall as to fay, that any one may at firft fight, perceive the
fallacy of all the arguments of the Quakers; they have by fome
been thought perplexing, even when not convincing.— Mr. E.
told me on^e, coming from one of my ledures, that he had
been in more danger from Barclay's Apology, than from any
Book written againtl our Religion. -And Rev. John Norris, of
Bemerton near ialifbury, who died in lyn, faid,/' that he
would rather encounter ten Cardinal Bellarmines, than one
David Barclay." -So the Newfpaper fays; but without refi^r-
ring to the part of Mr. Norris's works where the faying is to
be found.

a Eph. iv. 5.

»> Barclay's Apology, Prop. ta. Seft. 3.
U 2

3o8 BOOK IV. ART.XXVII. SECT. XXX.

Several arguments of the Quakers turning upon
one form of exprcffion, it may be mentioned; — 1
mean the fcriptural negative form of comparijon :
fuch as we find i Cor. i. 17. and i Pet.iii. 21. —
" Chrift fent me not to baptize, but to preach the
Gofpel Baptifm" — " not tlie putting away of the
filth- of the fleOi, I^ut the anfwer of a good con-
fcichce," &c. — But there are a multitude of fuch
comparifons; fee Matt. ix. 13. and Col. iii. 2. —
One might add, Matt. vi. 19, 20. and xxv. ^^.
and I Tim. ii. 9, 10. according to Fordyce. — And,
according to Archbidiop Sharp, Matt. xii. 31^ —
Who will make all theie to be abfolute negatives ?
—if not all, why the two firft.?

XXX. But, to drop the enemies to Water-bap-
tifm, as our Church holds'^ it eflential to Baptifm,
that a perfon be baptized " in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl,"
it may be proper to mention an objec^tion of the
BaptiJIs ; that, in the Acts of the Apoftles, con-
verts are fometimes' faid to be baptized in the
name, or into the fiame of Chriji^ or ot tf:e Lord. —
But this feems to mean only admiffion into ChriJ-
tianity, by Baptifm; it might be, in the ufual form.
Baptifm in the name of Chrift, feems contradif-
tinguiflied to the Baptifm oijohn-, or of the Jews ;
or to Hcathenifm : ilich an expreffion would not
preclude the farther inquiry, by what Form was
luch a perfon baptized into the name of Chrift ?
probably, by the ufual form^ For the expreffion,

the

<= Art. XVI. Sefl. iv.

^ Rubric to private Baptifm, at tlie end ; already mentioned,
SeiSt. XVII.

<= See A£ls ii. 38.-vlii, 16.— x. 48.— xix. 5. — ?. S. See
Wall, page 431;, quarto.

♦" This may be right reafoning, though fome ancient Chrif-
tians clic) fometiincs bal;ti^e in'the name of Chriji mftead of
baptizing in the form prcfcribcd. Matt, -\x\iii. 19. they might

mlfunderliand

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXI. 3O9

the name of Chrift, we fliould read A6ts iv. 12.
which was introduced into our eighteenth Article.
- — There is no other name under Heaven whereby
men may be faved, but that of Chrifl; the names
of Moloch^ Remphan, &c. are infufficient and
impotent. — When we were accuftomed to this
language, being baptized into the name oi C\\n%
would only convey the idea oi becoming Chn^iins,
without implying any particular form^.

With regard to Infant -baptifm, feveral objedions
have already occurred : I will therefore now men-
tion only two.

XXXI. If infants are to receive one facrament,
why not bothf—\t ufed to be a cuftom, for many
centuries, to give Infants the Lord's fupperj nay,
it is now with the Greeks, and with " near halt
the Chriftians in the world''."— But to make theni
Members of Chrift, was more neceflary on account
of original fm, than to make them go through a
ceremony in commemoration of his death. — Thofe
who receive the Lord's Supper, renew their bap-
tifmal vow, broken by actual fin; but Infants have
committed none, and it may be doubted whether,

regularly,

mifunderftand A£ls xix. 5, — See Art. i. Sed. xviii. Vol. 2.
page 273.

5 Gal. iii. 27. " For as many or you as have been baptized
into Chrift, have put on Chrift."

A£ls xix. 2. — Some perfons at Ephefus told St. Paul, that
they had not heard of the Holy Ghoji ; he immediately afked,
" unto what were ye then baptized ?^^ does not this feem to
imply, that if they had been baptised as Chriftians, they mull
have heard of the Holy Ghoft.'' that is, they muft have been
baptized according to Matt, xxviii. 19.

^ Wall, page 517, 410. or 2. 9. 17. He adds, that pro-
bably the Weftern Church would have continued the pradtice,
had it not been for the Doflrine of Tranfubftantiation: this may
bejuft, though tir Edwin Sandys fays, that the Greeks hold
Tranfubftantiation. — Speculum Europsc, page 233. — But -fee
farther Art. xxx. Seft. m.

U 3

3IO BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXU.

regularly, Confirmation fliould not precede a par-
taking of the Lord's Supper. \Vc have rcafoned
Irom the Jewilh to the Chridian law : amongft the
Jews, children were initiated by circumcifion, but
did not partake of the Pafchal fuppcr, which is
analogous to the Lord's fupper with us; fo at
lead it is fuppofed'. — Infants cannot receive in
remembrance of Chrift. — But if any church is, at
laft, of opinion, that Infants ought lo have the
Lord's Supper; let fuch give it them: our rea-
foning in favour of Infant-bapiifm remains un-
affcded.

XXXII. Baptifm confifls of two parts, externa!
and internal; perfons baptized are accordingly faid
to be born again of water and the fpirit''.— Chil-
dren may be born of water, but how of the Spirit?
how can their Faith be confirmed, or their grace
increafed ? It does not fecm neceliary that all the
benefits of Baptifm Ihould belong to every perfon
baptized; it is enough if the Sacrament has both
an external and an internal part. An infant cannot
have faith', or good principles; but it may be
'-^grafted into the Church" and adopted-^ and it
may even have forgivenefs, though not of adual
lin ; it may have remifllon of the penalties in-
flicted on the human"" race. Our Saviour was
baptized; but he who knew no fin, of any kintl,
could have no forgivenefs. He who was, from the
tiril the Son of God, could not receive adoption.

XXXIII. Here

' Exod. xii. 26. does not prove this: — Bingham quotes it,

15. 4. '/. end, and gives fome reafcns. Wall, at the end ot

Chap. 9. (Part 2.) mentions tJie Paflbver twice; as underftood
not to be for children : but quotes no text,

^ John iii. 5.

' The Lrtherans allow thtm Faith ; and the Pelagians ufcd
to afcribe to them aftual Sin, in order to avoid original.

"" This may fecm lefs ftrange or harfh to thofe who have
confider^d what was faid under the nintli Article.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXIII — XXXV. 3II

XXXIII. Here we put an end to our Proof,
dired and indirecfl ; and therefore proceed to our
Application. I have been in doubt whether a new
Form of Aflent is wanted, and have tried one;
but on the whole, 1 do not tliink it worth while
to detain you by giving it here.— We come there-
fore to mutual conceffions.

XXXIV. Here, again, we have to deal with
^takers and Baptifts.

Conceffions to Quakers, of the ancient or modern
fort, we have none to make. — Nor to the Soci-
nians : fome Baptifm we think clearly appointed in
the fcriptures; but, at the fame time we difclaim
all judging of our Brother ^ ''* to his own" Mailer
he ftandeth or falleth."

XXXV. As to Baptijis, they differ from us, both
with regard to fpr inklings and to baptizing Infants,
But if they agree with us in other things, there
feems nothing in thefe, which need hinder us from
uniting. — At fome° times the Baptifts have pro-
fefled to think, on moft fubjeds, with the Church
of England : but feds are apt to veer about " with
every wind of Dodrine^" (preventing which, is
one great good of an eftablifhed church) : — the
Socinians are now labouring to unite** all feds of
Dilfenters againft our National Church : an union
which could anfwer no religious purpofe. It is
indeed ridiculoujj to think of the Baptifts and
Socinians favouring each other, merely becaufe
they both oppofe Infant-Baptifm, when they do
it from principles fo different, that they fliould
rather diipute than unite ; one holding Baptiiiii to

be

" Seeker's Lectures, Led. 35. near the end. — Rom. xlv. 4.
° Wall, page 551. p Eph. iv. 14.

1 See Dr. Prieftley's Addrefs to the Methodifts, prefixed to
Wefley's Letters,

U 4

-12 BOOK IV. ART. XXVI 1. SECT. XXXV.

be necelTary, the other to be unneceflarv. — But
as to immerfion and fprinkling, a Baptift need
not quit the Church of England ; bccaufc ac-
cording to our Rubrics, I do not lee how a Pried
could refute immerfion if it were required. Our
Fonts have indeed grown lets and lefs fuited to
dipping, but that furely is not to be mentioned in
aro-uino; about Dodrines.

Nay our baptizing Infants does not feem to lay
the Baptift under an abfolute neceflity of fepa-
rating from us. Suppofe a Baptift was to try the
experiment : would he be compelled to bring his
children to Baptifm'? does not our Church pro-
vide for baptizing at any age? — But if a Baptift
was called upon to fubfcribc to our xxxix Articles,
could he fubfcribe to our prefent Article ? — to
every part of it, except the laft claufe, Baptifts
kave^ fubfcribed.— But the" claufe, ** the Eaptifm
of young children is to be retained in the Church;"
— could he fubfcribe to that ?— if he could not, it
might be altered ; * the Baptifm of young children
is to be per mitt dd to thofe who prefer it,' would
do as well for our church.-— But fome might be
contented with this fenfe; * I defire and wilh that
the Baptifm of young children may be " retained
in the church^' and I think it ought to be, in order
that thofe who think it their duty to bring their
children to Baptilm, may not be deprived of an
opportunity:' but on the other hand, 'as I think
it right to afford my Chriftian brethren, who ditier
from me, an opportunity of baptizing in their

own

' Ido not fee that he woukl, by the Canons. Burn mentions

an Aft of 3 Jac. ordering the children of Pcpijh Recufants to
be baptized within a month.

* ^^'^all, page 551.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXV. 313

0^'n wa}'-, I hope they will grant me the fame
Liberty.'

Limborch is of opinion, probably after Grotiu^y
that all Chriftiaris might, confidently with the
Scriptures, follow their own notions with regard
to the manner and circumftances of Baptifm ; in-
cluding in thefe, the age of the perfon baptized \
— But he thinks, of courfe, that Infant-baptifm
ought to be deemed valid, and therefore he blames
the Anabaptifts for re-baptizing. And he thinks
infant-baptifm valid, not only becaufe every one
Ihould have liberty, in fuch a cafe, to ad as he
pleafes ; but becaufe it is agreeable to the Genius
of the Doftrine of Jefus Chrift. — An expref-
fion not unlike the concluding one of our
Articled

Dr. Priellley'' concludes nis Hiftory of Bap-
tifm with giving his opinion, that thofe who are
called rational Dijfenters baptize children more
from the influence of fettled cujlom, and through
a defire of avoiding all difturbance, than from any
fixed perfuaiion that they are under an obligation
to baptize them.

Even Mr. Tombs'^, the beft, as well as the
moft candid, of the Baptift-writers, who con-
tinued an Antip^edobaptift all his Life, wrote
againft feparation from the Church, and " con-
tinued in communion with the Church, till he
died."

\Vhat

* Limtorch, Theol. Chrlfl, 5. 68. 25.— Wall fomewhere
fays, that Grotius was the firft who reprefented it as a matter of
indifference whether a man was baptized in infancy, or his Bap-
tifm delayed. — He blames Grotius as difingenuous.

"^ Limborch, Theol. 5. 69. 9. — " Doftrinae Jefu Chriftigenio
optime convenire."

* Hift. Corr. 2. page 94. There is afterwards an Appendix,
to both Sacraments.

> Wall, page 454.— Alfo429, 430. 528.-.Seealfo 2. 2. 15.

314 BOOK IV. ART. XXVII. SECT. XXXVI.

What greater encouragements to Unity can
be had ?

XXXVI. I have frequently finiflicd my Apph-
cation with Ibme hints of Improvemeni ; but none
occur to me itprefent, except fuch as the preceding
remarks cannot fail to fuggeit.

0^<^^

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. I. 3x5

ARTICLE XXVIII.

OF THE lord's SUPPER.

THE Supper of the Lord is not only a fign of
the love that Chriftians ought to have among
themfelves one to another ; but rather is a Sacra-
ment of our Redemption by Chrift's death : info-
much that to fuch as rightly, worthily, and with
faith receive the fame, the Bread which we break
is a partaking of the Body of Chriil, and likewife
the Cup of bleffing is a partaking of the Blood of
Chrift.

Tranfubftantiation, (or the change of the fub-
ilance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the
Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ j but is
repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, oyer-
throweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given
occafion to many fuperftitions.

The Body of Chrift is given, taken, and eaten
in the Supper, only after an heavenly and fpiritual
manner. And the mean whereby the Body of
Chrift is received and eaten in the fupper, is faith.

The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not
by Chrift's ordinance referved, carried about, lifted
up, or worftiipped.

I. The Hiftory of this Arricle might be made
very extenfive, but I will endeavour to confine
myfelf to fuch incidents as feem likely to be moft
yfeful. — As all incidents are built upon thefcrip-

tural

3l6 BOOK IV. ART, XXVIII. SECT. I.

rural account of the Intlitution of the Lord':'
Supper, it will be proper to give that, before we
proceed; in full, or in fubftance. All the paflages
of Scripture which mention it, might be foon
read ; but that account which is contained in our
Prayer of Coniecraiion, and makes a kind of har-
mony, feems fufficient. — *' In the fame night that
he was betrayed," &c. — The things principally to
be noticed are the metaphorical cxpreflions : But
we Ihould not fufier ourfelves to be hindered by
the familiarity and commonnefs of the founds,
from obferving, how ftrangc a thing it is to be
commanded to eat the flelh of our teacher and
Lord^; and how much more ftrange to be com-
manded to drink his Blood : though it were onlv
in an emblematical way : efpecially confidering, that
the perfons who firft received the command, were
Jews, to whom tafting blood was prohibited. — This
ftrangenefs will naturally make us go back to the
Old Teftament in order to fee the nature of the
Je'wlfli Sacrifices, to which allufion is made : fm~
offerings^, peace-cffcrings, Pajfover.
. The JIn-offerwg ; blood, Jliedy fprinkled, called the
blood of the Covenant. — Loaf broken, pan given to
God (or his Pried) ; Animal broken, or divided
into pieces. — The Peare- offering; for benefits pad,
or future; " in remembnuice" of Mercies.— Ani-
mal partly given, partly made into a feq/ly eaten

with

" This command does appear (take, eaf, this is mj Bcdy) in-
dependently of John vi. — tliough when I read that Chapter as
prophetical, and coniider what Bifliop Cleaver fays of the Ana-
Jocry between John iii. and John vi. I am of opinion it does
relate to the Eucliarilt. — It is not lb plain as a narration ; and it
contains obfciire intimations in the way of reproof, like John
iii. but I feel fati^fied with tliat Interpretation, which refers it
to the Sacrament.

•» Thefe were mentioned, Append, to Art. xi. Sed. u.
and XX V n.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. II. 317

with friends. Drink-offering, implying Cup. — The
Pajfover — a Lamb llain, eaten " in remembrance" of
redemption. He vv'ho reads thefe things will be
aware alfo (Hammond on Matt. xxvi. 26.) of the
Jevvilli cuftom of breaking and diftributing Bread,
as an ad of kindnefs, and of putting round a Grace-
cup, or cup of blejfing or Salvation : And will know,
that the Heathens had facrifices and feajls upon
them, with libations, or cups of blefling. — (Cup of
Salvation, Pfalm cxvi. 13.) ^ ^^^^^^ things confi-
dered, we fliall perceive, that our Saviour's com-
mands would appear natural and intelligible to Jews;
unlefs they fhould think, that, in the new Jnftitu-
tion, the different fort of facrifices were oddly
mixed and confounded together.

II. No fuch notion, nor any other, hindered
the inflitution from being univerfally adopted by
Chriftian converts. They might lee, that the
Death of Chrift, taken as a facrifice, refembled,
in different points, different forts of offerings; and
therefore, that they all had prefigured his Death.—
(Appendix to Art,, xi. Seft. xxvii.) At firft
the ordinance was probably ^^;^/)/^i but afterv/ards
it became more varied and complex ; as well as
more animated, or pajfionait; and more adorned and
magnificent, - When perfons had great dangers to
encounter in the proieffion of Lhriftianity, it
naturally heated their imagination and paffions;
and led them to do every thing with earneftnefs
and fervour".

The idea of the AJcodruta:, and others of the
fame turn, would have place here"", as well as in
Baptifm,

We

«= This was faid of Srxraments in ger.era!, but the remark is
wanted here.
^ Art, XXV, II. and xxvii. vui.

3l8 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. III.

We meet with the expreffions, Mijfa Catechu^
menorum^ and MiJfa" Fideliim, to denote certain
parts of divine lervice, in ancient times, — The
fideles were mature, complete Chriftians, who (laid
in the place of vvorfhip, and received the Com-
munion, after the Catechumens were difmijfed^. —
I do not think, that our knowledge is perfectly
clear about all the particulars of thefe matters; but
it is probable, that Mifla Catechumenorum meant
the fervlce before the Communion, and Miffa Fide-
lium, the Communion-Service : and that the word
Mafs, with its connexions, mijjal, he. had this
origin; (Meffa, Mefle) : Mafs continued to be the
name for the Lord's Supper^ in England during
part of the reign of Edward VI. but was probably
odious.

III. Whoever came to the Communion (and
all the faithful, except penitents, communicated at
firft) brought fome offerings, proportioned to their
refpedive fortunes; chiefly of i^r^^^ and wine; out
of thefe the Priells took as much as it was necef-
f.iry to confecrate. The bread was common leavened
bread, fuch as was ordinarily ufcd. The RomiOi
Wafers, which are unleavened, and very thin, and
lound, like a coin, and fo fmall that each perlbn
can take an whole one in his mouth without
danger of letting any of it drop, did not come
into ufe till the eleventh or twelfth Century. —
Some chofe to ufe unleavened bread, as what had
been ufed at the Jewifh PaJJover, the t}'pe of the
Lord's Supper ; and that occafioncd a long dif-
pute between the Greeks and the. learned of the
Weftern Church \ Attempts were made at dif-
ferent

« Bingham, Book 15. Wheatly, page 328.

^ Catechumens are called, in our Homily, " Learners m
Religion," page 3^6, 8vo Horn. 27th on the Sacrament.

E And the Augfburg Confcflioa (faid to be like ours) will not
allow, that it abolilhes the Mafs. — Syntagma, page 30.

^ Jn the nth Cent. rrielUcy's Hilt. Corr. z, page 56,

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. IV. V. 319

ferent times, to introduce zvater inftead of wine,
and water mixed with wine ; and milk, and honey :
Grapes alfo, and even Cheefe, had their Advocates.
— Thofe who avoided wine were called Encratita,
as avoiding it on principles of abftemioufnefs : if
they were for pure water, they were called Aqiia-
rians; and thofe who ufed bread and cheefe, were

called aoTOTXJoirxi,

Mixing fome water with the wine, feems to have
been a prevaihng cuftom amongft rational Chrif-
tians for a great length of timcj it arofe from a
notion, that the Jews ufed to mix water with their
pafchal cup, on account of their wine being ftrongj
and it defcended even to the time after our Refor-
mation in England. — See Wheatly on the Common
Prayer, page 2 89. 292.

IV. In the earlier part of tlie Ceremony, it was
thought a proper thing (as in Baptifm) to follow
the advice of the Apoftle literally, " falute one
another' with an holy kifsj" but the different fexes
did not falute each other.

The ancient Chriftians rofe gradually in their
devotion, till they came to the mofl: folemn and
animated giving of thanks: that was called Eu;)^a-
^tr<«, and thence the folemnity got its'" name of
F.HchariJi. In this part was the I'rifagium, a Ihort
Hymn fo called from its having the word dyioq^
Holy, repeated thrice : it was much the fame with
ours, " Therefore with Angels," &c'.

V. After the communion, part of the conle-
crated elements, was fometimes preferred in the
Church, for fuch as had not been able to attend :

and

' Rom. xvi. 16 and parallel places.

'' See Wheatly's account, page jo2. — Blnq;liam, Book i 5.

^ For the Greeks fee Cave's fecond Appendix. They feem
to haye been quite enihuriafts about this Hymn. Allix- has
written an Hiftory of it.

320 BOOK IV. ART. XXTIII. SECT. VI.

and part was fometimes allowed to be carried to
theHoufes oi thtjick; but this laft cuftom got
abufed, and was left off: children had a part : and
fometimes apart was burnt; (Lev. viii. 32.)

A good deal, I fuppofe, of the offerings re-
mained unconfecrated. The Priefts had a portion
of them, and the reft furnifhed the repaft called
Ayxnyt, or Lcve-fcqft -y an entertainment ^ origi-
nally of a truly Chriftian fort, at which the rich
and poor met together. Pity that any Jcandal
ihould ever occafion its being left off!

Thefe things, or moft of them, may be found in
Bingham's Antiquities. He mentions fuch a thmg
as a Fi3W//>'-Commi]nion".

VI. For many hundred years after the publi-
cation of the Chriftian Religion, though "due now
iind it the more rational the more we confider ir,
Rcafon was on the decline. Paffion had, on that
account, the freer fcope; and religious paffion,
when not regulated by reafon, becomes fuperfti-
tion, myfticiim, emhufiafm. In the dark ages,
men ran into all thefe. — Though no form of fpeech
is more natural than Metaphor when an emblema-
tical rite is intended to exprefs a fact of great im-
portance, yet nothing is more obvious to fanaticifm,
than to feize upon a metaphorical expreffion, in
things grand and awful, and raife its fenfc to every
height that it will bear; indeed the moft extra-
vagant fenfe of a metaphorical expreffion may be
its literal fenfe. Thus we may conceive that, when

high

" See Lardner's account of Pliny's Ep, to Trajan; where he
mentions i/«//f// 33 treating on the rubjed^.— Lardner's Works,

Vol. 7, page 311. ^ee alio Lardner, Vol. 8. page 71. — -

Luclan's account of Peregrinus, and the Chrillians having a good
flipper together ; and bcijig bretliren,

" J>ingham> 1 5. 4. 3.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. VI. 32I

high and lofty things had been faid, for a long"
time, in a declamatory way, of the necefllty of
eating the jleJJi and drinking the blood of Chrifl,
and men kept trying to furpafs each other in flights
of devotion, they might at laft come to profefs, as
a Doclrine^ that the coniecrated bread and wine
were really^ without a figure, turned into the body
and blood of Jefus Chrift ! — This Dodlrine is
ufually called the Dodrine of Tranfubjlaviiation-y
becaufe thofe who hold it, fay that, on the confe-
cration, the bread and wine lofe their own fubJlancCy
and are changed or tranfmuted into the iubftance
of the Body of Chrifb. — Yet as the bread and wine
appear to be flill the fame, this Hypothefis is
helped out by another; that though \\\t Juhjtance
be changed, the accidents remain unchanged ; ac-
cidents are hardnejSy colour, and in fhort all the
qualities by which we know one fubftance from
another. — The difcovery of this dodrine of Tran-
fubftantiation, is afcribed to one Pafchaife, in
Latin Radberhis Pafchafnis^, a French Monk, who
had afterwards the magnificent German Abbey of
Corbey, with the Sovereignty annexed. But the

term,

*> Chryfoficm is faid to have written and fpoken fome very de-
clamatory expreffions on this fubje<5l : as, that the Lips were
tinged \s\\\y\)[i^ hloo J of oar Lord, Sec. but Collier, (Eccles. Hift.
Vol. 2. page 369, or near it,) diftinguiflies between the Orafo-
rical works of Chryfodom and his reafoning works. Of the
reafoning fort is the Letter to Cafariu:, which the Papifts are
unwilling to allow genuine. — By the way, Collier takes the
tinging. Sec. in an higher fenfe than I do : when we drini the
blood of Chrift, our lips muftbe tinged withk: it is only fixing
the attention on t}\tfa7ne metaphor.

P Cave, Hift. Lit. Pafchafius, or Vol. 2, page 2. opening of
the Qth Century: that it was not known during the Neftorian
and Eutychian Controverfies, appears from a paflage quoted by
Bi(hop Pearfon ; on Creed, page 328. ift Edit, or page i6z, foL
— from Gelafius (Bifhop of Rome in 400) de duabus Na'turi?
Chrifti.

VOL. IV. X

SECT. VII. VII I.

term, or name^ was not given till the thirteenth
Century j and in the fame Century the Doftrine
firfl received the lupport and authority of a Coun-
cil'^. Lanfranc (Archbifliop of Canterbury at laft)
was the perfon who lirtl brought the Doctrine into
England \ about the middle ot the eleventh Cen-
tury.—(See Fox's Mart. Vol. 2, page 457.) — ■
Strange as this Dodrine fcenis, it has been found
to feize and atfect the mind, lb that even improved
nations have been unwilling to give it up : a cru-
cified Deity prcfent to the fenfcs ! not through
Incarnation, but Impanation ! what an idea! enough
to fill the mind with facred horror, (no doubt
intervening) and to make every ordinary fentiment
appear infipid \

VII. It mud not be concluded, from what has
been faid, that all thofe who profellcd what is
commonly called the Dodtrine of Tranfubftantia-
tion, explained the particulars exaftly in the fame
way : where there was fo much room for fuppo-
tion, it would have been a wonder if feveral hypo-
thefes had not appeared; they may, however, all
come under the general notion of corporal orefence^
And fo may the hypothefis of Conjiibjlantiation^ of
which by and by.

VII I. Oppofition was foon made to the doctrine
of Tranfubftantiation ; particularly by Bertram, or
Ratram, a ISlonkof Corbey', and John Scot, called
Erigenay becaufe he was a native of Erin, or Irin,

that

"* In 121;, at the third Lateran Council ; See Cave's Hill.
Lit. under Innocent the Third.

' See the Difputation at Oxford in 1554, before Latimer, A:c.
fufFered: Collier, Vol. 2, page 368, or Fox's Martyrol. (by
the date), or Syntagma, p. 120. Angl. Confeflio, from Jewel's
works. — immutari, &c. fomniarimt; neque adliuc potutrunt
unqiiam fatis inter fe de fuo Ibmnio convenire.

^ Cave's Hill. Lit. Vol. 2. page 2. confpeftus, or opening of
9th Century, (for Bereuger, fee Sedl. x.)

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. IX. 323

that is, oi Ireland. Scot's book is loft, but Bertram's
remains.

IX. This Doclrine comes under the general
oblervation made on ail the Popilli Doiftrines con-
tained in the opening of the twenty-fecond Article.
And we fhould now fee in what way it has " given
occafion to many JuperjUt ions ^

Somt fnperji it ions ^ to which the Doclrine of Tran-
fubftantiation gave occallon, will be the fubjedis
of fome of the following Articles ; a few others
may be mentioned. — It occafioned the cuftom of
Jopping the bread in the wine ; — of referving the
wafer with a view to performing cures, and flopping
public calamities ; — of burning the elements to
allies J — of r[\-d\d\-\^ procejjions in the ftreets, during
which every one prefent is to kneel :-^o^ elevating
the Hoftia, that every one may fee and adore his
God. — This Doclrine has alfo occafioned the mul-
tiplying of Altars in churches ; and has drawn the
attention of the Romanifts from every part of
public worlhip which we look upon as valuable. —
The Romiiii cafuifts very gravely determine what'
punilhments are to be inflicted on a monfe, that is
lb unfortunate as to gnaw the confecrated elements:
and how things are to be conduced in cafe a lick
Prieft Iliould vomit them up.

On the other hand, the dp6lrine of Tranfub-
flantiation is thought to have put a"" ftop to the
cuftom of giving the Sacrament of the Lord's
Supper to Infants in the Weftern Church, They
ufed to have it given by the Prieft, who dipped
his finger in the chalice, and then put it into the

child's

* See the original pafTages in Bennet's Direflions, under this

sgth Article. Ste alio Mofheim, Cent. 1 3. 2. 4. 2.— And the

thing is mentioned briefly in Fulke's Rhemifh Tellament on.
I Cor. xi. 29. oppofite to folio 288.

" Wall, page 5 1 6, 4:0. or 2. 9 16.
X 2

324 BOOK IV. \RT. XXVI II. SECT. X.

child's mouth. But the moderns mix the bread
with the wine, " r.nd put to the child's Hps a drop
or two of that mixture quickly after his Baptifm ;
alter which he receives no more till the age of
dircrction\"

X. But let us come to the age of the Reforma-
t'lon. The do6lrine of wliiqh we are fpcakino^, was
one of thofe which were objefted to by the IVal-
deufes^ : But yet it was not decidedly oppofed for
lome time : even Luther only changed trinfub-
flantiation into conjuhjlantiation^. IVickliffe had, in
fome parts of his works, expreff.d himlelf (trongly
againft this abufe, but MelmiElhoit' complained,
that, on comparing different parts, he found him
confufed in the quellioii about the Holy Sacrament.
Of the forty propofitions of Wickliffe's which the
Council of Conjlnnce condemned, the three firft re-
late to our prefent fubjed ; (fee Baxter on Coun-
cils, page 431, or Chap. 13. Seft. 2.) And the
third is againft the Bcdily Prefence in general ; and
therefore againft what Luther afterwards called Con-
fubftantiation. I think John HufSy and Jerome of
Prague did not differ from Wickliffe in this,
materially, if at all.

ConfuhJIantiation meant, that the fubftanre of
Chrifi's Body and Blood were prefent in the Holy
Sacrament with the fubftance of the bread and
wine. Luther's perfifting in this notion cauled an

unhappy

^ Wall, page 515. 517.

y Wall, 2. 7. 3. page 386,

* This may jull be mentioned here, as Luther is faid to have
borrowed his Confubllantiation from Berenger, in 1035 : fee
his Recantation in Cave's Hill. Lit. Confpeitus oxc. xi.— But
Berenger made feverai Recantations ; tliey are not to be de-
pended on. What F"o\ gives as his (Berenger's) real fentlments,
out of a Book of Lanfranc's, feems moft worthy of notice. (Mart.
Vol. 2. page 458). — Berenger, from that, feenis to have thought
n.uch as we do now.

'* Gilpin's Live> of Reformers, page 65.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII, SECT. X. 325

unhappy divifion amongft the reformed Churches,
which, i beheve, continues to this day.

Luther explained his confubftantiation by faying,
that in red-hot iron^ two fubltances are united,
heat^ and^re : he fupported it, by what was called
Ubiquity^ by affirming, that the Son of God w^as
every where, ubique i—oi' thus; God is every where;
Chrift fits at the right hand of God; therefore
Chrift is every where ". — Yet Luther was, in gene-
ral, a good and forcible reafoner : but when a man
is determined to maintain by reafoning a dodrine
totally unintelligible to rcafon, he muft take the
appearance of argument for the reality. What led
him, probably, to change tranfubftantiation for
confubAantiation, was, what is urged in our
Article, that Tranfubftantiation takes away the
elfence of a Sacrament^.

The Romaiiijis make the ordinance of which we
are fpeaking, very complicated and gaudy ; and
they profefs the dodrine of Tranfubftantiation
without referve ^ I may ufe the prefent tenfe, as
they have made no material changes, that I know
of, lince the age with which we are now con-
cerned, the Age of the Reformation. The ads of
the Council of Trent, and the Catechifm made by
its direction, will fupply us with any particulars of
which we may want to take notice.

The

'' Maclulne's Mofheim;, Cent. 16. 1.7. 21. and note (2).
•^ Luther is faid to have given up this ubiquity as a proof of
Chrill's corporal prefence in the Eucharift ; but rigid Lutherans
were ftill Ubiquitai-ians.

^ " Neceflitas ipfa verltatis facramenti exigere videtur," &:c.
— Confeflio Wittemb. de EucharilUa, Syntagma, page 159, 160.
^ See Art. i. Sedl. xvui. VoL 2. page 275, Note (c), where
is an expreflion from a French Prayer-book : after Communioa
the communicant is directed to fay, " Seigneur, &-c. jc vous al
reju avec joic," This order is alfo given ;
Ton Createur tu recevrar.
Au moins aPaques, &c>
X 3

326 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. X.

The thirteenth Scflion of the Council, is upon
the Eucharift. The firft chapter declares, that
there is no contradiction between Chrift's body
l:)eing always naturally at the right hand of God,
2,w(\ facr anient ally in other places: where ideas are
wanting, how ufeful are words! Yet I'uch manner
of exiftence, we are told, is not expreffible by
words, but is pofTible to God. Afrerwards we are
told, that, in the facrament, the real Body of Chrift
exifts fub fpecie panis, &c. — Nay, that the zvhole
body of Chrift exifls in every parlicleoi the bread,
and in every particle of the wine : and there is a
converjion of fubftance, which is aptly (proprie)
called Tranfiil^Jaiitiaiion. — That the fame worlhip of
Lairia is due to the coniecrated elements, which
is due to the true God. That procejjions are proper,
as a triumph over Herely, and to make it pine away,
or be alhamed. That the cuftom of refervingy
is ancient, and that of carrying the Sacrament
to the Jick, nccellkry. That the proper .prepara-
tion for receiving is facramenral Confcfiion. — The
Anathemas are eleven, the fecond againft Con-
fubftantiation.

The Catechijm has the fame things j with rea-
fons; and fome things more minute. The Sacra-
ment is to be taken fajling. The bread ought to
be wheat -y it ought to be unleavened^ but may be
leavened. — " The Church of God alzuays mingled
ivater \v\i\\ the wine j" for feveral "weighty" rea-
fonsj fo that fuch mixture *' may not be ncgle^fled
\jnder mortal Jin^ The Eucharift is to be judged
of *' by Faitky not by fcnlc." Our fenfes tell us
" nothing at all but the Species of bread and wine.'*
'* Ihey will judge that there is only bread and wine
in the Sacrament." " One may fee indeed all the
accidents of bread and wine, which yet are inherent
in no fubftance'* — (what would Mr. Locke fay to

this.?)

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. X. 327

this?) " but they confift of themielves."— " We
are not too narrowly to inquire into Tranfubftan-
tiation." — If the Romanifts had been " feen to
eat" their " Lord under his own Species," they
could not eafily have avoided the " reproach of
Infidels," as feeding upon human flelh and blood,
" the moft horrid thing in the world!"

Though thele things were fetded by the Coun-
cil, yet we muft not conceive that they were fettled
without debate or diffenfion : The Cordeliers and
the Jacobins were oppofed in their methods of
fclving the bodily ^ prefence.

The Feftival of Corpus Chrifti or the Holy ^ Sacra-
ment is faid to have been founded on a Revelation,
which one Jidiana, a devout woman of Leige, de-
clared Ihe had received. Her pretenfions v^ere
fupported by the Bifliop, (in 1264) and afterwards
by Pope Urban IV. and, in 13 11, by Clement V.
—The Feftival is to be looked upon as /;/ faci,
the caufe of Tranfubftantiation, as a fettled and
popular Do£lrine. It feems to be held the Thurf-
day after Trinity-Sunday :— It is fometimes called
Fete de Dieu.

Dupin"" is willing to give up the word tran-
fubftantiation; but ftill it muft be profefled,
" that the Bread and wine are really changed into
the body and blood of Chrift," &c. The word fub-
Jiance is dropped.

After the Romanifts, let us look at the Re-
formed' churches.— Z?////^r'j opinion of the prefence

of

*■ Voltaire, Vol. 10, 4to. page 156.— Du Conciie de Trente.
Probably from Fra. Paolo, (alias Sarpi).

g Molheim, Cent. 13. Part 2. Chap. 4. Seft. 2. oftavo. Vol. 3.
page 108.

*> Append, to Moflieim.

* I mean here all thofe Churches which feparated from Rme.
Abroad, thofe Churches are called reformed, which feparated

X 4 ' froin

^28 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. X.

of Chrift in the Eucharift was mentioned juftnovvj
as well as the feparation occafioncd by his perfill-
ing in it. This reparation confills of a number of
particulars; but it may fuffice for us to be aware,
that the great opponent to Luther, was Ziiingle^
who formed the Churches in Switzerland ; and
afterwards, Calvin. Zuingle looked upon the
Sacramental Bread and Wine as only Jlgns and
lymbols^y but it does not appear to me, that he did
not look upon the facrament as a comniemoration
of a facrtjice. — The greateft difficulty arifes fiom
the Hiftory of MdanElhon^ about whom we are
interefted as the divine on whofe judgment very
great reliance was placed in the forming of our
own Articles. The truth may be, that, as he was
of a very mild temper, and a fingular lover of
peace, and as he had fenfe enough to fee, that the
prefence of Chriil in the Eucharift, is a thing in-
tirely above human comprehenfion, and one that
does not immediately affect practice, or virtue, he
miglit fpeak undecidedly, and endeavour to pacify
each of the contending parties, as much as pof-
fible, by refpeclful attention and candour. — He
Was connected with Luther, and in conterence'
appeared as one of his company ; and he is fome-
timts faid to have been of his opinion ; but fome-
rimes he is laid to have thought ditferendy from
him : I mean on the fubjecl now before us"'. — It is

certain,

from the Lutherans, under Zuingle, Cali'in, SiQ. — SeeMolheini,
Index, or Vol 4, 8vo. page 54. 62. — And, if I miftakc not,
they are fometimes all together called Calvinijls.

^ Mofheim, Cent. xvi. Seft. 3. part 2. 2. 4. — Alfo Cent. xvi.
Sed. I. Chap. a. Sedt, 21. — And compare the Helvetic Confef-
fion, page 71, with that of Wictembcrg, page 159,

' At Marpurg, in « 129. — Moflicini, Cent. i6. i. 2. 28.—
Alfo Cent, 16. Seft. 3. Part 2. 2. 4. note (y).

■" Compare Mofheim, Cent. 16. 3. 2. i. 27. with Mac-
laine's Note (r).

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XI. ^It)

certain, that the confefiion of Aiigjburg^ which,
was drawn by him, favours Conlubftantlation".;
but in that Confeffion he is thought to have com-
plied too much for the fake of peace. From what
has been faid, we know what to expeA in the
Confcfiions of the Reformed, Corporal prefence
is the moft fully profelled in that of Wittemberg%
and the moft avoided in that of the Helvetic
Churches. — The opprobrious name given to thofe
who denied the corporal prefence of Chrift in
the Eucharift, was that of Sacrametitarians^^ or
Sacramoitayics.

XI. Let us now come to our own Country. —
In the reign of Henry VII f. very great ftrcfs was
laid upon the corporal prefence; nay, feveral people
fufiered death for oppoiing it. Cramner was, at
that time, a Lutheran'', and the King himfelf
raged againft Sacramentaries. In 1539 the act
was paffed which made a kind of regrefs of the
Reformation ; it was called, '^lie Statute of tJieJix
Articles, the firft Article affirmed the corporal ''•pre-
fence; and if any perlons preached or wrote againil
it, they were to be burnt, and their eflates for-
feited. In 1543 the ^^ Necejfary Do^irine" &c.
was publilhed; it maintains, in conformity to the
ftatute, the Law of the Land, that in the " moft
high facrament of the Altar," the bread and wine
are " turned to the \'q.X'^ fubftance of the body and
blood of our Saviour Jefu Chrift." Yet when we

have

" Syntagma, page 14. x.

" Syntagma, page 159. {ox Helvetic, \>zgc 71. 73.

P Neal's Hifl. Pur. Vol. i. page 20. 410. A. D. 1538.

Mofheim, Vol. 4. 8vo. page 87. Maclaine's Note.

1 Cranmer's prcgreirion was the natural one; giving up Tran-
fubftaniiation he kept fome belief of corporal prefence: giving
up that, as untenable, he became a Sacramentarian. — He was
famous for refilling, in Parliamentj the Uatute of the_/£v Articlec
fee his Life by Strype.

' Neal, A. P. 1539.

35° BOOK IV. ART. XXVI II. SECT. XI.

have taken it, ic " is not turned into cur fub-
fame ;" there are feveral other things mentioned,
but they are only popilh; and therefore they have
occiirred already : As, that the facramcnt is to be
received fajling, ^c— But when a church, which
had been trying to reform, could accept or retain
the Doftrine of TranfitbJIantiation^ we need not
wonder at its retaining an}ahingelfe'.

In the beginning of the reign of Edv/ard VI. it
is not fo ealy to give an account of the doctrine
of the Englifli Church. In his Firji Book, (that
is, of Comm.on Prayer) the irafcr is continued*,
only it is to be fo large that it may be broken ;
but " men mull: not think lefs to be received in
part than in the whole; but in each of them the
whole body of our Saviour Jefus Chrift."

Afterwards both Tranfuhjlantiation and all ways
of bodily prefence, feem to have been decidedly
reje^ed: this appears from our Article of 1552,
and from the Refornhatio Leeum.

Iq the Reformaiio hegum we iind a pretty long
chapter'' againft both Tranfubftantiation and Con-
iubifantiation, and againil corporal prefence in
general. The exprcffions arc much the fame with
thofe of the Article of 1552. We alfo find a
Chapter'' againfl: ubiquity^ faying, that drift, in
his divine naiurc, might be every where {ubique)
even after his refurredion; but that in \i\s human
nature he could not : his body, if human, muft be
in fome one place at one time : this chapter alfo
agrees exactly with our Article of 1552.

Latimer,

" The profanencfsof the Anabaptijls^ mentioned in Ait. xxv.
Se£l. II. might be here rccollcdied. Indeed it would have
fuitcd our preient Article full as well as that about Sacraments
in general.

* Whcatly, page 332. A. D. 1548. the fecond Book was
in 1 5 152.

" JDe Ha^rcfibus, cap. 19. ^ De Summa Trmitate, cap. 4.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XI. 331

Lathner, in the Dlfputation at Oxford in 15.54,
(or in the Paper which he gave in,) faid, that
he maintained the real prefence of Chrift in the
Eucharift, but not the i:or/)or^/ prelence. (See Fox,
or Collier, A. D. 1554). Avchbilhop Seeker,
(Lect. Vol. 2. page 251.) fays, the Church has
alvva)'s acknowledged the real prefence. Yet
Wheatiy, (page 320.) fays, it (real, eliential pre-
fence of Chrift's natural ftefli and blood,) was not
allowed at firfl, in the time of Edward VI. it
fecmed to approach fo near Tranfubftantiation.
— Fulke on Heb. i. 6. denies reality of Chrifl's
corporal prefence.

Queen Elizabeth fecms to have been willing to
ccmprckend as many as poffible in the new Englifh
Church ; and with that view to have endeavoured
to ufe a language, which all might adopt, who
did not profefs Tranfubftandation^ in the ftrlcteft
fenfe, and which might neverthelefs be ufed by
thofe who did not admit any prefence of Chrift in
the Eucharift perfectly corporal. Such language
v^^ould comprehend all Lutherans, and {orwt
Papifts^. I think this remark will be fuliicient
to account for the change of the expreflions in
the twenty-eighth of our prefent Articles; (on
which Biiliop Burnet fpeaks judicioufly) and for
the language in the fecond Book of Homilies;
both as to the word " Incorporation^^'' and the
infifhing on Faith and Jpiritual eating of the
Sacrament.

There

y See Wheatiy, end of Commimion-ofHce. — Mofhelm, Vol,
4. 8vo. page 37 or. Cent. 16. 3. 2. i. 27.

^ See Seft. xi. — See alfo Mofiieim, Cent. 16. 3. 2.2, 6. or
page 70, 71, 8vo. Vol. 4.

'' Homily : on worthy receiving of the Sacrament, page 3 50,
Svo. and35i. The language now is very like Calvin' s\ ft-s
Jnftitutes, 4. 17. -^i^.-^^'JncoTjiorate" occurs in the next prayer

before

232 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XI.

There was publifl-jed, in Latin, in the year
1560, a very Ihorc office for a Communion at
Funerals^ if the friends and neighbours of the
deceafed^ chofe to attend. The Collect is the lafl
Prayer in our burial-fervice; *' O merciful God,'*
&c. — And there is an Epillle, and a choice of two
Gofpels. I fuppofe the reft would be taken from
the Communion-fcrvice; beginning, probably, at
the Lord's Prayer. — Indeed if the Prieft began
there, fome Colled:, Epiftle and Gofpel would
be wanting.

Of the Familijisy we faid enough under the
twenty-fifth Article i and fo of the 5(7r/;//^7;/j : and
in general of thofe, who, near the time of the
Reformation, fpoke of the facraments m general
as mereftgni of unity amongft Chriftians — 1 doubt
how near thofe moderns come to them, who make
the Lord's Supper a mere Conimemoraiion.

The chief part of the Dodrine of the irjhiahersy
with regard to the Lord's Supper, feems to be
this; they look upon what was done by Clirift in
the inftitution, as ^.JJiadow^ intended to vanifh, or
ceafe ; i[-\cJiibJlauLehQ:'\ngintei'?ial''y and intended to
remain. — Col. ii. 16, 17. applied to the Lord's
Supper, might exprefs their mind.— This dodtrine
is generally, I believe, coniidered as invented in
the lall century; but thofe PetrobruJfianSy who
were juft mentioned before ^ feem to have been
PopiJJi Qiiakers, as it were, in the eleventh Cen-
tury, when Tranlubftantiation was taken for
granted. Their preachers faid, that the Clergy
deceived the People " notorioully; for the Bodv

of

before Gloria In excelils. Alluding to I Cor. xxi. 27, an4
parallfls.

*> Sparrow's colleftion, page 200.

' Barclay's Apology, prop. 13,

** Art. xxvm.Scd, xiv.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XIT. 533

of Chrlft was only cnce fnade, by himfelf, at the
iupper before bis Paflion^ : and was once only,
viz. at that time, given to his Difciples. Since
that time It was never made by any one, nor given
to any one."

In IFeJlefs^ Letters we have an account of the
notions of the myftics\ they need not " the Lord's
Supper, for they never ceafe to remember Chrifl
in the moft acceptable manner." — " Love is your
end." " Different men are led in different ways"
(to Love) : " You muft judge for yourfelf. Per-
haps fading may help you for a time, and -perhaps
the holy Communion."

XII. Thole whom we commonly call DiJJe?!-
ters^ in England, fit at the table on which the
Lord's Supper is celebrated. The Minifter pre-
fides, according to the DireHorj^, breaks the
bread, with prayer and benediction, and gives it to
fome one, but not to every one : and fo of the
Cup. — The ceremony may be grave, decent, and
edifying, for anything I fee. — Dr. Priefhley men-
tions'" a Mr. Henry, whofe treatife on the Sacra-
ment is much read, and he refers to a chapter,
incitled, *' Si^/jts to be feen at the Lord's Tabled —
This Title has a myftical found, and Dr. Prieftley
fays, that experiences are fometimes examined into
before admiflion to the Sacrament.

The Baptijis alfo receive the Sacrament syT/Z/V/^
" at a common table," " and handing the Ele-
ments' one to another."

XIII. Early

* Wall, end of Chap. 7. Part 2.

^ Page 60. 62. 13th Letter.

e See Directory ; and Preface to Grey's Hudibras. I have
been told, that one kind of DifTenters will receive a Teacher
or Paftor, from another kind ; but will not Jtt doion with him :
that is, will not receive the ^acr^.ment with him.

^ Free Addrefs, page 55.

' See Wall,, Part 2. Chap. 8. page 446, 4to,

334 EOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XIII XV.

XIII. Eailj' in this eighteenth Century Bifhop
}IoadIc\ contended, that the Lord's Supper is a
bare viemorial of the Death of Chrift. Bilhop
« Warburton, that it is ^ feajl on a facrijice. This
laft feeras the moft approved opinion, and is ably
defended" by BiJJiop Cleaver. Dr. Balguys feventh
Charge amounts to the fame thing. — But if Bilhop
Hoadley looked upon the Death of Chrift as a
facriiice, a memorial of his death, confidered iit
that li^ht, would not perhaps differ materially from
a Feaft on a facrifice ; where no real facrifice is
performed' : and would agree with the exprelTions
of our"" Cateehi/m. — Naj, when the mod-^rn Soci-
nians make the Sacrament a bare memorial of
Chrill's death, and throw out all notion of a
{licrifice, I do not regard the diifefence as one be-
longing to the ^^frrtwc";// ; but to the nature and
elScacy ot the Death of Chrift, or the docfrine of
Atonement. Each party commemorates the Death
of Chrift as what he imao-ines it be.

xi V. We next come to the Explanation.

The Title is taken from i Cor. xi. 20. The
Article confifts of four Paragraphs.

XV. The firft thing it does is, 10 aiTirm, of the
Lord's Supper in particular, what was before
affirmed of Sacraments in general, that it is not a
mere badge. Yet it is a Badge ; and the Vv'ay in
which it is a badge, is by denoting Chriftian focial
kindneis, fuch as would be ihewn by an Agape^
or fcaft of Charity, which meant only to brmg

thofe

^ Two Sermons, Oxford, 1789.— Warburtor/s Sermon is
called a ^«//o««/ account, &c.— Iloadley'sa /'/«/« nccount, &:c.

^ Maclaiiie thinks, that Bp. Hoadley 's notion is the fame
with that of Zuingle. Moflieim, Vol. 5. 8vo. pao;e 3^1. or
Cent. 16. I. 2. 21. Note (a). ~ Had they the lame notion of
the deatli of Chrift as a fiCiilke?

•" " For the continual rcmtnibr:\nce (memorial) of the Sacri-
jice of the Death of Chrift," 6.c.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XVI XVIII. 335

thofe of the fame comtnunity together, in a way
likely to produce chearfulaefs, good humour, and
benevolence. The Lord's Supper ufed to be called
the Sacrament of Peace and Charity: (Trent Cat.
page 159. bottom.)

XVI. " But rather"— verum potius — this does
not exclude the notion of a Badge, but only de-
clares the Lord's Supper to be fomething rnore;
to have, as a Sacrament, not only an external, but
an internal part.

XVII. "A Sacrament of our Redemption by
Chrifl's Death." In Art. xxix. thofe who take
the Lord's Supper, are faid to " eat and drink the

Jign or Sacrament of fo great a thing" (as the body
and blood of Chrift.) — From this comparifon it
appears, that " Sacrament^'' in our Article, means
much the fame as '■'-fign^^ \n\\\q\\ agrees with tlie
account before" given of the mod literal or proper
lignification of the word Sacrament. Redemption
was explained in the Appendix to the eleventh
Article". — The Lord's Supper then is an emble-
matical reprefen ration of our being redeemed from
fpiritual evil, or bondage, by the Death of Chrift :
but ill what way has the Death of Chrift any
efficacy to free us from fpiritual evil? by being a
facrificc : (that it was a facrifice, has been proved
I^efore ^ : ) therefore the Lord's Supper is a facrifice-
feaft-, or a feaft upn a facrifice : in fome relpeds a
■pafchal fupper.

XVI II . If this be underftood, all the reft follows
naturally; as is implied by, " Info-much that:''* In
all fuch Feafts there was a Communion^ ,that is, a
Commuyiication^ or a -partaking in common^, [in common
with the guefis; in common, in fome fort, with

the

" Art. XXV. Se6l. 11. « App. to Art. xi. Seft. xvn.

P Append, to Art. xi. Seft. xiv, xxi\, xxvii. xxvii i,
■2 Dr. Balguy, page 312.

33"^ BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XVIII.

the Biin^ to whom the facrlfice was offered') of all
the benefits at which facrifice aimed; as pardon,
favour, thankfgiving. — Siiould not this be fatisfac-
tory, the remainder of our paragraph is a proof of
it, from fcrlpture; expreffing indeed, at the fame
time, what might always be a tacit condition, the
ivorthinefs of the receiver : that he who partakes,
muft not be wholly unworthy, is fo plain, that
the Scripture, may, at any time, rake it for granted;
we fhall have occafion to fpeak of it under the
next Article. The pafTage introduced, in proof
or confirmation, is i Cor. x. i6. the word in the
Englidi Article is partakings but in the Latia
Article it Is commnnicatio ; which is Latin for either
partaking, or " communion -y^ that is, partaking in
common: Communion is the word in our Eng-Ihli
Bible. In the Vulgate there is firft communicatio
and then pariicipatio ; thefc muft have the fame
meaning, the Greek to them both being xoiva;v<a\
— To be lure, a fmgle, unconnccfted fcntcncc of
Scripture in an Article, would make a kind of
identical propofition ; for in every Article we mean
only, that each thing affirmed can be proved by
fcripturc ; and therefore when the thing ailirmed is
itfelf fcripture, we (^iyy in effect, fcripture may be
proved by fcripture : — However, in difficult fub-
lefts, we had perhaps moft of us rather fubfcribe
to a fentence of fcripture than to an human inter-
pretation of it. And a fentence of Scripture may
realbnably be introduced, to confirm fomcthing
elfe which Is not Scripture. But let us now come
to the fccond paragraph.

XIX. " Tranfub-

' Damafcere has both thcfe connexions, Trent. Cat. Sedl. f .
or page 195.

'^ 1 am not fure that tho fcope of this re;ironln<T will be im-
mecllatcly perceived, except the reader find?, that the con-
cluding e.vprellions of the firfl paragraph of the article, might,
■without it, give too little feeling of ayoaWpartaidng.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIir. SECT. XIX. XX. 337

XIX. *' Tranfubflantiation" was explained in
the Hiflory. It " cannot be proved by Holy-
writ;" — this expreffion will occafion what may
be called indireSi proof; that is, anfwenng the
arguments of the Romanifts, which to our doc-
trines, are objedions. But that ' which follows
will bring on dire6t proof; it " is repugnant
to the plain words of fcripture," — '* plain words^*
—all fides talk o^ plain words : we will only obferve,
that fome words are more plain when ufed meta-
phorically, than literally : as, a Plagiary, in Eng-
lifh; pravus^ in Latin; Saijijjement\ in Ffench.

*' Overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament" —
by confoundmg the outward and vifible fign, with
the "inward and fpiritual Grace:" — the figure,
with the thing figured". Tranfubflantiation makes
the bread (the fign) to be aifo the Body of
Chrifl, (the thing fignified). — Explanation here,
is proof.

The " fuperftitions" to which this dodrine
hath given occafion, were mentioned in the Hif-
toi'y''; and no farther proof can be wanting, that
the Dodrine " hath given occafion to many fuper-
ftitions."

XX. The third paragraph is not more eafy to ex-
plain than that in whofe room it was lubllituted. —
It mentions only the Body of Chrifl; but that is for
the fake of fimplicity and perfpicuity. What is

faid

' Did. Acad. f;iys of falfifrement " il n'eft pas en ufage au
propre, mais feulment au figure. There are many fuch words.
Candor is never ufed for whiteaefs. I never knew any fenfe of
univarrantable but the figurative, till a Keeper in a Kin'g's Foreft I,
told me, certam Venifon was unwarrantable; that is, could not
be fent in return to the Warrants ifiued by the Officers of the
Crown

« Fulke on Rhem. Teft. Luke xxii. Sed. 7.— Heb. i, Se6l. i.

" i^eft. ix.

VOL. IV. Y

338 BOOK IV. ART. XXVllI. SECT. XX.

faid of the Body may be extended to the Bloody by
parity of reafoning. — Let us, in order to explaia
it, read, in addition to what was read before^,
John vi. 48 — 58. — And compare Heb. x. 5 — 10.
From thefe two fcriptures, one may get fome idea,
how, by eating the facramental Bread, or Bread in
a facrifice-feaft, one may be faid to eat the Body
of Chrift. Whether John vi. relate to the Lord's
fupper, has been dilputed ; I think Billiop Cleaver
proves, that it does as a/)^!?/)^^//^ intimadon; but
we are fure that many people have fo underftood
it; and fo probably did they who compiled our
Article^. In that chapter lomething is meant,
which is not intended to be cxprell^d with perfeift
clearnefs. It may, as a prophetic intimation, be
interpreted by the Inftitution of the Sacrament, as
an e^Jent ; and by a comparifon of Chrift's reafon-
ing in the fixth Chapter, about the Lord's Supper,
with his reafoning to Nicodemus in the third,
about Baptifm. The difficulty lies in giving a
meaning to fuch expreffions as that in our Cate-
chifm, *' verily and indeed taken" w^hen ufed by
thofe who reject both Tranfubftantiation and Con-
fubftantianon ; and deny, in general, the corporal
prefence of Chrift in the Eucharift. It is a dif-
ficulty which feems to have occafioned fome un-
fteadincfs of language, fome expreflions feemingly
inconfiftent in thofe, who have departed both from
the RomiQi and the Lutheran Church*. My own

idea

X Sea. I.

^ Bifliop Cleaver fays, that the Reformers were aga'mji apply-
ing John vi. to the Sacrament. He excepts (in lome degree)
Cranmer. Two i'ermons, page 2 5 .

* Barclay obfervts this in his Apology, Prop. 13. Sedl. 3 & 4.
Reality (ot Chrift's prefence) lecms to be the moft unfteadily
ufed; fomctirr.es with Body, fometimes without — See Sed. xi.
about Latimer, &c. We eat Chrift's body r^a/^' ; we cannot

eat

BOOK IV. ART. XXVI II. SECT. XX. 339

idea is this; when T fay, that, in the Lord's
Supper, the inward parr, or thing fignified, is,
" The Body and blood of Chrift, which are verily
and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the
Lord's Supper;" J mean, that, though I may not
know precisely what may be intended in Scripture
by our eating Chrift's Body and drinking his blood,
yet I believe, that whatever is meant, a worthy
receiver comes up to that meaning : he performs that
acrion which is prefcribed ; he obtains that good
which is annexed to it.

If this be admitted, great latitude is allowed,
when fcripture fpeaks of eating the Flelli of Chrift
and drinking his blood, to diiTerent notion?, and
conceptions, or imaginations about particular wt'^;/^;
or intermediate fteps : and in things above reafon
why Ihouid latitude be denied? One man thinks,
that eating Chrift's flefti and drinking his blood,
means only a bare commemoration of his death :
another thinks, it is emblematically accepting the
benefits of the Chriftian facrifice : a third thinks,
that it is eating, in fdme inexplicable way, the
fubjiance of Chrift's Body, into which the Bread
has been changed: a fourth, that it is eating the
fubjiance ot Chrift's body along with the facramental
bread. Thefe are but citierent fancies or conjec-
tures of men about the particular means of bringing
about what is called in Scripture'' eating the fiejh of
Chrifl : ftili therefore 1 fay, whichever of thefe is

rights

eat that really which is wet prefent; thus men feem to have been
led to acknowledge the real piefence, even of Chrift's body;
thougt) tney dei\y the fcr/K^ra/prelence.

•* The Romanifts and Lutnerdns would not deny, either that
eatinf( Chrift's Body is a commemoration, or a partaking of the
benefits or 2i Sacrifice ; nor fhould we Cfl/w«//^j; but ftill, every
thin^ Between t;:e precept " take eat," and the obedience to it
(incluaing the reivard, or benefit), is human.

Y 2

340 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XX.

right, or if none of them be right, the zvorthy
communicant, does that which is really meant in
fcripture b)'^ eating the flefli of Chrifl;, and drink-
ing his blood ; and he gains all the benefit which
God intended fliould arife from fuch eating and

drinkins. He does that which God hath corn-
er

mandedj and he obtains that whicli God doth
promife.

I could wilh an}'^ one, who enters into what I
have faid, to try whether the paragraph before us,
would exclude the Lutheran^ or even the Romanijl.
The Romanift, who profelfed Tranfubftantiation
in the ftricfteft fenfe, could not fubfcribe to the
■preceding paragraph; but would he not own that
even Jm eating the Body of Chrifl is a fpiritual"
eating? he does not mean to fatisfy his hunger; and
he profefl'es, that what he eats does not mix^ with
his bodily fubftance. And as to Faith, he profefles
that " we mulljudge of the Eucharift by' Faith;"
nay, in the form of conlecration he calls it *' the
myjiery of Faith.'* And as all muft own, that the
eating of the flefli of Chrift is a fpiritual and not
a carnal ^eating, all muft likewife own, that Faith
is more properly the inftrument, than the Jaw is.
The Trent Catechifm fays, " what food is to the
Body, that the Eucharift is to thc^ Spirit'' Roma-
nifts fpeak of Faith chiefly with a view to their

incredible

«= It is called " o\xt fpiritual mea/," Trent Catech. Secfl. 5.

or page 196 Spiritual eating isdiftiiigiiifhed from facramental

eating, and both are required. Council, Scfl". 13. Cap. 7. and
Canon 8. but facramental eating is not ordinary eating.

•^ Trent Catechifm, Sedl. 49, or page 220, bottom.— Seft. xi.
of this Article. This might be held, in order to obviate the
charge of Stercoriatii/m. (Molheim, Index).

'^ Trent Catech. Sedl. 23, 24 or page 206, 207.

^ Panis cibus nieiitiselt, nou cibus ventris. — Cypr. See Synt.
page 121.

s Scft 49. page 220.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT XX. 34I

incredible converfion of bread into Flefh j we,
of Chriftian Faith in general ; yet tiiey fometimes
ufe it in our fenfe.

When I think in this train, and confider how.
tranfccndent and aftonidiiDg a thing the Eucha-
rift muft, on any fiippofirion, appear to one who
fixes his thoughts fairly upon it ; how folemn and
afFeclingthe firft Inftitution, efpecially when open-
ing the fenfe of the prophetic intimation recorded
by St. John ; how ftrong the declarations of the
neceffity of eating the Fiefh of Chrift and drink-
ing his blood: I feeni to be in the place of thofe
perfons of our"" perfuafion, who have fcarcely
known how to exprefs themfelves, fo as to deny
the corporal prefence of Chrift, and yet not let
down the Ordinance, nor give the Romanifts and
Lutherans a pretence for charging them with want
of veneration for it. I feel inclined to ufe the
fame expreffions, though fenfible of the fame dif-
ficulties. Though their expreffions feem to vary,
yet they always fpeak fo as to be confident with
my idea juft now ftated : they may always mean,
by receiving really the Body and Blood of Chrift,
receiving the Sacrament according to the real mean-
ing of Scripture, be that what it will : in oppofttioii
to, mere bread, vain ceremonies, empty figns, un-
feeling formality. Tliey are all words explaining
by oppofidon, or attempting to give the force of
fcripture.

As I doubt not but the high and ftrong ex-
preffions which thofe of our perfuafion ufe, have
given offence or difguft, or caufed perplexitj'-, to
many, and made them prefer Popery, Socinianifm,

or

'' I include, in this cafe, the Calvinifls, and all who have
departed from the Romifh and Lutheran churches; (except
Socinians and Quakers, &c,)

Y 3

342. BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXI.

or QuakerUm ; I will refer to feme places where
they are ufed ; in hopes that, in the li-:;ht in which
I have placed their., they may be thought natural,
and fuch as arife from right notions and leelings.
I will, at the fame time, refer to feme palfages :n
which our id. a of the Lord's Supper is illuilrared
by oppofition and' contradiftinclion. Dr. Balgny
defends " verily andindeed" by the context.

XXI. The pra^lices mentioned in the fourth
paragraph have been explained in the Hiftory.—
The expreffion " By ChrifCs ordinance^'' may be
obferved, becaufe by the ordinance of fome ancient
churches^ fome elements werc"^ referved. Bilhop
Burnet accounts for their bemg fo' : circumftr.nces,
at fome times required it ; but ancient churches
did not referve their God in any facrarium, nor
expofe him to the inroads of mice 3 for they did
not believe in Tranfubftantiation. Nor does it
feem as if they had encouraged fupcrilitions. —
Generally fpeaking, they confidered ciicumflances;
they left off carrying the facram.ent to the iick,
becaufe of fome abufes, and lo of the Agapze :
and I doubt not but anything, not quite eflential,

would

' See the prayer preceding the prayer of Con fee rati Ofi.

And Reformatio Legum, de Hasrefibus, cap. 19. — Maclaiiic's
Note, or Mofheim, Cent. 16. 3. 2. 2. 12. (and 6.) — Calvin's
Infritutes, 4. 17. 32. and Barclay's mention oJ it, Apol. 13. 3, 4.
— Fox's Afls and Monuments (or Marty rologx ), Vol. 3. page

82. col. 2. difp. in April 1554, at Oxford. Syntagma i^age

120, part of the Englifh Confcfiion, from BilTiop Jewell —
Fulke on the Rhemifh Teftamcit, fol. i;2. (comp on Heb.
i. 6 ) — Homily on the worti.y receiving of the Sacrament,
Part I ft. (t very word rnuft be attended 10, in fome places:)
** incorporatmi"' occurs twice (John vi. (;6 ) the hitter time
near the end. The fcriptural Metaphors of Head and Menibers
(" incorporation") vine and branches, &c. are wtll introciuced.
This is the 1 15th Homiiy ot the 2d book, or tlie .-7th of the
whole number. — Dr Ba/guy's 7th charge would illullrale the
Article, if the expreffions were curefully compared.

•» Set\. Y. I Page 429. 8vo.

BOOK IV. ART.XXVni. SECT. XXII — XXI V. 343

would have been left off, if it had given occafion
to fuperfliitions or fcandals. But we are only ex-
plainvig^ theexpreffion, " by ChriiVs Ordinance."

XXII. Come we now to our Proof.

The Article feems to contain7?.v propofitions.

1. The Lord's Supper has an external part, or
Sign.

2. It has an /«/fn/^/ part, or " fpiritual Gratri?i"
that is, it denotes or reprcfents our redemption by
the death of Chrift.

3. Tranfubftantiation cannot be proved by Holy
Writ.

4. It is repui^nant to Scripture.

5. The Body of Chrift is, in the Lord's Supper,
ea.ien Jpirittial/y -y hy Faith.

6. Chrift has not ordained that the Sacrament
under confideration, fliould be referved^ carried
about i elevated^ or adored.

XXIII. That the Sacrament of the Lord's
fupper has an external part, is fufficiently proved
by the inJiitution. — Nlsin. xxvi. 26. — Mark xiv. 22.
— Luke xxii. 19. — i Cor, xi. 23. with the prac-
tice mentioned i Cor. x. 16. made perpetual,
1 Cor. xi. 26. — What better proof could be re-
quired ?

This external part of the Ordinance being vifi-
ble, and peculiar to Chriftians, muft be a Badge.
And whatever is a badge of Chriftians muft be a
lign of mutual affection: fee John xiii. ^^. —
I Cor. X. 1 7. —mutual love muft alfo refult from
what is urged i Cor. xii. 13.

XXIV. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper,
denotes, or reprefents, our Redemptiori. by the
Death of Chrift: and fo has an internal part, or
" fpiritual Grace."

If it be intended to commemorate Chrift*s

Death, and his death be a Sacrifice for the Sins

¥4 of

34-1 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXIV.

of the world, it mull be an application to one's

felf of the benefits of fuch facrifice. — That it is

intended to commemorate Chrift's Death, appears

from the Body broken, the blood (bed, and from

I Cor. xi. 26. — And alfo from i Cor. x. 16. In

the inflitution alfo we are told, that CiirilVs blood

was filed for us, and for the remiflion of Sins :

thefe things are there connedled with the Lord's

Supper ; and we are told of a (JjaOriKi}, fometimes

tranflated tejlanient"', fometimes covenant, in the

blood of Chrift ; which being the word ufed for

the Old Covenant, (Deut. iv. 13. — Exod.xxiv. 8.)

implies, at Icaft, fo.me great bcncfir, arifing from

the fliedding of the blood of Chrift. Which is

confirmed by Heb. viii. 8, &c. — And it is faid,

that J't«6»)t»i, and the Hebrew nnil, are con-

nedled with facrificing : becaufe, it is thought,

folemn leagues and contracts ufed to be fcaled, as

it were, by facrifices. — But I fee nothing about

facrificing in Henry Stephens's accout of Aja6»>cn,

or J'jariGrjiut, &c. for this, confult Parkhurft under

"li and §ix^mr\. Potter (Antiq. Vol. i. page 252.)

mentions facrifices at folemn covenants. If we

allow that John vi. relates to the Lord's Supper,

the benefits of it muft be endlels. And all virtues

naturally

•" AtaTie£f/,«» is to difpofe ; in various ways; hy Will ; Chrift
might be conceived as both Teftator (or Difpenfer, author of a
Dilpenfalion,) and Vi8im : different charadcrs, as well as
different types meet in him: perhaps we do not fee the _/«//
J'crce of oiaC'^x*) and ^ia££|U,£>«, Heb. ix. i6. if we have not
thefe diffcr.nt ideas in mind.

But what led our Tranflatois to ufe Tefiament for Ji«6»)x»)?
perhaps Jia9£f*£ia : — A»aO»ixrj is claffical for a Will, (as a mode
oi iiifpofctl); but the Lxx always ufe it for H^'^i* ^^f'tJus*
Aquila puts^ttQrjxr, a compaft. — Chrillians ufe Teftament and
Cov emwt proini/cnoujly; fo that Tejla?ne}:tum in fcripture often
means padum 'viventium (Stephens Greek Lex. ). God covenants
with thofe who are called his ;«//f/7VflHa ; yet God's covenants
are gifts, difpenfations.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXV -XXVII. 345

naturally refulting from a worthy receiving, make
^ part of the "y/)/r//zW" Grace,''''

XXV. Tranlubftantiation cannot be proved by
Holy Writ. This mud be deferred to the in-
direct proof, for the reafon mentioned in the
Explanation.

XXVI. Tranfubftantiation is repugnant to fcrip-
tuve. The Jews did not ufe blood ior any fort of
victuals; and the fcriptures have made fome fup-
pofe, that Chriflians o\2^i\i not. It is not therefore
likely that Chrift (hould mean drinking his blood
in a literal fenfe. Chrill calls the wine the fruit
of the "vine after confecration, Matt. xxvi. 29. In
Johnvi. Chrift afcribes the fame effects to eating
Bread oi Life, and to eating his FlefJi: and the
Papifts own John vi. to belong" to the Sacrament:
Chrift's body may therefore as properly be breads
ViSjleJJiy but eating the bread of Life^ and eating
Chrift' sfeJJi, muft be both proper, or both figura-
tive exprefTions : they cannot be both literal, there-
fore they are both figurative. Acts iii. 2 1 . excludes
any corporal preience of Chrift in the Eucharift,
which can properly be called fuch. i Cor. xi. 26.
** //// he come," fhews, that Chrift is not come in
the Sacrament : this laft was Biihop Ridley's argu-
ment in the day of his trial : more may be found
in Fox's account of the Dijputation at Oxford in
1 5 154, and that at Cambridge in ~i 549.

XXVII. The Body of Chrift is, in the Lord's
Supper, eaten Jpiritually^ by Faith. The argu-
ments juft now ufed muft tend to prove this; the

Body

" See of Sacraments in general. Art. xxv. Se£l. 11. Our
Homily calls thefe virtues Graces, and defcribes them well : if
graces, they muft be fpijitual graces, (page 350, bottom, and
351, top) they cannot be corporeal,

" Rhemifts on John vi. 53.

346 BOOK IV. ART XXVIII. SECT. XXVI II.

Body of Chrift, in the Eucharift, is eaten \nfome
fenfe; if not really^ it mufl htfpiritually.

After what was faid in the Explanation, about
the paragraph from which this propofiiion is taken,
it fcems almoft needlefs to give a proof of it.—
Every emLlcmatical ordinance (orSacranient) miift
be executed by Faith. — John vi, 35. is a Key to
the whole difcourfe. — And the grofs, carnal notion
of the inhabitants of Capernaum in ver. 52. with
the reception of it by Chrift, (hews, that carnal
eating could not be meant.

XXVIII. Chrift has not ordained that the
Sacrament called the Lord's Supper (hould be
referved^ carried about, elevated, c^r adored. — It
refts vipon our adverfaries to prove that Chrift has
ordained thefe things; if they offer any atguments
worthy of your confideration, they muft appear
under our indired proof.— The words " take, eat\*
— " as often as ye eat this bread," &c. — feem to
prove the Romifli fuperftitions here mentioned, to
be even repugnant to Scripture : as they feem to
prove the delign of Scripture to be, that the facred
Bread (liould be eaten : eating it would cut off the
reft. — Befides, all tlie four pradlices here men-
tioned are grounded on 'Traiifubjlantiation; that
being difproved, thefe are difproved by con^
iequence.

I may clofe this direfl proof with a paflage from
Dr. Middleton's Preface to his Letter from Rome;
page Ixxv. &c. — He fays, that it was too ahftird
a thing even for Heathens, to worfiiip that which
they ^ eat. Yet in fad, the elevation of the Hojl is
fo ftriking a ceremony, and fo affeding to the
devout, through the help of fympathy ; befides
pomp, fhewj mufic, fometimes military exerciies,

and

P Reftmng to Cic. de Nat. Deor. Lib. 3. 16.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXIX. 34^

and " a prefenf^ Deity" that calm reafoii fcems
unable to abolifli it,

XXIX. Having finiflied our direft proof, we
miift fee what indired may be wanted : Or what
■obje^ions there are, which it may be worth our
while to confider.

Thofe of the ^takers come nrfl in our way. —
The chief of what they urge feems to turn upon
thisi if we make a perpetual Sacrament of break-
ing bread, why do we not make a perpetual Pedi-
lavium, or waihingof feet? one is as much inioined
as the other. — This was mentioned in the eleventh
Chapter of our firft Book^— Pedilavium is a cere-
mony in the Greek^ Church; and the Pope, I think,
goes through the ceremony of wafliing fbme peo-
ple's feet. But let any one compare the inftitution
of the Lord's Supper, with John xiii. 14. and the
general importance ot the Lord's Supper, with that
of the other ceremony, only mentioned by one Evan-
gelift ; let him compare the cuftoms in Judea, of
travelling, &c. with thofe in our own counrry; let
him compare the pradice upon the on€ ceremony,
with that upon the other; and he will find many rea-
fons for eflablifliing the rite of the Lord's Supper,
which will not apply to the wafliing of feet. — This
was once a Sacrament, and may now be called fo by
the Greek Chriflians, in the extenfive fenfe of the
word ; but the five Popijh Sacraments which we
rejed, feem more important than this, and more
adapted to general ufe; yet they fall much below
our two Sacraments. Our Saviour's wafhing his
Difciples, was probably only emblematical teachings
it was indeed followed by a verbal precept, (John
xiii. 14.) but that might be only the explanation
of the adion ; or the moral of the Parable. — After

all,

"? Dryden's Ode on St. Cecilia's Day.

' Book X. Chap. xi. Sedl. vi. The Lord's Supper is Sedl. vii.

^ Cave, Di/r. 1, Nitttij^.

34S BOOK IV. ART.^XXVIII. SECT. XXX.

all, if our rcafons fcem to any one infufficient, let
him imitate our Lord j he will do no barm. IF
the ceremonies muft be adopted or rejected to-
gether, it is a much lefs evil to adopt the NtTrr^ov,
than to reject the Eucharift.

XXX. It may be objefted, that the Gofpel-
Inftitutions are not to be made complicated and
abftrufe unncceffarily. Is not the " SimpHcitv that
is' in Chrift," bed obferved, by taking; the Sacra-
ment of the Lord's Supper as a i}iere commemora-
iion^ Bifhop Cleaver aniwers this objc6lion in his
firft difcourfe; and Dr. Balguy 3.n{\\ers it, in effect,
in his feventh Charge. If you make the Lord's
Supper, as it was inftituted by Chrift, a mere
commemoration, you make it a ftrange and unin-
telligible rite : for what can be more " ftrange than
eating the flcfh and drinking the blood of one, who
is to be regarded only as an inftrudor and bene-
faftor .f* if we had been ordered, in the Sacrament,
to kill an animal, and fhed its blood j or only to
break bread, and pour out wine; the rite would
have been intelligible, as a fimple memorial ; it
would have reprefented Chrift's Deaths merely as
a death; but it would have been a different rite
from ours. Now conceive it as a feaft on ?,Jacri-
> fice^ and all is eafy and fimple. We indeed arc
not in the habit of facrificing; but what is that t
who could not underftand, that when facrifices
were in ufe, part of the vi<5tim was ferved up at a
religious /t'(7y? ; and all who partook" of the material

feaft

• z Cor. xi. 3.— See Dr. Prieftley's expreffion before.
" Before, Sed. 1. — Dr. Balguy, page 309.

* See Potter's Antiquities, Vol. i. page 145. which though
about Heathens, is worth our notice. Heathens, deliberating
about Chrillianity, muft have had their minds full of ideas of
heathen facrifices. And thefe ideas mull have affected both their
converfion, and their Religion after converfion ; befides mak-
ing it eaficr to tlicm to conceive and celebrate the Chriftiim
Sacrifice.

BOOK IV. ART XXVI r I. SECT. XXXI. 349

fcaft were underftood to partake of the fpiritual
benefits of the facrifice^. Chrift was our viciim ;
on his body we do not feaft Hterally, becaufe it is
in Heaven J but he appointed bread to reprefent
it; on that we can feaft, and fo partake of his
Body; that is, feaft upon the 'y/^T/wz. Such bread
is '•'■ tJie Bread of Life^' becaufe, by his own ap-
pointment, it reprefents his FleJIi. This appears to
me plain ^.ndjimple.

XXXI. We muft now take fome notice how the
Romanifts prove Tranfiibflantiation from fcripture.
They have feveral weak arguments which, as I faid
in the cafe of Purgatory and Invocation of Saints,
it would be no Improvement to conlider. Such
as John ii. 9. the tranfubftantiating of water into
wine ; (it did not, after the change, appear to be
water) ; and i Cor. xi. 29. not dijcerning the Lord's
Body; by which St. Paul means, not making a
religious meal of the Lord's Suppsr, but a profane
one ; and that with excefs and intemperance, with
violation of the rules oi^ Johriety.—^\\t\x chief ar-
gument lies in the words, '■'■this is my'' body;^*
plain words, as they contend : Archdeacon Sharp
rightly replies, yes, they are plain words, for they
are a very plain figure^ . Many exceptions may be

taken

y 1 Cor. X. 18. •' Are not they which eat of the Sacrifices,
partakers of the ^//^r.?" — Lardner, fpeaking of food, fays,
(Works, Vol. 11. page 332.) "The Worfhipper, as well
as the Prieft, partook of the Altar, excepting in the cafe of
whole burnt-ofFerings."

^ Suppofea large room, many Chriftians met; the rich making
feparate little parties, having a good fupper and good wiiies ; (a
fcaft on an Heathen ficrifice was a jovial thing) : the poor obliged
tomefsas they could; feeling mortified and iniulted by thofe, who
ought to be as i^zvc. brethren, and make with them one company,
one party. — Small feleft parties of great perfons in the midft
of numbers, generally mortify, if not made by fome ufeful Rule.

^ Matt, xxvi. 26.

•» Sermon on the Sacrament, preached at York Cathedral,—
Sed. XIX. of this Article.

^50 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXII.

taken to their being ufed in a literal fenfe; but I
fhall content myfelr with the context. If the
bread, in the hand of Chrift, was literally his Body,
what was the Cup? " This cup is the New' Tef-
tament in my blood " — Was the Cup a Tefta-
ment? was the Cup in Chrifl's blood .? And if we
may not take words figuratively, was Chrifl really
and literally a Fine^ and a Doorf' — It feems odd,
that the Papifts ihould infift upon fetting afide
metaphor here, and yet underfland Bread meta-
phorically in John vi. 48. and 51. — For they
do not allow that Bread is ever eaten in the
Sacranient\

xxxii. Our Article affirms, that " the Sacra-
ment of the Lord's Supper was not, by Chrift's
Ordinance, rejerved^ carried about , lifted up, or
wor/Iiipped.'" — We might therefore have arguments
to examine on thefe four points. But (befides that
they muft all be built upon Tranfubftantiation)
I do not fee any which are likely to detain us. —

Something

«: Luke xxii. 20.

^ See ppend. toAit. XI. Seft.xxvii.

« If 1 was a Papift I would fay thus ; — The paflages in which
Chriftians are ordered to eat the Flefh of Chrift, are very ftrong;
they ftrike, amaze, almoft terrify ; I cannot wonder when
devout people think, that, in feme way or other, they ought to
eat Chr iVs Flefh ; they have no way of doing it but in the
Sacrament, God muit therefore contrive fome way that they
fhall do it there: but how?— all things are poflible with God :
ha could change the bread which we eat into LhrilVs Body;
finely then he iloes: he would not command things impoflible.
Thus I niight argue it I was a Papilt : as a canJid Proteftant I
add, — This hypothecs might go down in an ignorant age ; It
might get affoclated with religion in general ; it might influ-
ence the whole praxi of Religion, and therefore mi" ht become
very difficult to extirpate There might be an appearance that
it could n t be removed witiicnt a total overthrow of a great
relipious e !abli(hment; one fplendid and opulent, nay, with,
out tot:il deiiiudion of Chiifann principles in thofe who pro-
feffed it.

BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXIII. 3^1

Something Is faid by the Rhemtfts\ of paying dif-
tinguifhed /w/wwrj to Chrift's Body, and of doing
officious things limilar io /pre ading garments in our
Saviour's way, when he entered Jerufalem in tri-
umph : They alfo would make an application
of thofe pafTages in which Chriji is faid to have
been 2 adored, to the adoration of the Hofi : But
I fee nothing urged by Romanifts from Scripture^
which relates to the peculiar nature of the ele-
ments in the Lord's Supper, after confecration.
Here ends our Proof, dire6t and indireft.
XXXIII. In regard to ^application, I will only
obferve, that, on this Article, there feems great
room for mutual concejjions. But we have been
already led to enter into thefe, in what was faid
of Queen Elizabeth, and in the explanation of
the third paragraph. Queen Elizabeth feems to
have followed a right plan, and Melan^thon} feems
to have had the fame idea with her Minifters.

What can' feem more defperate, at firft, than
Dupin's infilling on its being ftill profelTed, " that
the bread and wine are really changed into the
Body and Blood of Chrifl?" Yet if that had
been faid by a proteftant, and perhaps put in a
ftiape a little different, we iTiould have made no
objedion to it. Might not a Proteftant Preacher,
addreffing that part of his congregation, who would
attend the Communion, and exhorting them to
pay due reverence to the facred elements, fay, that
he who ftiould eat of them now, would eat only

fimplc

' Rhemifts on Matt. xxi. 8. Mark xi. 8. — i Cor. xi. 29.

s Rhemifts on Matt. ii. 11. viii 8. Heb. i. 6.

^ Moftieim, 8vo. Vol. 4. page 37. or Cent. 16.3. 2. i. 27.

* Bifliop Cleaver obferves, that there are three notions of the
Lord's Supper, all allowing to it " what our Church confidejs as
efTential to a Sacrament, an outward vifible fign and an inward
fpiritual Grace."

^^2 BOOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXIII.

fimple hetid and zvine\ but that he who received
theni properly after confecration, would " verih
and indeed^" receive " the Body and Blood of
Chrift ?"

Ambrofe has a fimilar expreOion, which the
Papills would have us take in their fenfe, but I
fully believe that it was meant in ours. 1 take
it as I find it in the Trent' Catechifm— " There is
bread before the confecration, but after the con-
fecration, the Body of Chrift." Now, how could
this be, if the Bread were not chamed into Chrift's
Body ? But fuppofe it was propofed to Dr. Dupin
to fay thus? ' The Bread, after confecration, is
changed into what is meant in Scripture by, the
Body of Chrift:' who could refufe his affent? and
whofe purpofe would not this anfwer ? — Some-
thing of this fort might effect an agreement; but
it is idle to ufe words, and, by limitations to take
away their cuftomary meaning. As words are
arbitrary ligns, they depend for their meaning on
cuftom wholly. What fignifies talking of a Bod\y
not prefent as to Place"^^ — That which is not
prefent in fuch a fenfe as to occupy a place, is
not Body, in human language. And fo that
which is without the qualities, or accidents", of
fubftances, is no fubftance : Man has no idea of

fuch

*= Catechifm, of Church of England.

' Trent Cat. page 210; orSeit. 27.

P. S. I have looked into Ambrofe, Edit. Paris 1603. The

pafllige appears page 366. torn 2. in his 4th Book and 4th
Chapter De Sacramcntis. The Books and Chapters are very

fliort, and the llile very declamatory. The fiibjedl of the

Chapter h, Chiillus eft AinRor Sacramentoriim; the paflage is,
Tu forte dicis : Meus panis ell n/itatus. Sed panis ifte panis eft
ante verba ^acramentorum : ubi accefltrit confecratio, de ptine
fit Caro Chrijii.

"^ Trent Catech. page 218. or Se6l. 43. Locke, Hum.

Unci. 2 13. 1 1.

° See Locke, Hum. Und. Book 2. Chap. 23. Seifl. 2. & 4.

^OOK IV. ART. XXVIII. SECT. XXXIII. 353

fuch a thing: nor could the notion have been
admitted in any but an ignorant age°.

° The Rorhanifts are very tender about this, as one fees by
their care to exclude fenfc from judging of tranfubftantiation ;
and their cautions about explaining it, and inquiring into it.
(Trent Cat. Seft. 39. 41 .— alfo 24. ) What right has ?ny humaa
being to fet afide the judgment of they^«/Ji ?-

VOL. IV. Z ARTICLE

354 BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. I.

ARTICLE XXIX.

OF THE WICKED, WHICH DO NOT EAT THE
BODY OF CHRIST IN THE USE OF THE LORD's

SUPPER.

TH E Wicked, and fuch as be void o( a lively
faith, although they do carnally and vifibly
prefs with their teeth, (as Saint Augufline faith,)
the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Chrift;
yet in no wife are they partakers of Chrift ; but
rather, to their condemnation, do eat and drink
the fign or facrament of fo great a thing.

I . In the way of Hiftory\ we may obferve,
that people have always been much inclined to
provide themfelves with Charms, Amulets, &c. in
order to drive away evils. Often, to ufe a thing
which was ordinarily efficacious, if rightly managed,
as mechanically efficacious. Sometimes indeed things
uled as Charms, may feem to be no way naturally
efficacious; but to ufe fuch is the extreme of
fuperftition ; and fuch things may originally have
been eileemed natural medicines. We have
already mentioned, that people have taken home
the water ufed in Baptifm, and applied it to bodily
fores; in like manner, confecrated bread^ and wine

have

* See Fulke in anfwering Rhcmifts on }ohn vi. jS. where he
mentions from TertuUian a I'liperllitioiis uoman keepiag the
^acrainent in a cheft, to eat i'.ilUng. — Alfo .\x\., xxv. Seil. vii.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. I. ^55

have been given to Infants, have been kept for
medical purpofes, and even buried with the dead\
Heathens and Jews have " run into finiiliar fuper-
llitions. Such folly ought to be oppofed ; bat
our prefent Article was aimed chiefly at the Roma-
nifts; who are accufed of faying, that the mere
receiving of the Lord's Supper, merits remijfion of
fins, ex opere operato^ (tranflated in the Article of
1552, anfwering to our twenty-fifth, ''^ Of the work
wrought i'') that is, mechanically'^-, without any good
difpolition of the communicant^ — What was faid
of Sacraments in general, at the clofe of the
twenty-fifth Article, is applied here to the Lord's
Supper in particular. This Article is not in the
fet of 1552^ from whence one may prefume, that
the early Reformers did not think fuch particular
application neceflary.

What the Romanifls fay of the efHcacy of Sacra-
ments in general, was ftated under the twenty-
fifth Article J what they fay of the efficacy of the
Eucharift in particular, muft be mentioned here.
The Rhemifh annotators fay, " 111 men receive
the Body and Blood of Chrifi, be they infidels or
ill livers :" their anfwerer Fulke fays, " Wicked
men receive not the body and blood ^ of Chrift."—
But the Romanifls have three ways of receiving.
The fir ft, jacramental, the fecond Jpiritual, and a

third

•> Bingham, 15. 4. 19. It appears from 11. 5. 8. and 16,

5, 6. that care was taken to prevent fuch follies.

= Potter fpeaks of (paf/«.axa awTJj^ia, Book 2. Chap. 18, or
Vol. I. page 353. Amulets, page 35;.— The Jews had Phy-
lafteries. Thefe are mentioned together in the Saxon Coii-
ffffion. Syntagma, page 104. — Heathen and Chriftian Holj/m
ivater; Middleton's Letter from Rome, page 136.

'' Some author iz-^i, magic ally ; but I do not recolleft who.

^ Saxon Confeffion, page 103, Synt.

f See Rhemiftson i Cor. xi. 27. and Fulke's anfwers on the
fame; and on John vi. 27.

z a

35^ BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. II.

third made up of thcfe two coujomed^. — They who
receive only facramentall)', only eat the confecrated
wafer, without due preparation or difpofition.—
They who only receive after the fecond manner,
fpiritually, do nothing but what we fhould call
hearing Mafs, or in the words of the Trent Cate-
chifm, cat the " heavenly bread in dejiresind zvi//i;"
that is, as I underftand, they do not cat it at all.
But they who both eat the wafer, and eat it with a
good difpofition, afttr facramental confcflion, receive
in the third way.

It is poffibie that our church, by infer ting this
Article here, might intend it as an argument
againft Tranfiibfiantiation, in the way of a reductio
adabfurdum; for if all who eat the confecrated
wafer eat Chrifl's Body, then mice and flies, any
animals or infeds, eat Chrift's Body, as much as
the moft pious Chriftian.

Our Article might be aimed alfo at the Lutlic*
rans; becaufc according to the Doftrine of Con^
fubjlantiation, all receivers of the Lord's Supper,
receive the Body of Chrift : and Dr. Bennet**
argues, that Archbilliop Parker could not be a
Lutheran, becaufe he fubfcribed this Article; and
that the rcafon why other Prelates did }iot fign it,
was, probably, becaufc they w^re Lutherans. — I
do not, however, perceive anything in the Luthe-
ran Confcffions, which our Church would \vi(h to
oppofc, as bringing on the fame evils with the
Romifli Dodrine of Tranfubftantiation ; indeed I
fee nothing allied to the Romifh Dodrine, either
in the ConfeiTion of Wittembcrg, or in that of
Augfburg. The Saxon Confcifion calls it *' por-

tentofuiii

5 Trent CatechifiT), page 224., or Seel. 77. of Eucharifl.

The Council, SefT. 13. Cap. 8. Canon 8.

•" EfTay on the Articles, page 187.— Eiihops Geft and Cheney
did not fign.

BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. II. III. 3^7

tentofum errorem MonachorLim." — Thefe are all
the hiftorical remarks which it feems neceflary
to make.

II. Nor need the Explanation be long.

The title founds more like French phrafeology
than EngliHi. Le voila qui vient, fee he is coming.
We fliould commonly exprefs the meaning of the
Title thus ; * Of the Wicked not really eating the
Body of Chrift.' The Latin is, De Manduca-
tione Corporis Chrifti, et impios illud non man-
ducare. The Wine is not mentioned ; probably
for the fake of fimplicity and perfpicuity'.

The chief part of the Article is exprefled in
the words of Augujlin, as a Father much vene-
rated by the Romanifts. The paflage is in his
twenty- fixth Trad on Sr. John. — It is quoted at
length by Bennet'^and Welchman.

As all men are "wicked" in fome degree, it
may be proper to obferve, that worthinejs is here
oppofed to the opv.s operatiim, or the fuppofed
mechanical efFed of the Lord's Supper. — " The
Wicked" who eat " to their condemnation,"— are
the decidedly wicked, the abandoned, " fuch as be
void of a lively Faith." The meaning is, to
o-ppoje the notion, that a man eats the Body of
Chrift how wicked Joever he be. — A lively, or
living Faith was explained under the twelfth
Article'.

III. We have here but one propojition. * Chrif-
tians do not get the benefits annexed to what in
Scripture, is called eating the Body of Chrift, merely
by partaking of the Lord's Supper.'

For

* Art. xxviii.Seft. XX. the fame.

^ 1794. Mr. Porfon, page 229, calls this paffige of Auguftm
fpurious ; that fiiould be inquired into. — It is in the Catholicus
confenfus prefixed to Syntagma, page 207.

* Art. XII. bed. XIV. xxi.v.

z 3

358 BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. IV.

For Proof, I will only cite Hab. ii. 4. with the
New Teftament applications of it"'; John vi.
3v 54. and 1 Cor. xi. 29. which hft is alluded
to in the Article; and i Johni. 7. which intimates,
that we muft walk in the Light, before the Blood
of Chrift cleanles us from Sin.

IV. Our Application may be confined to mutual
concejjions. And for thefe I think there is greater
room in this Article than in any other. The dif-
pute between the Romanifts and the Reformed
is merely " verbal; I mean about the prefent Article
as feparated from all others. They fay, the Bread
after confecration, is the Body of Chrift, even in
fubjlance; it follows, fuppofing this true, that wJio-
ever eats that fubftance, eats the Body of Chrift;
that is, it is not dejecrated by one mouth more than
by another. We fay, that the bread continues
bread after confecration, and therefore, that every
receiver eats bread ; but that he who does what
the fcripture requires, may be faid, in the pro-
phetic, ftrong, figurative language of Scripture, to
eat the Body of Chrift ; as he eats what is appointed
to reprefent that Body, and what the Scripture
calls briefly that Body itfelf. — The Romanifts,
therefore, and we ufe a phrafe, eating the Body of
Chrift, in two different fenfes ; and we ufe this
propofition, ' 'The wicked eat Chrijl's Body,* in two
different fenfes : confequently to difpute about its
truth, is idle and childifh. They too ufe it as
a corollary from a propofition which we think
falfe, though we own the corollary to be rightly
deduced. Now it muft always be trifling to dif-
pute about fuch a corollary, as if it were an inde-
pendent propofition. — ^V"e both xcc^ut preparation

for

"> Art. XI n. end of SeSlion 11.

" Myyht this be the rcafon why Cranmer made no Article on
this fubjedb ?

BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. IV. 359

for the Sacrament, indeed Roman ids more than
wei we both fay, that unworthy receivers may
draw piiniJJiment upon themfelves ; we both quote
the paflage of Augujlin ° which is in our Article.
In flrort, we both mean; that the confecrated
Bread is not defecrated by the unworthinefs of the
Receiver; and that worthinefs is required in order
to obtain benefit.

Dupin fays% that the Body and blood of Chrift
" are truly and really received by all, though none
but thQ faithful partake of any benefit from them.'*
What can we difpute here ? The former part of
his affirmation is true, upon his fuppofition, of
Tranfubftantiation ; but that we think falfe; yet
we might ufe the fame words, with a different idea.
The latter part agrees with our opinions. The former
is the fame thing as if he had faid, ' Siippofing
Tranfubftantiation, the Body and Blood of Chrift
are received by all communicants.' This could
not be difputed ; why then fhould not the Roma-
nifts now exprefs themfelves fo, if it comes to the
fame thing ? why fiiould we difcufs a dodrine an
hundred times over, in an hundred confequences
deduced from it ?

I am apt to think, we take the Romanifts too
ftridly about the Sacrament producing Plrtues"^ or
Graces : that which is to be expeSied of courfe, is
fpoken of, in human language, as a confequence,
jmd no uncertainty is expreifed about it. — Luke
xvii. I.— I Cor. xi. 19- — What Proteftant teacher
would fcruple to tell his hearers that attending the
Sacrament would make them better men ? Our
Homily 'defcribes the Graces and Virtues ^^ wrought

(operatic)

o Trent Catech. Seft. 57. -See alfo Sea. 58, 59.
P Third Append, to Moflieim.

q " An admirable and>r^ virtue to cure our fouls." From
Trent Cat. page 145.

» On worthy receiving, page 350, 8vo,
Z 4

560 BOOK IV. ART. XXIX. SECT. V.

(operatse) by the Sacrament ; and I have done the
fame in explaining* the expreffion, *' fpiritual
grace."— If the Romanifts held what they are
charged with, they mufthold, that all perfons re-
ceive the fame benefit from the fame Sacrament. —
But this is contrary to many paffages of the Trent
Catechifm'.

V. I (hall conclude what I have to obferve on
this Article, by reading Dr. Balgufs"^ account of
pur obligation to prepare ourfelves for the worthy
receiving of the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's
Supper. And may that fcripture comfort the
feeble-minded, which fays, that we may truft we
have a good confcience if we are in all things
wilHng to live honeftly.— Heb. xiii. 18.

» Art. XXV. Se6t. 11.

' On theEuch. Seft. 51, &c. And 57, 58, 59.

" Charge 7th, page 315.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. I. 361

ARTICLE XXX.

OF BOTH KINDS,

THE Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to
the lay-people : for both the parts of the
Lord's Sacrament, by Chrift's ordinance and com-
mandment, ought to be piiniftered to all Chriftiaa
men ahke.

I. The principal part of the Hiftory of this
Article conlifts in (hewing, how the Romifh cuftom
of not giving the cup to the Congregation arofe
from the Docftrine' of TranJiibJlanUation. When
the facraniental wine came to be confidered as the
blood of Chrifl in a literal fenfe, and that in an
age of weaknefs and fuperftition, though reverence
for the elements feems to have been exceflive before^
men became feized with an horrour at the thoughts
of any of it being profaned, loft, dropped by the
trembling hand, or even lodged upon the Beard.
1 think there are ftories of [ome judgments coming
upon individuals on account of fuch profanatbn.
— How to apply a remedy ? At firft the defperate
expedient of wholly withholding the Cup, did not
occur; the bread was fopped in the wine; the
wine was conveyed into the mouth by means of
t.'^bes ; ftill, probably, accidents did not ceafe ; at
length, the ordinance of Chrift was maimed,
through an exceffive fear of (polling a falfe Ihape,

into
* Micldleton's Letter from Rome, Pref. page Ixxix.

562, BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. II. III.

into which it had been tortured : — the Cup was
denied to the People; including fuch Priejls as, at
any particular communion, made a part of the
congregation. For a time, the authority of the
ruling Ecclefiaftics might be fufficient to prevent
the people from murmuring ; but the pradice was
afterwards fettled by the authority of a Council :
the Council of Conjlance, begun fo late as the year
1414: a very numerous one, as we have fhewn"*
before.

II. That the ancient Fathers, and all before
the twelfth Century, had no notion of fuch a thing
as preventing the people from receiving the Cup,
appears fufficiently from the gradual manner in
which the ancient pradice was left off. But their
expreffions are alfo plain, as taking for granted, and
fuppofing that every man received both bread and
wine^^i and reprimanding thofe who wanted to
make a change. — The Manicheans, indeed, avoided
all wine, on principle, and therefore avoided the
Cupy when the liquor in the Cup was wine : at
Rome, when they wifhed to be concealed, they
fometimes were difcovereJ by this declining of
the cup**.

III. The Greek Church has no cuftom of re-
fufing the cup to the people" : the Roman cuflom
arofe from the doctrine of Tranfubftantiation ;

which

* Art. XXI. Sefl. 11. from Fox 1. 785. SelT. 13.— See Labbe's
Councils, col. 100. — Baxter on Councils, page 437, has the
Decree. As alfo has Biftiop Burnet on the Article.— See Com-
ber's Advice, page 12. 17.

* See Burnet on the Article — Bingham, 15. 5. i.

^ Leo I. in his Serm. 4. de Quadragefim.^, quoted by Lardner,

Works, Vol. 3. page 491. Buract mentions this, page 438.

odavo.

« " The Laity, as well as the Priefts, communicate in both
kinds, taking the Bread and the Wine together in a fpoon from
the hand of the Priell." Paul Ricuut, page 187.

BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. IV. 2>^^

which I do not conceive to be properly a doctrine
of the Greek Church : for although Sir Edwin
Sandys fliys*^, the Greek Chriftians do hold Tran-
fubflantiation; yet that feems by no means a fettled
thing. From Sir Paul Ricaut's account I judge,
that only thofe Greek Chriftians who have refided
in Italy have favoured it. The Patriarch Cyrill
agreed wholly with the reformed Churches in this
particular °.

IV. As we might be fufpefled of exaggera-
tion if we gave our own account of the Romanifts,
we will let them fpeak for themfelves.

The twenty-firft Seflion of the Council of Trent
was upon the bufinefs of communion in one kind,
fomething being annexed about giving any kind
of communion to Infants. The members of the
Council do not fay, that it is wrong for Chriftians
to receive in both kinds, only that it is 7iot necef-
fary : — they hold, that though tht primitive manner
was to receive in both kinds, the Church has
power to alter it, as to anything but the fubftance
of the inftitution ; making allowances for circum-
ftances, of time and place, &c. — and that the
alteration in queftion was made for weighty and
ji'Ji caitfes y but thofe caufes are not fpecified. —
It is however faid, in the way of argument, that
Chrift is received whole and intire under one kind;
and therefore, that they to whom only one kind is
adminiftered, are defrauded of no faving grace y no
beneficial effects. — But in the Council, two quel-
tions occurred,

I. Whether

^ Speculum EurOj^re, page 23^.

s Paul Ricaut, page 182. — There was however, fuch a term
in the Greek Church as f^iraaiuicric, coined on purpofe to exprefs
the notion which had been brought from Italy. Which might
be ufed by fome to exprefs the change made in the bread and
wine by confecration.

364 BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. IV.

1 . Whether the Church's weighty and juft caufes,
were fo ftrong, that the ufe of the cup was to be
allowed to no perfons whatfoever ?

2. Suppofing it might be allowed to fome par-
ticular ration, whether it fliould not be on condi-
tions ; and what thofe conditions ihould be ? — thefe
queftions were left undecided till the next Seffion i
and then they were left by the Council, to^ the
decifion of the Pope.

The Trent Catechifm' direds the People to be
taught, " That by the Law of the Church it is
prohibited that any one, without the Authority of
the Church, (except confecrating Miniflers) fhould
take the facred Eucharift in both kinds.'* Some
authorities of ancient Fathers are quoted j and
Jix reajons are fpecified.

1. The fear of fpilling.

2. The fear of wine growing four, when kept
for the fick.

• 3. The difjke which fome perfons have for the
lafte or fmell of wine.

4. The fear of hurting the health of the com-
municants.

5. Th^ fcardiy ai wine in fome places.

6. Laftly and principally, the defn-e of oppofing
thofe Heretics^ who dij/jonour Chrift by faying, that
he cannot be received intire under one kind : that
being to deny his Divinity. It is added, that fuch
as have treated on this argument have affigned
flill more reafons.

The Rhemijis, on^ John vi. 38. fl\y, that the
Church has only regulated manner, order, and par-
ticular points; (that is, has not hurt the fubftance
or ejjence of the bacrament;) that fuch regulations

the

*■ See end of aid Seffion. Voltaire, Vol. 10. quarto,

page 160.

• Sea 70, ^c.

^ Fulke's Rhem. Teft. opp. fol. 152. on John vi. 58.

BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. V. VT. 365

the Clnirch has authority to make, according ta
time and place, for the honour ol God, reverence
to the Sacrament, and profit to the people: (edi-
fying).— Then they mention fome of the fame
Fathers which are referred to in the Catechifm :
and fome of the fame reafons j affigning moreover
the number of communicants ; a *' dreadful regard'*
of *' Chrifl's own bloody* and the pradtice of fome
centuries.— To their authorities from the Fathers,
and indeed to their arguments, Dr. Fulke feems to
me to have given a complete anfwer.

Though the language of the Council feems to
imply an opening for variety and liberty^ yet the
conftant praftice of the Church of Rome has been,
for no one to receive the cup except the confecrating
Prieft^

In later times, v^lth ^ view to agreement, Dupht'^
declares for mutual toleration in this point ; and
for leaving it to be fettled by each Church for itfelf.

V. One would think, that the practice of ad-
miniftering to the people in only one kind, might
have been deduced from the Lutheran Confubfian-
tiation ; but the Confcffion of Wittemberg^ (which
I have prefumed to be the work of Luther,) ex-
prefsly difclaims the dedudion. And all other
reformed churches feem to oppofe it.

VI. The Neceflary Dodrine is not reformed
with regard to the Sacrament of the Lord's Sup-
per.— It fays, that the Cup is not necejjary to Salva-
tion,' That receiving in one or both kinds, rather

concerns

^ Dr. Prieftley (Hift. Corr. Vol. 2. page 55, from Hifloire
des Fapes, Vol. 4. page 679.) fays, that " Pius IV. granted tlie
Communion in both kinds to thofe who fhould demand it, pro-
vided they profefTed to believe as the Church did in other re-
fpefts. The Bohemians alfo were allowed, with the Pope's
confent, to make ufe of the Cup."

°> As before. — Third Appendix to Mofheim,

" Syntagma, page 160.

^66 BOOK IV. AliT. XXX. SECT. VII.

concerns the manner or fafliion of the Sacrament
than the ejjence •, that the main thing is worthinefs :
— ^by " ancient cuftom" I fuppofe it means the
fame as the Rhemifts by, " fome" centuries. In
a popular calculation a cuftom of fome hundred
years ftanding, is an° ancient one. — It contends,
that " by natural reafoUy' " the lively body cannot
be without bloods

Archbifliop Cranmer is faid to have been the
Author of this Neceflary Doftrine ^, &c.- — it muft
have gone hard with him to exclude the Cup, in
compofingit^ for in the firfl year of Edward VI.
tlie adrniniflration in both kinds was voted, nullo
reclamante, in a Convocation where he had pro-
bably the chief weight ''. — This makes me wonder
why our prefent Article was not amongft. thofe
of 1552. Neither do I fee the fubjeft in the
Reformatio Legum. — I cannot account for theie
omlflions.

P. S. The Article of Edward VI. confirming his
very recent Liturgy, made in 1552, takes in this
particular ; — this was to be fubfcribed.

VII. I do not fee that this Article wants any
explanation. " Is not to be denied''' — fecms to
anfwer to the expreffion of the Council of Trent,
" petentibiis ufum' calicis."

But if it was faid, that the Cup is not to be
denied to thofe who ajk it, would not that imply,

that

<» Sterne's fimple and unfcholaftic Uncle has no idea of any
event having happened above 100 years ago.

P Oxford Pamph. on 17th Art. page 32, from Burnet. — Hift.
Ref Vol. 2. — Records, page 238. Where Henry \'III. call>
it Cranmer's own Book.

1 Wheatly, page 25. from Strype's Cranmer, page 157, 158.
It appears, page n;6, that Archbifliop Cranmer hitroduced the
propofiil of having both kinds, at this Convocation, and that
they were fupporied by Archdeacon Cranmer, his brother.

' Trent, page 1 52. or SefT. 22. at tlie end.

BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. VIII. IX. 367

that withholding the Cup from fuch as did ?iot afk
it, is innocent ?

VIII. We may proceed therefore to fome Proof,
I fee but one Propofition in the Article; namely,

* By the Ordinance of Chrift, both Bread and
Wine are to be adminiftered, in the Lord's
Supper.'

Matt. xxvi. 27. — " Drink ye all of it."

Matt. xxvi. 28. — All Chriftians are in the new
Covenant', and all ftand in need of " remiffion of
fms." — Thefe are afligned as reafons for all drink-
ing of the Cup : " For this," &c.

I Cor. xi. 26 — 28. isaddreffed to all the Church
of Corinth.

I Cor. xii. 13. puts Baptifm and the Lord^s
Supper on one and the fame footing ; and for the
Lord's Supper ufes thQ term" drinking : that part
for the whole. If the Romanifts fay eitker part is,
according to them, fufficient, yet all objections to
the Cup in particular, are here done away. Dr.
Middleton obferves, with a view to our prefent
fubjedl, that the abfurdities into which the Doc-
trine of Tranfubftantiation leads, fhould make it
to be diftrufted'.

IX. The Romanifts offer fo many arguments,
that we mud have fome indirect proof. — We may
obferve of them, in general, that they prove too
much', and therefore nothing at all. — Before we
mention them, be it obferved, that our Saviour,
in the Inflitution of the facrament of the Lord's
Supper, makes no difference between the Bread and
the Wine; of any kind, that I fee. — Alfo, that the
Romifli dodlrine is this;— the Priefl who confe-
crates, muft confecrate both bread and wine; and

muft

* Locke on i Cor. xii. 13.

* Pref, to Letter from Rome, page Ixxx.

368 lOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. X. XI.

muft veceive both himfelf ; though he mnft admi-
niftcr only Bread.

X. Chrift at Emmaus" only broke bread-, now
if he gave the Sacrament, and bread docs not imply
wine, then the argument proves too much : it
proves, that the Frieft ought to confecrate only
bread. — And this applies to all arguments founded
on the phrafe, breaking of bread.

Though a name of anything confifting of parts,
may l^e taken from either part, and though St.
Paul takes his name for the Sacrament, on one
occafion, from drinking (i Cor. xii. i3.)» y^t who-
ever paints to himfelf the nature of the Inftitution,
mud think, that breaking ot bread is another ob-
vious and natural name for the whole ceremony ;
efpecially as it was a name for any repajl.

The ^lakers'' (and indeed many of our com-
munion) hold, that breaking of bread does 7iot
mean the Sacrament;— in feme cafes it may not,
being the name for any meal, but in fome cafes
I think, it does; as where it is joined with /io^r/;/*?''
?lX\<^ prayer -y or mentioned as the employment /or
whiih the Apoftlcs met on 2l Lord's Day"^. — Barclay
argues againiT: this, from (f^//;;^ being joined with
breaking^ of bread, and from the company con-
tinuing till midnight^, or later; but why might not
this eating be the Ayxirt^ which ufed to be (fome-
timcs at leafl) held in the evening? I can con-
ceive any conferences of Chriftian leaders in Sr.
Paul's time, whether begun by an kyxirr,, or not,
to continue for a part of the night or the whole
night. — But to return.

XI. The Romanifts fay, the JpoJIIes indeed
were to drink of the wine, but they were made

Prie/h,
" Luke xxiv. 30. 35.

* See B.arclay's Apology, Prop. 13. Se(Sl. 8.
y Aftsii. 42. ^ * Afts x.v. 7.

» Ads U..46. *> Aclsxx.;. u.

BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. XII XIV. 369

Priefts. This again proves /oo w«f/^.— For granting
the argument, it follows, that wine ouoht to be
adminiftered to all Priejls. And the Laity are
under no obligation to receive the Bread; for there
is no difference in our Saviour's appointment of bread
and wine.

XII. It is urged, Chrift is received intifre in his
body; every Body contains /^/W. We once fpoke
againft inferences in unintelligible dodrines*". T^his
goes to prove, that it was abfurd in Chrift to infti-
tute the Cup; and that it is equally fo in the confe-
crating Prieit to drink it — By the way, this argu-
ment is a confequence of Tranfubftantiation; which
we conHder ourfelvesas having dilproved.

xiii. But, fay the Romanifts, the PrieJ! receives
the Cup in order to '* exprefs lively the pafuon of
Chrift, and the feparation of his blood froni*^ his
body, in the fame." But this goes to prove that
all Chriftians ought to receive the cup ; as they are
ail to ihevv the Lord's Death till he come.

XIV. But giving the people the cup, occafions
dijlmiour to the blood of Chrift, occafions its being
Jpilt^ &c. — another corollary from Tranfubftantia-
tion : but moreover it proves too nmch. It proves,
that Chrift could notforefee thefe great evils; he
muft haveforborn to mftitute anything which true*
wifdom would wholly remove in order to avoid
them. Nay, thefe evils were not peculiar to diftant
ages ; they muft be liable to happen every time the
wine was confecrated, in every age. Perhaps an
Heretic might be fo profane as to fay, what real
harm could be done by a drop even of the real
blood of Chrift falling to the ground ? or what real
difhonour? his blood muft have fallen to the ground
when he was alive. Chrift is honoured moft by a

faithful
« Art. I. Sea. XVI II. ^ Rhemifts on John vi. 58.

VOL. IV. A A

37° BOOK IV. ART. XXX. SECT. XV. XVI.

faithful and pious heart ; a man may have that with
a trembling hand. And as to any corporeal pain, or
fuffering, on account of what fell, that mud be
out of the queftion : the falling of blood never
occafions pain to the perfon by whom it is fhed.

XV. But giving the cup, or witholding it, is
only manner y form, faOiion; not the fubftance or
ejfaue of the Sacrament. This again proves too
mitch. For as Chrift made no ditference, if the
cup be not the effence, neither is the bread. —
Therefore, again, the people are under no obliga-
tion to receive the bread. - But indeed the manner
of inftituting the cup has no appearance of mere
variable mode and circumftance. And if any
change is to be made in an ordinance on account
of change of circumftances, it ihould be (hewn,
that thofe new circumftances are not voluntary cor-
ruptions and abufes.

XVI. But enough. I will trouble you with no
wore arguments i neither does it feem ncceffary to
make any Application of our realbnings on the pre-
fent Article.— Bifliop Porteus's Chapter on this
fubjed is well executed.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. I. 37!

ARTICLE XXXT.

OF THE ONE OBLATION OF CHRIST FINISHED
UPON THE CROSS.

THE Oifering of Chrift once made, is that
perfe6t redemption, propitiation, and fatisfac-
tion for all the fins of the whole world, both original
and adtuali and there is none other fatisfadion for
fin, but that alone. Wherefore the facrifice of
Mafles, in the which it was commonly faid, that
the Prieft did offer Chrift for the quick and the
dead, to have remiffion of pain or guilt, were blaf-
phemous fables, and dangerous deceits.

I. The fubje^t of this Article is the Romifh
Mafs.

We will begin, as ufual, with a few hijiorical
obfervations ; but as there may be fome who have
not attended fo much to Romifh Doctrines as to
have a clear idea of what is meant by the Romifh
Mafs, it may be proper, previoufly, to give fome
account of it.

The Proteftant notion of the Lord's Supper has
been explained ; all that fome Proteftants da, is to
commemorate the Death of Chrift; others join in a
ceremony which may reprefent a Feaft on a facri-
fice; that is, thofe who confider the Death of
Chrift as a facrifice. The fartheft any Proteftant

A A 2 goes.

572. BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. I.

goes, is to offer a fymbolical commemorative* facri-
fice. — But RomaniftSy by confecrating bread, make
it, in their opinion, the real Body ot Chrift, and
they ufe it in two different ways; they not only
adminifter it as a Sacrament^ but they offer it up to
\God the Father as a real Sacrifice : they have one
Form for offering up the bread, another for offer-
ing up the confecrated '' cup. — The facrifice here
offered, is not faid to be fymbohcal, but a real,
literal, propitiatory facrifice. — There is one form
which requefls Chrifl to*^ deliver and affift the fup-
pliant by />^^ jBo^ o/" ChriJi]\\?L received.

What was faid of fome Romilh Do6lrines at the
opening of the twenty-fecond Article, and fince
of others, feems fully applicable to the Dodrine
of the Mafs.

The Romanifts have z. fxfiem of notions to fup-

port this of offering the confecrated bread as the

Body of Chrift; it feems int.'nded to obviate ob-

jeBions. But this will appear when we look into

their writings, by and by.

All thofe malfes in which the Con2:re<2i;ation are
Spectators, and the Prieft^/o;/d' receives the elements,
may be called folitary, in fome fenfe; but thofe,
I think, are properly Iblitary malfes, at which no
one but the Prieft ^ is prejent. Several of theie may
be going on in the lame church, at different
Altars, at the fame" time. Thefe are generally

intended

' See Heylin's Life of Laud, page ai. — Bifliop Cleaver's two
Sermons, page 2. i8.

'' Prefent Spirituel, page 35. ' Ibid, page 55.

^ Card. Bcna feems to call hoth forts private. " Sive enim
dicatur/>r/i;rt/^7 ex eo quod fohts Sacerdos in ea commjnicet;
five quia vel unus duiitaxat vel pauci ei interfint" Sec. Bona
Reriim liturgicariim, 1. 14. 1.

" There arc fome which are called t^ry Maffcs ; mere outward
fiiew, without Confecration, ico., but thcfe and others being

blamed

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. II. 373

intended to deliver departed Souls out of Purgatory :
and are paid for; infomuch that fome Priefts are
laid to get their living by offering np Chrift a great
number of times in a day. — Indeed in public
mafles there are fome parts which are not audible,
called in French La^ Secrete, and in all, or moil, I
fuppofe, there are fome prayers for the dead.

Thiscuflom of faying Mafs prevails fo much as
to exclude^, in a manner, all other worjhip.

This is the Jiate of that Romifli pradice of
which we fhould now attempt to give fome hif-
torical accounr.

II. The only quejlions are, when did this prac-
tice begin} and wliat variations has it been fiibjeft
to ? It may be difficult to affign for its commence-
ment any period with precifion. The M;ifs, in
the ftriftefl: lenfe, could not begin before the Doc-
trine of Tranfubftantiation ex)fled, becaufe it
proceeds upon that doftrine. — But fomething
which Joiindi like it, and approached to it, and
would in cffed: bring it on, may be found be!oie.
It is difficult to trace out fa6ts nicely m dark and
and ignorant ages, but the name of Sacrifice for
different parts of divine iiuorjhip, has been long
in uic^

The

blamed by Bona, Sec. as abufes, T do not mention tliem. Nau-
tical Mafles aie without wine, for fc;ar the motion of the fliip
fhould fhake it fo much as to fpill it - See tncfe and others
mentioned, Bingham, j 5. 4. 5.

^ Prefent bpir. page 38. — Oraifon fecrete, or fometimes La
Secrete, as a fubftantive. Did. Acad.

s Rhemiftson Luke xxii. 20.

'' In fcripture. Beneficence is called a facrifice, Heb. xiii. 16,
we have ailb the facrifice or praife, Heb xi.i 15 the Body of
Man is to be a living (fometimes in cid Englilh called li'vely)
facrifice, Rom. xii. i. — And when the captive Jews could
offer no facrifices, their devotions weie called the Calves of
their lips.

A A 3

374 BOaK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. ir.

The ancient Fathers expreffed themfelves warmly,
and nobly J the fame feelings, which made them
give dignity to every fucrcd ordinance by cere-
monies and habits, made them cloath diuir expref-
fions of things facred, with fplendid metaphors.—
And if they called the Evening prayer their even-
ing facrifice', no wonder they gave the name of
facrifice to that ordinance", which they confidered
as a reprefentation of the fublinie and affeding
facrifice of Chrill himfelf. If one wanted to fee
a number of inflances, one might confuJt the
Rhemifh Teftament on i Cor. x. 21. and Dr.
Fulke's anfvver : but I can feled no better fmgle
pafTage than that which is attributed to Ambrofe, on
Heb. X. II. though the fame' is found in Chryfo-
flom. The phrafe, unbloody facrifice^ has alfo been
ufed by the Fathers for the Lord's Supper, and
adopted by the Romanifts for their facrifice of the
Mafs. — MiiJa is itfelf an"" ancient word. Ohla-
iiom, of one fort or other, are very ancient, and
fo is the cuftom of dedicating or offering them up
to God at the Altar. — ]so^ fuppofe a Prieft, in an
age of ignorance and fuperftition, heated with zeal
and piety, to get all things ftrongly into his mind,
and to fancy he had Chrill in his hand ; may we
not conceive, that he might begin the cuftom of
offering him up to God the Father?

To carry our attempts farther, iq accounting
for the Mafs, would not probably anfwer any good
purpofc i — only we may add, that the idea of

profiting

» Pfalm pxli.2. Bingham, 1;. i. 5.

^ See Prieniey's Hift. Corr. Vol. z. p.ige 6. Bingham,

S. 20. 8. Sacnficii opus fine Prefbytero efle non potuitj from
Hil. Fragm page 129. — See Heylin's Laud, page 21.

* Rhem. Tell, on Heb. x. 1 1. and Fiilke.

^ See An. xxviii. Sea. 11, -Fulke thinks, thut Mijfa \S,
not fo ancient as the time of Ambrofe. — On Rhem, Tell, opp,
j>age 2S0V —On i Cor. x. ai.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. il. 37^

profiting particular people (and the Prieft of
courfe) by particular oiferings, made at the Lord's
table, or akar, on their behalf, with the confe-
cration ufed at the communion, feems to have
been carried into execution before" the tenth
Century, the sra of Tranfubftantiation : though
iuch offerings were more properly faeraments than
Sacrifices. — Ihey were accounted abufes^ and Laws
were made againfl them. — Prayers for the dead
were in ufe in the time of Chryfojioniy and were
offered at the time " of celebrating the Lord's Sup-
per.— A weaknefs not unnatural, but, as it now
feems to us, injudicious ; yet there might be dif-
ficulty in feeing, at that time, that it could be
attended with much harm.

It may be proper to remark here, that though
the Fathers fometimes ufed expreffions which
founded like thofe of the later Romanifb, 3'et that
fuch exprellions were declamatory, and are not to
be underftood in a proper or literal fenfe. — The
very ancient Fathers, having occafion to ipeak
againft the heathen facrifices, and ipeaking lite-
rally, declared, in their Apologies, that Chnftians
had none. And in the mofh declamatory fentences,
fomething always appears, from which it is evident,
that the expreffions are not intended as plain or
literal. — Gratian, who lived about the middle of
the twelfth Century p, undertook to reconcile
Canons, &c. and expreffions of Fathers feemingly
difcordant ; on the words. Hoc eji, he obferves,
" therefore as the Heavenly bread, which is the
Flelh of Chnft, is called, after the proper manner
thereof, \\\t Body of Chrift, when in deed and

truth

" Bingham, 15. 4. 4. Molheim, Cent. 8. 3. 4.

° Fulke on Rhem. Teft. opp. 279. or on i Cor. x. 21.

|*rie{Hey's Hift. Corr. Vol. 2. page 1 1. is near this purpofe,
V Cave places him A . D. 1 1 3 1 .

A A 4

37^ BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. III.

truth it is the Sacrament of the Body of Chrift,'*
&c. — and afterwards, " not in the truth of the
things but in z.fignifyingm)](lery^^ h.z'^.

And the unbloody [acrifice of the ancients, was only
figurative; it meant, the reprefenration of the real
facrifice of Chrift, in which he flicd his blood
for Mankind. — Indeed I do not fee how the facri-
fice of the Romilh Mafs can be called unbloody,
as the blood of Chnft, or what they call fo, is
folemnly offered up.

III. When once the praclice of facrificing in
the Mafs was fettled, I do not know that there was
much variation in it. Some abafes crept in, from
avarice, irreverence and iupcrllition. This we
learn from the Council of Trent, which makes a
Decree for reforming' them.

We may now fee what the Acts and the Cate-
chilm of that Council tell us concerning our pre-
fent fubjed. — The Council held their twenty-
fecond Seffion September 22, 1562 ; ten years
after King Edward's Articles were made, and there-
fore may well be fuppofed acquainted with their
contents. — They lay down, that Chrift fuperfeded
the JeiJuiJJi Priefthood, which was to be temporary,
by his own, which was to be perpetual. Yet
though he was a Prieft for ever, he did not mean
that earthly Priefthood Ihould ceafe : accordingly,
the night before. he was betrayed, he offered up, to
his heavenly Father, his Body and blood, under the
jymboh of Bread and Wiiie, and ordained his dif-
ciples Pr/i?/?J, that they (and their fucceffors) might
afterwards o^er him up. Still there was to be but
one Priejl, the Apoftles acling only for their Lord.
— The appointed facrifice was to reprefent the

original

1 Gratian, Concord : difcord. Diftinfljon 2. C. Hoc eft.—
For this Engiijh, fee Fulke on Rhem. Teft. 1 Cor. x. 20.
' ocfl". 22d. fiiit Decree. (p;ige 145, Latin.)

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. IV. 377

original onej both being real, but the former
bloody^ the latter unbloody : yet the appointed was
to be accounted one and the fame with the original
one, differing only in the mode of offering; ftridly
propitiatory, capable of gaining remiffion of even
great finsj and therefore to be offered for the dead
as well as the living.

The Catechifm keeps pretty clofe to the Council :
in defcribing the difference betv^een a Sacrament
and a Sacrifice, it fays, " The facred Eucharift
whilft it is kept in the Pyx\ or carried to the fick,
has not the nature of a Sacrifice, but of a Sacra-
ment :" but when it is bot/i, *' they that offer this
facrifice, wherein they comm.unicate with us, do
fatis/y and merit the fruits of our Lord's Paffion."
—And afterwards it is' faid, " fVe facrifice," that
is, all communicants. Maffes for the Dead axe"
built on Tradition : — and no maffes are to be called
private ; becaufe all pertain to the Salvation of all
the faithful.

The Rhemifts have a great deal to fay, but
nothing that I need trouble you with

IV. PVickliffe had not, probably, at onqe fet-
tled his principles fo as to appear perfeclly uniform
in his opinions, in all parts of his works-, but a
propofition condemned as his in the Council of
Conftance was the following"; — "The Gofpel
faith not that Chrift inftituted the Mafs."

The Reformed Churches feem all againft the
Romifli Mafs : the Confeffion of Augjburg Ijpeaks
favourably of the term Mais, and exculpates itfelf
from the charge of having aboUflied^ that rite. —

The

= Sea. 78. ' Sea. 85. " Sea. 86.

^ See Baxter on Councils, Chap. 13. or page 431. — See alfo
Fox's Aas, &c. (or Martyrol.) InAzxJFicklife.

y Bifhop Andrews was candid alfo : lee He) lin*s Life of Laud,
page 21.

378 BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. 17,

The Lutherans departed the lead from the Romifh
Church.

One of xhtjix articles is, " That private Mafles
ought to be continued, which as it is agreeable
to God's Law, fo men receive great benefit from
them."

The NecefTary Doftrine, gives inflru(5lions with
regard to the Sacrament of the Altar, but I fee
nothing about Sacrifice. It concludes with a fhort
Ledlure en praying for the dead, in which it dif-
courages every way of being particular, if I may
fo fpeak. — It allows benevolent interceffions for
departed Chriftians in general, on the principle of
a " Communion of Saints," but oppofes MaiTes
being faid at particular places (at Scala Call), &c.
— and rejefts pnrgatory, blames all temerarious
judgment, and would have all things in which
we have not clear knowledge, left to the difpofal
of God.

Perhaps Henry VIII. fufFered Cranmer to un-
dermine the Mafs, becaufe the cuftom of faying
MafTes had a tendency to fupport the power of
the Fope.

In the beginning of the reign of Edward VI.
Maifes were left much the fame as before, cnl)'-
the communion was allowed to the people in bcih'^
kinds. But in 1550 the Mafs-books were called in,
and the Altars removed and changed into "Tables:
the principal Englifli Reformers judging, that the
retaining of altars would give offence to the chief
enemies of Popery, and tend to keep up amongll
the people, the idea of a propitiatory ^ Mafs. —
Some Bilhops refufed to part with their altars, and
were deprived for contumacy ; the Lutherans did

retaia

^ Neal's Hift. Piir. Vol. i. quarto, page 36.
* NeaJ,page 44. ibid.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. IV. 379

retain theirs \ There is a chapter againft Maffes
in the Reformatio Legtim.— And Latimer, in his Ser-
mons", fpeaks of them as theydeferve.

Of men's notions of the Mafs under Elizabeth^
we may judge from the fecond Book of Homihes;
in which I do not recollect any laboured argu-
ments, but only fome Ihort declamatory expref-
fions. It is called *' dumb mailing," — " mnmmijJi
maffing." We are cautioned to take heed left the
Lord's fupper, *' of the me?nory" " be made a [acri-
fice\^ " left applying it for the dead, we lofe the
fruit that be alive." — We are told, that at it
" every one of us rai.)ft be guefts and not
gazers ; eaters and not lookers, feeding ourfelves,
not hiring others to feed for us," &c. — The Mafs,
I ftappole, was fo far unfettled by this time, that
arguments were unneccffary, and eloquence furii-
cient.— Yet it might be worth while for any curious
perfon to compare fome of the exprefiions in our
communion-office, about the Body and Blood of
Chrift, about Chrift's being a facrifice, &c. with
the Romifh Latin Forms; as he would the mors
eafily conceive how the fan:e expreffions might fuit
the different Religions when taken in a literal ^ and
metaphorical fenfe.

Dtipn is^ unyielding as to our prefent Article:
indeed he could change nothing without briny^ing
' the whole Fabric of Popilh Worlhip upon his
head. He maintains " that the Sacrifice of Chrift
is not only commemorated, but continued in the
Eucharift, and that every communicant ofiers him
along with the Prieft."

Cardinal

^ On this fubjeft, fee Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page
2,73. odavo. — Heylin's Life of Laud, page 20.

<= Vol. I. odavo, page 162 — See alio Index, Mafs.

'' Art. XXVIII. Sed. xxxiii. — Art, xxix. Sed. iv. — =
Heylin's Life of Laud, page 21.

^ Mofhemi;, 3d Appendix.

380 BOOK IV. ART. XXXT. SECT. V.

Cardinal Bona' feems to be the moft able Romifh
writer in defence of the Mais, that I have hap-
pened CO confult.

V. We (hould fay fomething of thofe who think,
that our Church did not recede far enough from
the Church of Rome. We maj- call them col-
lectively Puritans, or Dijj'enlers. But ue have
alread}'^ mentioned the modem cuflom oi ftting at
the Eucharifl unknown in the ancient Church : —
To thele an Allar"^ mull: be ab/'mination, tfpe-
cially the Romifli forr; o^ ftonc\ let againft a wall,
Lardner^ fays, that near the prinjtive times, the
Eucharift v.'as never laid to le upon an Altar, —
One may ealily conceive the Crojs to be called an
Altar. Some have thought ^ that the Apoflles
would not be in the ufual familiar table-pollure,
at the laft fupper, when they received the bread
and wine. Whatever might be the cafe, our
kneeling at the communion is juftified, by our being
in a continued ad: of Devotion , and by our con-
fidering the Ordinanae as totally en.biematical, or
fymbolical. — Our church, by a Rubric, guards
agamft any lufpicion of our adoring the confecrated
elements: No Englifh communicant has now ever
any lucn idea in his mind. And farther, we never
infifl upon the pofture of kneeling as neceliary for
all locieties of Chriflians. We are fatisfied with
our common exprelTion, Altar-tahle, as it Teems to
fuit our idea, that the Eucharift is moft properly u
reprekntaiion of a Feajl upon a Sacrifice.

VI. We

' Rerum Liturgicarum Lib. and De Mifid.

8 Alt XXVIII. tedl. XII.

'■ Seeker's >ermon?. Vol. 6 pnge 2S8.

' Fiilke's Rhem. Tell Fol. 287. bottom.

^ Works, \'ol. 4 page 337.

■ See Seeker's Ledures, Le6l. 36. page 243. " ^ ferious
and (itvout manner." More in Seeker's Sermons, Vol. 6.
page 288.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. VI — VlII. 381

VI. We will now proceed to fome Explamt'wn.
In the T'itle, Oblation means, I think, the fame

as facrifice : alt facriliGCs were oblations, and all
oblations were fuppofed to be accepted as facrifices.
Under the Law ot Mofes, the poorer fort of men
brought offerings, -t^'ho could- not afford facrifices.
In our prayer of confecration, facrifice and obla-
tion come together, and feemingly as fynonymous.
— One oblation is oppofc^d to ilie continued lacri-
fices of the Romanifts '.—finijlisd is alfo oppofed
to perpetuated: and on the Crofs, — to, on the
Altar.

VII. "The Offering" — in the Latin Oblatio;
fo the Englifh might have been again, Oblation:
but the lirll: fentence of the Article is not our pre-
fent concern : it is only introdud:ory, except indeed
as it may fugg.ft proofs : but the fuhjed, of Chrifl's
death being a Sacrifice, has been treated in the
Appendix to the eleventh Article : 1 do not know
that it was proved there that " there is none
other," &:c. but it is agreed that there can be no
other, except what is atterwards mentioned in this
Article.

VIII . " The Sacrifice of Malfes," &c. '* were,"
&c. this does not feem good grammar; but the
Latin has Sacrificia, and the Englifh, in Spar-
row's colledion. Sacrifices. Bennet, however,
mentions, Sacrifice, as one reading. *' Mafles"—
Mijfa las occurred"' before: no diflinclion here
between public and private maiies.— " It was com-
monly faid," — that is, before the Reformation : —
I think we have had a fimihir expreffion before.—
" Pain,'' in Latin pa:na, which may ^}gx\\iY penalty,
or punifhment. There is '-'penis'' in Trent Sef-
fvon 22. Canon 3, relating io the fame thing.

*' Blajphcmoiis

^ Art. XXVIII. Sea, 11.— Art. xxxi. Se^. n.

382 BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. IX. X.

" Blafphemons fables y^ figmenta'' : — " dangerous
deceits,' — perniciofce impojlura. Other Reformed
Churches ufe exprefllons much the famej which
are anathematizeci by the Council of Trent" -r-
How the facrifices of Maflcs have been " blafphe-
mous fables and dangerous deceits," will bell be
mentioned under our Proof.

IX. In entering on our Froof, we muft fettle
what Propofitions our Article gives us to prove. I
fee only two.

1. Mafles, according to the Romlfli practice,
are " blafphemous Fables," or figmenta.

2. They are '* dangerous deceits."

X. Being fables, figments, and deceits, feems
to mean only one thing, namely, that tliey are
contrary to jtripture, or, at leaft, unfupported
by it.

This might fiifficlently appear from confidering,
that the doctrine of the Romilh Mafs is founded
upon tliat of Tranfubflantiatioit, which we fuppofe
ourfelves to have removed out of the way. But
there arc fome texts which are fo ftrikingly op-
pofed to the Mafs, that it muft be wordi while
to cite them.

Thofe which were cited in the Appendix to the
eleventh Article, to prove Chrift's death a Sacri-
fice, would Ihevv, that fuch facrifice was completed.
But 1 will confine myfelf. Firft I will take Heb.
ix. 24. and go to the end of that Chapter. Is it
poffible to conceive, that the Apoflle could have
rcafoned thus, and have given no hint about the
millions of facrifices which the Romifh Pricfhs
profefs to have performed ? or is it poflible to con-
ceive, that any part of worlhip Ihould be meant to

fwallow

" Terence has, Fabulas ! for idle tales ! flufF ! Heauton: Afts.
Seen. 3. V. 95.

« Sefl. 2 2 . Canons 4 and 5 .

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. X. 383

fwaliow up all other parts, and yet no injundion
be given about it? - Next read Heb. x. 2 6^.-1 do
not fee how it is any argument if there is any
facrifice after that of Chriit : as to all the facrifices
of the Mafs, and the facrifice of Chrift malting
but ofie^ that feems quite a gratis dictum, and
no argument, — Heb. v. 3, compared with vii,
24 — 28, fliews, that no man can be a Pried in
the room of Chrift, to offer up the Chriftian facri-
fice.— Read i Pet. iii. 18. — Whatever completes
types makesaconclufion; that therefore did Chrift.
— On I Pet. i. 20. we obferve, that as Chriii;
was the Lamb flain from the foundation of the
world, he muft be the only propitiatory Sacrifice
for the fins of all ?nattki)id. — According to Heb.
X. 2, 3. whatever facrifice is repeated, cannot take
away fin. — Either Chrift y//^^rj in the Sacrifice of
the Mafs, or he does not; if he fuffers, he muft
be everfuffering (againftPhil. ii. 9.— Heb. ix. 26.)
if not, it is no real facrifice ; add Heb. ix. 22*". —
I will not detain you with producing more autho-
rities in fo plain a cafe. Private Mafles are againft
I Cor. X. 17.— xii. 13. &c.

Maffes may be called blafphemous, as degradin<T
Chrift, dragging him, as it were, down from Hea-
ven for a icw foiis : — merely to defcribe the thing,
feems a fort of blafphemy.— A poor Fne^ /ai?our-
ing, with a wafer, in the occupation and craft of
offering up our bleffed Lord ! treating a happy
and glorious Being, *' crowned with glory and
honour," (Heb. ii. 9.) as wretched and defpicabiel
nay numberlefs Priefts doing this at the farne time ;
and muttering at numberlefs Altars! — Books of

Travels,

P On this text the Rhemifts remark, *' Perilous reading cf
Scriptures."

9 See Bifhop Cleaver, page 18.

384 BOOK IV, ART. XXXr. SECT. XI. XII.

Travels, which relate thcfe fa6ts, mud be fhocking
to every ferious reader.

XI. Malfes may be called pernicious^ in regard
to the evil conlequences which they tend ro pro-
duce. They tend to make religion a mere civi-
lity; to take Chriftians off from prayer, and
preaching of the word of God ; and to give them
an eafy method' of evading ail their duties, moral
and religious. Moreover, by preienting a material
objedt, they hinder men from worlhipping " /;;
Spirit^ and in Truth." They tend to promote
Infidelity amongft men of improved underfland-
ings; and from fuch, inferior perfons foon catch
the infedion.

XII. And now Ihall I offer any indired proof P
the Romanics have urged many conliderations in
their own favour, but fuch as feem to be for the
moft part mere Hypothefis, unfounded in Reafon
and Scripture. The doctrine of the Mais might
do in the dark ages, but it vyill not bear the light.
The Romanifts, where they arc improved, refemble
a man, who becaufe he has planned fomethino; in a
fit of melancholy, rage, or intoxication, det^Tmines
to carry it into execution vX all hazards, when he
is become perfeclly fober and in his right mind;
and to juftify it the bell: he can. However, if any
one chufcs to make a bufmcfs of examining tl e
Popifli pleas in favour of the Mafs, he may con-
fult the Rhemilh Tellament ' ; and if he reads

the

' At Reims, a reverend German Marquis (^n Abbe) told me,

U one Sunday evening, that he had been a la Me/Je at five o'clock

in the morning; after which he had gone a la LhaJ/e; (a rabbet-

fhooting;) and diat he was then ready to go a la ComeJie.

This he faid very innocently, as confcious of no fault. Indeed
at the Play he was to make fome little change in his drefs, that
every one might know he was incognito.

* John iv. 24.

' Particularly on Luke xxii. — i Cor. x. and xi. and on Hcb.
ix. and x.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. XIII. 385

the anfwers of Dr. Fulke, I think he will be pleafed ;
making an abatement for controverfiai language,
which is feldom pleafing.

XIII. I fear it would not be to much purpofe
to detain you long on an Application : a form of
alTent does not feem wanting, and any plan for
mutual conceffions, is defperate".— To the interejied
we can only offer 2 Cor. iv. 4. and obferve, that it
is as applicable to thofe who call themfelves Chrif-
tians, as to " them which believe not." "• The
God of this world may blind'' the minds of either.'*
But to thofe who are not affeded by the immenfe
fums which have been lavifhed away on the faying
of Mafles, we may recommend the interefts of
rational piety : let not any of them be afraid^ to
embrace it, though it may fubvert, for a time,
the whole fyftem of their national religion : neither
let them be afraid that the common people, deprived
of their prefent principles, may become wholly un-
principled : the common people amongft. the Pro-
teftants, have, many of them, much folid piety; of
a better fort than the lower people in Popifh coun-
tries: and as to men of letters andfcience, v/hile
the Romanifls are chiefly Infidels, the Proteftants
can reckon amongft true believers, thofe for whofe
underfbandings they have the higheft efleem on
other accounts; an Addifon, a Locke, and even a
'Newton, Thefe have all laboured in the caufe of
revealed religion.

If the Romanifls will not liften to our brotherly
exhortations, let them hear our threats : the rage
of paying for Malics will not laft for ever ; as men

improve,

" Hallitax on Prophecy, page 361.

'*■ See Comber's Advice, page 39.

y P. S. What we find in the fecond Appendix to Mofheim,
fuits this advice ; —I had not read it. Oclavo, Vol. 5, page no.
Fenelon's notiOii.

VOL. IV. B B

386 BOOK IV. ART. XXXI. SECT. XTII.

improve, it will continually grow weaker, and
weaker : As Philofophy rifes, Mafles will fink in
price; and at length, fuperftition will pine away,
becaufe no one will be interefted to maintain and
fupport it. Even Inflitutions formed by Legacies^
will have their revenues transferred to other uies. —
But then^ the minds of all ranks of men will be in
a far worfe flate than if they had loft their fuper-
ftition in any other manner : inftead of having a
Religion which their reafon makes them efteem, at
the fame time that it warms their hearts with devout
affedion and Chriftian benevolence, they will have
acquired an habit of defpifing all religion; and of
thinking thofe moft degraded, who (hew the moft
attention to religious^ truth,

* This LeSure was given Feb. 27, 179a ; uith the accidental
Offljilion of Seft. x i. and the lafl: paragraph of Scft. x.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. I. 387

ARTICLE XXXII.

OF THE MARRIAGE OF PRIESTS,

BISHOPS, Priefts, and Deacons, are not com-
manded by God's Law, either to vow the
eftate of fingle life, or to abftain from marriage :
therefore it is lawful for them, as for all other
Chriftian men, to marry at their own difcretion,
as they fhall judge the fame to ferve better to
godhneis.

I. If one could give the natural principles of
any fubjed, they would connect all fafts, and
make the bcft Key to the Hiftory of men's pradice.
For all pradice is only the operation of natural
principles in diiferent circumftances.— With a view
to illufhrating fads after this manner, I have fome-
times prefixed to my hiflorical obfervations, fome
attempt at a defcription of Nature ; and the plan
feems to fuit our prefent fubjeft.

In the Appendix to the Firfl Book, I have
fpoken fomething of monaftic Life; have endea-
voured to defcribe it, and account for it ; I now
only obferve, that the contemplative abftemious
Monk differs from the Man of the World, very
materially; he differs, as to the refinement of his
paffions, and particularly as to the more warm,
rapturous, affedionate kind of Piety. At the fame
time, he has his peculiar faults. — With regard to
Marriage^ which on this Article is our chief con-
B B 2 cern.

38S BOOK IV. ART. XXXI I. SECT. I.

cern, he is farther removed from it, than one
ivho maintains a conftant intercourfe with mixed
companies.

But amongft men of the worlds there may be a
great difference in refpect of marriage, and of
motives for engaging in it. One man may be fo
(ituated, that it would be a defireable thins; for
him to marry merely on prudentiaP motives; an
alliance would enable him to accomplifli the ends
which he has chiefly in view. Another is much
attraded to marriage; he efleems it a great good;
but he is afraid of loling what he efteems a ftill
greater good; he is afraid of lofing a good fervice,
a good Fellowfliip, &c. bcfides (for that miift
always be fuppofcd, in order to make fmgle life
rightly chofen") that he fliall be able to refift all
temptations peculiar to celibacy.

Now fuppofe thcfe men all to fix their views
folely on the good of promoting religion^ at the
time they have marriage in view : the Monk would
engage in fmgle life with readinefs, in order to
promote it; would probably condemn marriage,
or at lead highly applaud continence ; and would
feel himfelf elated and purifit^d. The man of the
worldy in the firft fituation, would perceive, that,
in his own way, he could beft promote religion
by alibciating with himlclf a certain female part-
ner, and following a certain plan. The other,
would tend forcibly towards a married ilate, but
he would fee, that, in his cale, connexions and
incumbrancer, would impede him fo much, that he
could not freely exert himlelf ; could not, on the

whole,

* It 16 reckoned prudent fi r a Man-midwife to be a married
roan; and a candidate for aL'h;i;,]aincy of a Society of Females:
as Magdalens, Afylum, &;c. — Or prudence may be pleaded
again]} marrying : Lc Manage eft une chofe tres ferieufe ; on
ne peut pas ti'op y penfer; Heureux celui quiypenfe toute
fi vie.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. II. 389

whole, do that good, in promoting religion, which
he particularly meditated. We need proceed no
farther in order to fee, how men might be fituated,
in refpeft of marriage, upon the firll propagation of
the Chriftian Religion,

It has been before obferved, that men could
fcarcely, at firft, enter into Chriftianity, without
being agitated : they muft be under continual
alarms; their views muffc be fixed on heaveii'-^
objeds; their afFecftions fet on things above : where
their treafure was, there would their heart be alfo.
This is a difpolition very unfavourable to mar-
riage; or to allowing it its due fliare of praife; and
the prevalence of the oriental Philofophy would
make it more unfavourable \ Such a temper would
regard the marriage of Priefls, as a want of felf-
government, as a degradation of the facred cha-
rader. Now if we conceive this temper working
forcibly through a number of ages, and always
combated by the natural propenfity to marriage,
and by the more ordinary feelings of common fenfe
and acflive life, we fhall have a general flcetch of
the Hiftory before us.

II. Though the facred writers themfelves (eem
to me perfectly free from every thing flighty, yet
in the Apojtolic Age Chriflians began to find, or
fancy, that attentions to their Wives, prevented
their being fuch good Chriftians as they might be.
And, in Ibme cafes, both partners were of the
fame mind : they feparated, at bed, though not
at board; fo that the wife became a fort of Sijler,
— Hernias^ at the beginning of his firfl /'"j/f<7;z, {peaks
of a woman, whom he had begun to love as a

Sijler,

*> Mofheim fays, that viallgnant Spirits were thought to have
jnoft iiifluence over married people, quarto. Vol. 1 . page 1 3 7.
B B q

390 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. II.

Sijler, and he is afterwards^ told that his Wife mufl
be his Sifier.

Bafdides is placed by Cave in the ^ear 112;
many ftrange things have been faid of him ; but in
Lardner's Book of Herefies they are compared,
and a fober judgment formed out of them. That
judo-ment is**, that Bafilides valued continence,
not on monaftic principles, abfolutely, in itfelf,
but only with regard to the good effects it would
produce in any particular jundlurc; on the ground
of its utility in any particular circumiiances : — if it
produced the greatcft good, in any cafe, in that
cafe, it was to be commended and practifed ;
otherwife it was not necclfary .or required. This
fell fo far fhort of the high notions of fome feds of
Chriftians, that it was accounted heretical.

The ManicJieans only tolerated marriage even in
what they called their Jnditors^, in their elect, they
did not even tolerate it. — The Manicheans are
placed as firft flourifhing about the end of the
third Century.

It fcems clear that, however fome might be
admred for not marrying, fome of the Clergy did
marry, or were married men, during the whole^
of the three firft centuries. Yet I fuppofe that
attempts were continually on foot to prevent their
marrying, or to make them fcparate thenifclves from
their wives.

During thefe three firft Centuries, there arofe a
cuftom tor men to have women conftantly with
them, who were called fubintroduced women;

muUeres

^ Second Vifion. — See the Note at the beginning ofHermas's
firft Vifion. Edit. Ruflell.

<* Her. Bafilides, Seft. 12. — Lardner's Works, Vol. 9. page
285.

" Vol. I. page 349. or Append, to Book i.Sedl. iv. ;.

' See Bingham, 4. 5. 5.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXn. SECT. III. 39I

mulhres fuhlntroduEla;; in the Greek Cliurclies,
<r'jy£»(raKTo»: — their employments and charaders are
not entirely agreed about : Lardner'^ lays, they
"were not wives, nor concubines, but perfons
maintained as objecls of Charity, or d^t for the
fake of domeftic affairs." Biihops, and men of
great eminence, entertained thefe women; fome
very innocently, I do not doubt; but it feems
probable, that the connexion would be a fnare for
others, if any times of peace or quiet came on. —
This Muiier fubintrodu6ta feems to have been a
fort of continuation of the Sijier-zvife oi Hernias.

III. At the Council of Nice, in 325, it was
propofed, that fuch Minifters as had wives, fliould
put them away; the conduft of Papkmaius''\ an
Egyptian Bilhop of fome eminence, on the occa-
fion, was fpirited and liberal : — though bred up _a
Monk himfelf, unmarried, and remarkable for his
chafle conduct, he cried out in the Affembly, that
he would not agree to the putting of fach " a
yoke' upon the neck of the Difciples ;"— that co-
habiting with a virtuous wife, was chaftity itfelf ;
—and that he could by no means agree to anything
more than that the unmarried Clergy iliouid con-
tinue

g Lardner's Works, Vol. 3. page 82, Note.— The idea of
maiTiage without cohabitation was not very uncommon in the
times of which we are fpeaking. Nor was it wholly unknown to
the Heathens. See the Life of Hypatia in Suidas ; or Lardner's

Works, Vol. 9. page 83. Some Chriftlans have run into the

folly of performing what may be called feats of chaftity or
continence : that is, have expofed themftlves voluntarily to very
great temptations in order to boaft of their power of overcom-
ing them. Sec the accounts oi D'ArbriJJel, founder of the Abbey
of Fonte^raud, who died in the year 1 1 17. Bayle's Dift. under
Fontevraud. Gibbon's Hift. quarto. Vol. 1 . Chap. 1 5 . page 48 5 .

^ Suidas from Socrates, 1. ii.andSozom. i. 23. Bingham,
4. 5. 7. from the fame,

» Afts XV. 10.

B B 4

39^ BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. IV.

tinue fingle. He had weight to (lop the impofitlon
of the reftraint propofcd.

Ac this fj.mous Council a Cown^ was made
.againft the fubintroduced women, which f vvill read.
The general tur?i of the Religious, was to celi-
bacy; and fine eulogiums were written upon
chaftity, and other Afcetic perfections, by Tertul-
lian, Ambrofe, and mofl of the Fathers: though
TertulJian did write two Books Ad Uxorcm; to
his own wife.

IV. The firfl; check which this humour met
with, was from Jovinian, a Monk of INlilan, in the
fourth Century j we have mentioned his idea, that
Satan has not power to feduce a true Chriflian,
under the fixteenth Article'; but he w^as more
famous for holding"", that wives may be as goo^
Chriftians as Virgins can be. Lardner conliders
him as having been of the fame opinion with
Bafilides; as already" dcfcribed. — VioUantiiis^ a
Prefbyter of Gaul, in the fifth Century, is fpoken
of with Jovinian; they both oppofed ieveral grow-
ing cufhoms of Chriflians, which had arifcn from a
too great luxuriance of Piety. --,7ctow is very in-
dignant againil; Vigilantius, whom he defcribes as
laying, that no Clergyman ought to remain un-
married. This notion he amplifies and exag-
gerates thus; et nifi (Epifcopi) prasgnantes uxores
viderint Clericorum, infanteique de ulnis matruni
vagientes, Chrifti Sacramenta non tribuunt" : —
(will not or dam them).

The

'' Councils, by Labbe, or others. In EngliOi, Lardnei's
Works, Vol. 3. page 82. Note.

' Art. XVI. Sedt. ix.

"' Bower's Life of Sirlcius.

" The opinion is Beaufobre's, but adopted by Lardne: ;
Works, Vol. g. page 28 5.

° Jcrom adv. Vigilant. C. i. lad Vol. bi;t one, page a8i,
2d Tome.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. V. VI. 393

The Pope, by whom Jovlnian and his followers
were condemned, was Siridus, who died in the
year 398 : he is ufuaily faid to be the firft who
forbade tlie marriage of his Clergy ; but 1 fnppofe
many of them were married after his time.

The finigglc between lofty notions of religious
purity, and ordinary ones of natural propenlities,
feems neverP to have intermitted; but we mufb
not attempt more than to mark its principal ap-
pearances.

V. Gr^^wv VII. c?A\cd Hi/dehand, who died in
1085, is fpoken of as having the mofi: completely
and univerfally effected the celibacy ■! of the Clergy.
— Thofe before him are thought to have been
fuperftitious in difcouraging marriage; he to have
done it from motives of policy. — Yet it is owned,
I fuppofe, diat he was a man of flrid purity in
private life, and fmcerely zealous for the Reforma-
tion of manners'.

vr. In England, according to Fox, Marriage
of Friefhs was firft forbidden by Anfdm, Arch-
bilhop of Canterbury, in a Council at London.—
In another Council, held in the year 1104, five
years' before his death, at Winchefter, there is a

reference

P Intermediate declfions were made in the fixth general Coun-
cil, held at Conftantinople 580, called Quinifextum, or in
Trullo, (or TruUa) : Cave, Vol. i. page 605.— Dupin's Com-
pendium, Vol. 2. page 295.

1 Burnet on the Article.— Biftiop Hallifax on Prophecy, page
352—355. Comber's Advice, page 15. 43. Fox's Mar-
tyro!. Vol. 2. page 463.

»■ The particular year when Priefis firft gave a promife of celi-
bacy, and Bifhops took an oath to ordain no' married man, is
laid by Fox to have been 1067; but Comber mentions 1074;
both fpeak from ancient hiftorians.

* Fox, Vol. 2. page 463. 483. the date of the former Coun-
cil I do not find in Fox : — Of which Henry Huntington fays,
^' \i\ qwQ prohibuit ::'acerdotibus Anglorum uxores antea non
prohibitas." Prohibiting is not preventing. But Cave does
^ no£

394 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. VII — IX.

feference to a former one held at London; but
Henry I*, connived at the Prielts* marr}'ing; and
there has been much connivance at this ofTcnce, at
different times.

VII. St. Bernard^ called the lad of the Fathers,
died 1 1 53; I was furprized to fee how flrongly
he inveighs againft depriving the Priefts of the
liberty of marrying". He was perfectly orthodoxy
Head of one great Monaftcry (Clairvaux) and
founder of 160 others.

VIII. The Marriage of Priefts was, about the
time Vvc arc fpcaking of, very unpopular in Eng-
land; it occafioncd no/j, in which the facred
dements, confecrated by married Priefts, were
thrown into the dirt, and irodcicn under foot. —
The Priefts who had wives, were called by the
opprobrious name of Nicolaitani^.

IX. Pope Pius II. called ^neas Sylvius before
he came to the Popedom, died in 1464; he is
famous^ for having faid, *' Marriage was for great
rcafons forbidden Priefts, and for greater ^ is to be
reftoied to them." — By greater^ intimating the
danger not only of fuch incontinence as he himfelf
had been guilty of, but alio of unnatural vices.

X. In

not clear up thefe matters, (o I leave them : He has no Council
at Winchefter in \ j 34, — And it appears that Lavcfranc held a
council againft the Marriage of Prielh in 1076.

Cave fays, that in 1 102 Anfelm held a Couftcil at London,
but he does not mention marriage of Pritfts, in his account of
it. There feems to have teen a great deal of bufmefs under-
taken at tl-.is Council.

* See an original record to this purpofe in John Fox, Vol. i.
page 253. — A proclamation of Aniclm's.

" See Fox, Vol. 2. page 483.— -Comber's Advice, page 43.

^ Fox, Vol. 2. page 465. 479. — Rev. ii. 6. 15.

y Burnet on the Article. — Ccmber, page 42. — Baxter ou
Councils, page 448.— Fox, Vol. 2, p^ge 466. — Bower's Lives
of the Popes.

* Baxter on Councils, page 448.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. X — XII. 39-

X. In the Greek Church we are informed, by
Brerewood^ in one part of his book, that no mar-
riage' is allowed after Ordination; and in another"
paffage, that the Rujfians, in particular, ordain
only thofe wlio are married. — Neither of thcie
rules allows a Clergyman to marry a fecond time.
\i\6.QC:di fecond marriages have been declared againft
by many fets of Chriftians''; probably with a view
to I Tim. iii. 2. " The hufband o^ one wife.'''*

XI. In the twenty-fourth Seffion of the Coun-
cil of Trent, the Marriage of Priefls was difcufled,
but there is only one Canon againft it (the ninth),
which contains nothing remarkable. The next
Canon anathematizes all thofe, who do not hold,
that fmgle life is better and more happy (or more
bleifed, melius et beatius), than married life. — In
the Trent Catechifm I fee nothing on the fubjeft;
perhaps becaufe the Catechifm was only for the
people ; which reafon will extend to the Neceffary
Doctrine.

XII. At the time of the Reformation^ men flood
difpofed as is defcribed by BiOiop Burnet at the
beginning of his Expofition of this Article; they
were remarkably attentive to the mifchiefs which
might arife, either from a continuance of the Clergy
in that fingle ftate, to which many fcandalous
irregularities feemed to be owing ; or from reduc-
ing perfons of facred, characters to the level of
ordinary men, and fetting them in the light of

flaves

* Brerewood on Languages, page 127.

^ Page 137.

•= See Dr. Redman's opinion in Strype's Cranmer, page 157.
— John Fox, Vol. I. page 36. Dr. Thomas, Bilhop of Lin-
coln in 1757, wasfaid to be married to his fourth wife, and to
have, as a motto of a ring, " If Ifurvi-ve, Vllmake itji've," —
The fame ftory has been told of others; it is onl,. -mentioned
here as proving, that a fucceffion of marriages were not dilre-
putable even to a Prelate.

396 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XII.

flaves to fenfual appetites. It will appear pro-
bable, from what has been faid, that n\cn/fmtld
fland (o affecled, in fuch a conjundure.

Amongft the propofiCfons of" JFkkliiJe and Hh/s
condemned at the Council of Conftance'', I do
nor fee any relating to the Marriage of Priefls.

The Reformed Churches declare" againft forbid-
ding Priefts to marry. Some mix the marriage of
Priefls with that of Laymen; but the ConfelTion
of Av.^fburg has a fcparate chapter for the marriage
of Priclfs : amongfl other evils of the prohibition,
it mentions, that fome good men, by their con-
flicls with the weaknefs of their nature, have been
reduced to a flate of defperation. That writing of
Bifhop Jewel's, which is called part of the EngliJJi
ConfefTion, I will read ; as it contains much good
matter in^a fmall compafs.— The firft page of that
of Augfburg (on this fubjeft) is worth reading. —
The Helvetic in one place, fays, that lingle men,
fjppofing them virtuous and eafy, are more fit for
taking care of facred things, than thofe who are
diflraded by the cares of a ° Family : — and, a
little after, condemns thofe who condemn fecond
marriages.

One of the Six Articles is, " Priefls may not
marry by the Law of God." — Jolni Fox in his
Martyrology, (or Acls and Monuments\ he.) has
given a particular Lliftory, and a great deal of

• argument,

<* Art. x'x-i. Scfl. II,

* In caftins; rnj eye over the Confeffions in the Syntagma, I
did not fee the fuhjcCl in the French, Dutcli, or Scotch; nor
in the Polifh ; but it may poffibly be in any of theni, though I
believe it is not.

^ Syntagma, page 1 1 7.

P Synt. page %^. — ^tptiores auteni hi funt curandis rebus
divinis, quam qui privatis famiiis; negotiis diftrahuntur.— This
mull defiend upon drcumftav.ccs.

''Vol.2.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXir. SECT, XII. 397

argument, on this and every other of thefe fix
Articles of Henry VIIL

King Edvv'ard VI. in 1552, ratified i\\t marriages
of the Clergy, and made, by Ad of Parliament,
their children legal inheritors.— knd in the Refor-
matio Legum there is a chapter in favour of Matri-
mony, which is warm in defence of the marriage
of the Clergy- Archbilliop Cranmer was married;
and in his Life by Strype we find fome good things
on our prefent fubje(5l'.

In the reign of Queen Mary Popery was re-
ftored, and the Queen gave injundions to the
Eilliops, amongil other things, " to remove all
married clergymen from their" wives." — And, in
confequence, " all the married Clergy thioughoiit
ihe kingdom were deprived.'*

Queen Elizabeth did reftore the Proteftant Reli-
gion, but, in fome things, fhe was not fo forward
about it as fome of her fubjecls.. It Teemed a
thing of courfe that the Clergy fliould again be
allowed to marry; but Elizabeth refufed ro au-
thorize their marriage, openly, by Lazv, ilie was
indeed willing to connive 2CL it, but that would not
fecure legitimacy of children'. Her backward-
nefs caufed the trouble oi particular afts, zs
I underftand, of legitimation. How defirous £he
was to clog and impede all clerical marriages,
appears from her Injunclions in 1559"; in which
flie orders, that no Prieft fhall marry any woman
except he have the confent of his Bijliop^ two
neighbouring Jii/Iices, and the woman's Parents. —

If

'"■ Strype's Life of Cranmer. See Dr. Redman's opinion,

page I 57. — Cranmer's, page i^r.

^ Neal, Vol. i. page 60. — John Fox, Vol. r. page 36.
Strype's Annals, Vol. 1.' page 80.— I think. Archbifliop
Pai-ker had a Son legitimated, by Aft of Parliament.— Neal,
Vol. I. page 117.

"• Spsrrpw's Colleftion, page ;6. Cap. 29.

398 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XIII. XIV.

If no Parents, the confcnt of Relations; if no
Relations, of Mafter or Miflrefs : befides Banns,
&c. — Thefc impediments argue either a ftrong pre-
judice in the Queen, or an opinion, that the mar-
riage of the Clergy was ftill unpopular.

XIII. Dupin" is very tolerant about the mar-
riage of Prieils : he allows " that Priefts may
marry, where the Laws of the Church do not
proh'ibit it."

Here ends our Hi/lory.

XIV. The Explanation will be much (horter.

In the '7i/le, the word " Priejrs" I confider as a
generic term, including all orders of ecclefiaftical
Minifters. In the Article, all thofe orders are
Ipecified, which fublKl in our Church.

" Not commanded :" to fee the force of this, we
fliould examine with what it is confijtent ; fuppofe
any one fl"iould be of opinion that fingle life is
better for Priefts than married life; (melius et
beatius) that it is recommended in Scripture, that it
will be rewarded^ &c. &c. ftill he might agree, that
it is not " commanded.^^

" By God's Law,'* — this is the expreflion of one
of tht Jix Articles of Henry VIII. and may allude
to them: fuppofe any one thought celibacy of
Priefts was commanded by the Canon Law, the
Law of the Church, or the Law of England, or
even the Law of Nature, ftill he might aflent to
this Article, except he thought it was commanded
by Scripture. Only it fliould be underftood, that
if Scripture was found to refer to any other Law,
or ratify it, then its being commanded by that
Law, would be the fame as its being commanded
by Scripture. Indeed the Law of Nature is
God's Law ; but the fcripture feems here to be
meant.

" Either
^ Third Append, to Mofhcim.

BOOK IV. AUT. XXXII. SECT. XV. 399,

*"^ Either to vovj the ePiiate of fingie life, or to
^Iftahi from marriage;*' — that is,^ either to abftaim
in confequence of a vow, or without vowing, i
fuppofe, that the Romifti Clergy do take a vow of
celibacy upon Ordination j as our Clergy ufed to
do in the time oi Anfelm", and ever fmcCj probabl}^
till the Reformation.

" As for all other Chriftian men,"— does this
make it neceilary for iis to prove^ that it is lawful
for Chriftians in general to marry? — the Title is
only of PriejJsi but if Priefts may marry, Laymen
may, a fortiori. And the fcriptural expreiSions are
common to all forts and conditions of men. This
ckufe beginning " therefore," was added m 1562,
ib means fomething againil monaftic Life in
general.

" As they fl-jall ;W^^,'* &c. this does not feera
properly a part of our Article : however, it is a
good moral direction, and tends to fliew the rea-
fonablenefs of the liberty allowed; and that it is
of an honourable, worthy fort: —and does it not
imply, that our Church prefers neither fingie nor
married life abfolutely? but either, which, in any
particular cale, is befh for a main's morals^ in which
he will be the beji Man?

XV. Next comes the Proof. — I fee but one pro-
pofition.

*■ Priefts are allowed, by Scripture, to marry.*

Matt. viii. 14. Shews that St. Peter was married.

Ads xxi- 9. implies that St. Pliilip was aifo
married.

Ads xviii. 2. Ihews the fame of Aquila'^, Alfo
I Cor. xvi. 19.

I venture

o John Fox, Vol.2, page 483.

_P Aquila feems to have been accompanied by his .wife Prif-

cUla while employed in teaching Chriftiaiiity. He alfo feems,

from Ads xvjii. 26. to have been more than an ordinary

teacher;

400 BOOK IV. AR r. XXXir. SECT. XV,

I venture to add, for the prefent,
1 Cor, ix. 5. It does not ihew that Paul was mar-
ried ; but, according to our verfion,
that he claimed a right to marry ;
and that thofe who were called our
Lord's Brothers, were married; that
is, James'', Simon, &c.— -So much
for Precedents.
Matt. xix. 12. at the end, implies, that fome are,
in fome fenfe, unai^Ie to live fingle :
therefore there can be no command to
do fo. — Priefts are not excepted.
I Cor. vii. 2. 9. implies, that to marry may fome-
times be a diUy : and no exception
is made.
Eph. V. 32. and preceding, might be confidered ;
I would fubmit, whether St. Paul
would have ufed his Allegory about
Chrift and the Church, his Spoufe,
if it was unlawful for St. Paul, or
any other minifbcr of the Church,
to marry.
In I Tim. iii. 2. 4. and Titus i. 6. it is plainly
implied, that Minifters may be married. — And
from 1 Tim. iv. 3. it appears, that '-^forbidding to
marry ^'' was one of the marks of f vvV times.

Heb. xiii. 4. fliews, that " marriage is honour-
able in «//:" who fhall prefume to make an ex-
ception } compare i Cor. vii. 2. Shall not a minifter
connect himfelf as thole were connected, who were
fixed upon for Minifters.?

The Jt^wi/// Priefts did marry undoubtedly.

If

teacher ; efpecially confideiiiig that Jpollos, to whom he ex-
pounded tlic way of God more perfeftly, was himfelf a
teacher.

^ See Art. vi, Setfl. xxv.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVI. XVII. 4OI

If it fliould appear, from any part of Scripture,
that we are made judges of the evils of continuing
lingle, it then becomes fcriptural to apply every
thing which Hiftory and experience have taught us.

XVI. This may fufiice for direft proof j on this
Article we muft have fome indireft. Not but fome
of the arguments of our adverfaries are again fri'
volons ; I Iliall content myfelf without proving,
that St. Peter did cohabit with his'' wifej or that
there was fuch a thing in the Latin Church as a
man's retaining a wife after his appointment to the
Miniftry : — Yet there zx& fome difficulties which are
worthy of a folution, if v/e can fugged one.

XVII. It is urged that a^iX(pnv yvvxixa, in i Cor.
ix. :;. is not rightly tranflated, a Si/ler, a V/ife;
it fliouId be a Chrijlian woman : — and lb indeed
Mr. Locke underftands it; one to zvait upon an
Apoftle, and provide thofe things for )iim, which
in modern times are provided at Inns.— The context
is not about a right to marry, but about a right to
have accommodations provided. — Our marginal tranf-
]ation of yuvatxa;, is, zvomnn. — l feel diffident about
two fubftantives put together; they ieem to make
an uncommon, or finguiar, expreffion; yet ahxfpnv
yvvxi-aa, fhould mean fomething more than ahxipnv
iingly; why is yuvatna added .^ if the expreffion
had been ufed by St. Peter, inftead of St. Paul,
I fhould have underftood it of his wife; and I
fliould have taken the meaning of aSsK(pr,i/ from
what we faid about Hermas's^ Sifier-wife.

Peter

"^ Rhem. Ted. on Matt. vili. 14. and on 1 Tim. ill. 3.

= Seft. II. — Perhaps one fhould not omit obferving, that
Bcmines Chiiftiani, means the fame as Chriftiani without homi-
nes; let the obfervation appl^ as it may- — But Fulke on R.hem.
Teft. I Cor. ix. 5. makes a ciifFcjrence between yv)ia\:<a. a.l\\(prit
and a^£X(pj;v •yvva.ixa.. And fo, between midieretnfororem, which
is the expreffion of the vulgate, and fororem uxcrem, which he
thinks right.

VOL. IV. C C

402 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIT. SECT. XVIII.

Peter is faid to have done that which Paul claimed
a right to do : whom could Peter lead about but
his wife? Paul was fmgle', and did not do the thing
which he claimed aright to do; certainly he might
have led about a Chriflian Woman. — Is the meaning
this? 'might I not, if I pleafed, put the Converts
to the expence of maintaining not only me, but a
female companion ? For if I had a IVife^ as Peter
has, I might take her with me, as he does ; not
for the fake of conjugal endearment, that would
impede my proper bufmefs, but as a fort of Si/Ier.*
— If it were quite fure that all the perfons of
whom Paul fpeaks in this paflage, were married",
I fliould be apt to conclude, that he meant by
'yvvonKK, a Hlfe.

However, if i Cor. ix. 5. fiiould not make
for the marriage of Priefts, it can make nothing
againfi it.

XVIII. But it may be urged, that Matt. xix.
11, 12. and I Cor. vii. feem to recommend celi-
bacy as fomethingy///)fr/or to married life; as more
pure and perfect. I anfwer, this has been'' thought,
yet without reafon, as far as I can judge. But,
though that were the meaning of thefe fcriptures,

yet

' I Cor. vii. 7.

" Some have faid that a// the A poftles were married, except
Paul; but I fancy they ufe this verfe as proof: taking for
granted that <yy»j here means -wife. —Clemens Alexandrinus
fays, that the Apoftles who led about with them a Sifter, a
Wife, might make them ufeful in teaching women religion in
private. And fo, " the doftrine of the Lord might enter into
the clofet of women," " without any reprehenfion or evil
fufpicion." Fulke on Rhem. Tell. 1 Cor. Lx. 5. fiomClem.
Alex. Strom, lib. 3.

P. S. The notion of Clemens Alex, feems like my own;

that the Apoftles led about wives, not "at Whes, but as

y- Sijlers'" as afliftants. Might not an Apoflle take with him

^omenmcs :i real SiJ}er? if particularly well qualified for in-

ftrufting females?

^ See John Fox, Vol. i, page 3.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVIII. 40^

yet the pafTages cannot be thought, by recom-
mending, to command men to hve fmgle;— rather
the contrary; a meafure is recommended becaufe
it cannot be commanded j they make no difference
between Clergy and Laity, and it is abfurd to think,
that it is fo much as recommended to all men to
live fingle. — But let us confider the fenfe of the
two paflages.

Matt. xix. II, 12. and i Cor. vii. maybe taken
together. — Difficulties and obftacles lie in the way
to marriage; a man is alarmed with not being able
to get a Divorce (Matt. xix. 9, 10.)— or he is
afraid, that if he marries, he Ihall not be able
(i Cor. vii.) to execute the trad committed to him,
of promoting a new Religion of divine original.
Or if he really, at bottom, wifhes to marry, he
propofes his difficulties as if he was led by them
to dejire a fingle life : perhaps under fome degree
of felf-deceit. He afks-'' advice. His advifer re-
plies, as fuppofing him fincere, Marriage is an
affair about which I can give you no advice upon
the whole ; at leaft upon the whole I dare not
advife you againjl\i\ you vnw^ judge for yourfelf;
the decifion depends in a great meafure upon your
o^sn feelings ; and thofe it is impoffible for me to
enter into with fuch exaftnefs as to dire(ft you
properly : all that the bed advifer can do, is only
to fuggeft particular conJideratio7iSy you mud after-
wards complete the deliberation. — So far I can
fuggeft; that you need not make yourfelf uneafy
as if it were an indijpenfible duty to marry; ex-
perience fhews that it is not; for it (hews, that
Nature has ^ difqualified fome perfons, -in body, or
in mind; and others, men of the b^ft characters,

have

y Matt. xix. 10. — I Cox*, vii. i.

'^ Lardner's Works, Vol. g. page 284. from Beaufobrs's opi-
nion of Bafilides.

c c 2

404 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVIII.

have found it the grcateft good to give themfelves
up to promote the interefls of Religion : thefe, by
fecting their alfeftions on things above, may be
faid to have difquaHfied themfelves : you may
therefore he perteAly cafy on that head; it is no
more expeftcd that all men Qiould propagate their
fpecies, than that all plants or animals fhould. —
But perhaps you may zvi/Ii to marry, and may
really be afraid left, by marrying, you fhould
involve )'Ourfelf in difficulties inextricable^; or left
you fhould encumber yourfelf, and divert your
aft'edtions, fo that you cannot exert yourfelf freely,
in performing the works of virtue or piety^, which
you meditate. I repeat, I cannot, I dare not ad-
vife you not to marrj% on the whole; but I will
mention anything that occurs to me : were you
to marry, you might fail into fome " prefent"
dijlrefs-j'' I can fee that things are lb fituated,
that you might " have trouble in"* t\\tfejli" if you
had a family to conduit; I can alfo inform you,
that I feel no diffiitisfaftion with my own" fituation
as a fingle man; and as to the things of religion,
certainly the fewer worldly and domeitic'^ cares you
have, the lefs diftracled will be your attention;
and fo I could go on fuggefting particular motives ;
but after all, you muft determine : if )'ou afk, zvhyy
I anfwer, becaufe you only can judge whether it
IS fafe for your morals^ to live a fingle life : that is
the principal thing to be confidered, and you can
only judge of your fecurity by your habits and your
feelings : every motive muft be fubfervient to
motives of duty : were I to prels you to live a
fingle hfe, and you fell \niofvi, I fliould never be

able

" Matt. xix. g. ^ x Cor. vii. 37. 34, 35.

« Verfe26. ^^ Verfe 28. = Verfe 7, 8.

^ Verfe 33. 3_<. s Mctk 2.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XVIII. 405

able to confole myfelf for having '* caft a/z^r^''
upon you;" — for having given you advice when
you was not *-^ able to receive^ it \' — able^ I mean,
as every one muft conceive me to mean, without
its ruining your principles. ~~l^o; whatever good
there may be in avoiding marriage, in any circum-
itances, whatever evils marriage might occafion,
they are not to be compared to evils of being per-
petually tormented hy finfiil padiotis-, it muft always
l3e " better to marry than to burn\"— If you feel
yourfelf weak, do not attempt arduous tafks :
" marriage' is honourable in all," and yet men may
in fome fituations rightly prefer a fingle ftate ; and
whatever virtue any man praftices, in any ftate,
he fhould confider it as the gift"" of God; (Matt.
xix. II.— I Cor. vii. 7.) But God forbid that any
principle of ambition^ though of the moft laudable
fort, Ihould ever induce you to avoid marriage, if
you cannot condudl yourfelf rightly in a iingle
condition; if you cannot fully refolve to do the

duties

^ Verfe 35. * Matt. xix. 12.

^ I Cor. vii. 9. ' Heb. xiii. 4.

'" Why is virtue in fingle life here faid to be the Giji of God,
and not virtue in married life ? becaufe that would not have
been to the prefent pzirpofe. The queftion probably is, may I
live fingky notwithltanding fome dangers of fingle life? the
anfwer is, yes, if you thiiik you fliall have the 'virtues of fingle
life; but every man has not thefe particular virtues; which,
when referred to God, is, it is not ghen to every man to live
in fingle life. — Suppofe the qiiefiion had been, may I marry ^
notwithftandir.g feme dangers of a married life? (thofe of
immoderate anxiety, worldly-mindednefs, &:c.) the anfwer
^vould be juft the fame; yes. if you think you Ihall have the
'virtues of a married life; but every man has not thofe parti-
cular virtues ; or, it is not gi'ven to every man to live well in a
married life. — St. Paul feems to conceive, that one man may
(from his temper, habits, &c.) be moll virtuous in a fmgle ilate,
another in a married ftate. " Every man hath his proper
(peculiar) gift of God ; one after this manner, and another afttr
that." (ver. 7.)

C C 3

406 BOOK IV. ART. XXXU. SECT. XVIll.

duties of it, and keep youilelf unfpotted from its
corruptions.

Such is the meaning which the two paiTages
obje(5led (Matt. xix. ii, 12. and i Cor. vii.) con-
vey to my mind. They do not feem to give any
abfolute preference, or afcribe any general per-
fe(5lion to a (ingle ftafe ; hut only to dire(5l men
how to condv.El themfelve- in cafe they are thrown
into any fituations which fecm to them to be
favourable to celibacy : — that abflinence from mar-
riage is defireable in fuch particular fituations, on
fome particular accounts, is a thing taken for granted,
oxjiippofed.

If any one examines i Cor. vii. on the ground
here defcribed, let him take notice when St. Paul
fpeaks from authority, and when fpeaks of himjelf.
JHe fpeaks his private judgment in verfes 6. 10.
25. 40. — And it might be well to compare Loi. ii.
20 — 23. according to the explanation of it before"
given. — And to confider, that when St. Paul fays,
(ver. 1.) " It is good ior a man not to touch a
woman j" he muft fay it with a view to fome par-
ticular fituations; fiid umverfally, it could not be
true; nor can it more be called univerfal than, " let
every man have his own wife," ver. 2. — We may
add, that recommending occafional abftinence after
marriage", preluppofes marriage, and is no dif-
couragement to marry; rather an encouragement to
very pious people; as it fhews them, that conjugal
duty and piety are not incompatible.

If my idea of Matt, xix, 11, 12 ^ and of i Cor.
vii. bcjuft, deliberations on marriage, as ri^ht or

wrong,

" Art. XIV. Sed. iii. *" 1 Cor. vii. 1;.

P I might have made t-xo cafes of thefe, but the fame rcafons
applying to both, there muft have been fome tautology. In
both I can fancy fome fclf-deceit, though aiifwers are given on
the fame footing as if the propofais to live fingle had been cjuitc

fine ere:

BOOK IV. ART. XXXI I. SECT. XVIII. 4^7

wrong, ought to turn upon principles of moral
utility, in each perfon's particular cir cum/lances.--
We may therefore obferve, that it may be much
eafier to " attend upon the Lord without dil-
tradionV in married Life, «ow, than during the
firft propagation of the Gofpd.— That times of
danger differ greatly from times oi fecurity : that
the former call generally for >^/^ Minifters, the
latter for married; as danger leffens the ftrength ot
the paffions now under confideration, and fecurity
increales it. And that it may often happen, that
tiftngk ftate may be bell adapted to the duties of
Jiudy and contemplation, and a married Hate to
the ordinary fojloral duties ; in which a wife or a
daughter may perform fome of Offices of an
ancient Deaconejs : Such obfervations as thefe may
be made, and may be of fome ufe ; yet they aioul4
always be underllood as capable of variation and

modification

fincere : unlefs any OTie mould allow_ Wtliing of a refined
raillery in the anfwer given by Chriil himfdf. ^

In the firft cafe, I can fancy a pee'v^A 7^^» (Art; ^']-jf'
XIV or Vol. 3. page 78.) vexed that he cannot follow his
caprce in ^/iri/; -d -ging. with feme petulance,^ one
had better not marry at .// than be fettered in this way ! hmk-
ingthisa fufficient objeclicn to our Saviour's ftrianefs,-yet
Jai.ns, as a ^ifciple (Matt. xix. :o ), who ;«-l^^ ^e r..W
to aive up all tor Chrift, and perfuading himfelf that he reaUy
lould. His Lord anfwers, do not be uneafy; YO^^^^f
obliged to marry, if you do not approve it; and fo on, as

^^In'the fecond cafe, I can fancy a convert, who would wil-
iindyperfuadehimfelf thathe is very zealous for the caufe of

ChH^ftiLty, ftruck with the -^--PrK^'r^^'^ iTvt S"
to his domljlic enjoyments if he devoted himfelf wholly to pro-
moting it. He hopes, (though he is fcarce corrfcious of fuch
Tn hope) that St. Paul will tell him to nurry -^ ^l/^^^^^'p^^
\^^exprenh his difficulty by propofing to live >^/^.- St. Faal
S-eatthf propofal candidly, but ferioully : and takes the occafiou
of givingVod advice, generally ufeful; but does not (as per-
haps had been expeaed) wholly rejea the propofaL

9 Verfe 35.

c c 4

4.08 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII. SECT. XIX.

raodlfic9,tion from the circumftanccs and dlfponf
tions of particular men.

In fliort, if fome fituations are bcft filled by
minifters who are married, and others by the un-
married; and if a fenfe of duty may rightly impel
fome minifters to marrj^ and others to remain
fmgle ; neither a ftate of celibacy nor of marriage
fhoLild be forbidden. And if anything whatfocver
makes reflraints pernicious, that is enough for the
purpofe of our Article.

Let thofe marry, who judge it beft to do fo; as
many may ftill remain fingie as find, that a fingle
life will, in their peculiar circumftanccs, " ferve
better to godlinefs," either in preventing moral
evil, or in promoting fpiritual good,

X I X. Not to conclude without fome Application^
I will juft obferve, that Dupin is, on this Article,
fo tolerant, as to leave no room for difpute, or for
reconciliation.

One might conclude with the end of the
Homily ' againft Adultery.

* Homilies, prge 104. oflavo.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII, SECT. I. 409

ARTICLE XXXIII.

OF EXCOMMUNICATE PERSONS, HOV/ THEY ARE
TO BE AVOIDED.

THAT perfon, which by open denunciation of
the Church is rightly cut off from the unity
of the Church, and excommunicated, ought to be
taken of the whole multitude of the faithful, as an
Heathen and Publican, until he be openly recon-
ciled by penance, and received into the Church by
a Judge tliat hath authority thereunto.

I. When we were treating of the Romlfh^
Sacraments, we divided Penance into private and
public. Public cenfure of a church, efpecially
that ignominious excifion, which feemed to degrade
a man from the fociety of Chriftians, to that of
malignant fpirits, has been always interefting;
from the infinite importance of fuch a degrada-
tion, and its powerful influence on the mind.

This Article may be conceived as including the
whole fubjeft of Church-Difcipline. As all penal-
ties are fubmitted to, in a church properly ^o
called, independent of all political 7?<s'/fj-, through
the dread of excommunication. In the tv.'entieth
Article we fpoke of ceremonies, &c. but nothino-
of Difcipline.

1 1 . L71 pre cations,
^ Art. XXV, Seft, iv.

410 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. II.

II. Imprecations^ of a direful nature, were in
ufe amongft'' the Heathens^ and excliifion from facred
rites, was alfo p^adtifcd^ — What C^far fays of
the religious difcipline of the ancient Druids^ bears
a ftrong refemblance to that in later times''.

The 'jcivs had the puniQimcnt of excifion^ by
the Law of Mofes : — they were for fome offences,
*' cut off from the Congregation" .'''* And the Rab-
bins have multiplied excifions greatly ^ Their
method of fi'pplying the lofs of their criminal
jurifdidtion, while they were in captivity at Baby-
lony was curious. They inflidled imaginary punilh-
ments, in the belief, that they would be realized
by Jehovah i as, for inftance, if a man committed
an offence which, by tlie Law was punifhcd by
Jioning, they had a confidence, that vyhen he was
fentenced, he would providentially be killed by a
flone.

Ezra X. 8. and Nehemiah xiii. 28, 29. give
Ibme notion of penal feparation; but the exclu-
lions or feparations there fpoken of feem to have
been calm and quier. Some of the feparations, or
anathemas, denoted by CIPT, were attended with
execrations^. — Avoiding an offender, under fentence,
was lifuaL — Degrees of excommunication, or ex-
cifion, are differently defcribed, but there feem to
have been a greater and a lefs. — In the time of
Chrift, fome were call out of the Jewiih*" Syna-
gogue ^

* Potter*5 Antiquities, Vol. 1. page 245.

« Wilfon's ArchzEol. Dift. under Excommanication.

** Cjefar de Bello Gallico, Lib. 6. Cap. 13. (or page aog.
Edit. Variorum 1651, Lugd. Bat.)

« Exod. xii. ig. There is a number of texts in the Concord-
ance under cut-off.

^ See Wilfon's Archsol. Did. under exci-Jian. Wotton's

Mifna, page 155, Vol. ift. Seder Koda(hin3> Title 7.

Cerethoth.

8 Forbes, 12. 3. 14.— Limborch, 7. 8. 12.

* John Lx. 22. 34. — xii. 42. — xvi. a.— Lukevi. 22.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. III. 411

gogtie-, — the word s'^i^aKov, John ix. 34. is, in the
margin, tranflated, " excommunicated^^ I do not
dillinguiih between ecclefiatlical and civil expul-
lion amongft the Jews, as they weie under a
Theocracy.

III. The fird: Chriftians carried on the ex-
preffions to which they had been accuftomed as
Jews; and in forae degree, followed the Jewifli
praAices. We had occalion to fay fomething of
this in explaining the word " accurfed^" in the
eighteenth Article. — But what is contained in
fcripture muft not be enlarged upon here, as it
belongs, properly, to our Proof.

The difcipline of the early churches was mild,
without being remifs, or unequal : free from every
idea of partiality, or intereft. No offender was
allowed to offer money, or other prefents. And
the dignity of religious fociety was not let down,
when the greatefh perfonages*' flood in need of
reproof, or correal ion.

A learned man' fays, that excommunications
began with Vidlor and Zephyrinus Biiliops of
Rome : and that private pique occafioned them.
He was no friend to eccleliaftical puniihments. —
Tertullian", mentions the exclufion of Valentine and
Marcion. Cave places Valentine in 120, Marcion
in 130, and Victor in 192.

From the Canons of the Council of Nice, in
325, we fee, that offenders were excluded, as peni-
tents indeed, for a long term, (that of ten years is
mentioned once); but that the Bifliops, on per-
ceiving firong marks of genuine remorfe, had fome

'difcretionary

* Art. XVII I. Se£l. viii.

^ An inibnce or two might be read out of Bingham, (Vol 2.
page 50. col. 2. being part of 16. 3, 5.) : — that of falentinlan,
^nd that of Theodofms the Great.

' Selden.— See Neal, 2. page 194.

^- See Bingham, 16,3. 13.

412 BOOK IV. ART XXXIII. SECT. III.

difcretionary power of fliortening'' the penitence.
— One of cur excommunications is not fuppofed
to continue fo long as one of thefe. About this
time, the penitents, uled to come to the churches,
and within them as far as they were permitted,
fliedding tears, and fhewing other figns of great
contrition*^.

The lauk mentioned in our Article, of encourag-
hig tliofe who are under cenfure, is one which was
always noticed. We find in Cyprian's time, that
the encourager fliared the fame fate with the firil '^
offender.

Augufim feems to have had an idea* that a
Chriltian who died obRinate, and refufed to be
reconciled to the Church, was guilty of the fm
W againft the Holy Ghoft; — that fm was fometimes
thought to be final impenitence ''. — Dr. Fulke
thinks, that fuch obflinale perfon mufl have died
an Healherf. Yet the ancient Church ufed fome-
times to let offenders die under its difpleafure,
though it gave them hopes of forgivenefs from
God, and prayedfor them. — (Bingham, i6. 2. 16.
end.)

The diftindion between a lefs and a greater
excommunication, feems to I'uit the difference of
offences, and to have prevailed at' all limes : the
lefs being exclufion from facraments, &c. as a tem-
porary puniflnmcnt, intended to make an offender

lerious,

" Firft Council of Nice, Canon eleventh.

•» This is mentioned in Dr. Prieftley's Hift. Corr. Vol. s.
page 169.

P See Forbes, 12. 3. 2. — The fime thing is faid by Thomas
a Becket, as decreed by fome eighth Synod ; fee John Fox>
Vol. 1. page 286.

•1 Art. XVI. Seft. IV. Note.

' On Rlxm. Teft. Matt. xii. 31. — Wheatly on Common
Prayer, page 4.65.

' Forbes, 12. 3. 10.— Bingham, 16. z. 7. -■■ , 16. 5. o.
Blackftone and Burn.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXITI. SECT. III. 413

ferious, humble, penitent, and alarmed about his
eternal falvation; and at the fame time to prevent
his corrupting the good; — the greater being an
unlimited exclufion from all intercourfe with the
regular and pious; the cutting off of one whofe
reformation feenied quite dcfperate : and that m
terrorem, meant fometimes, perhaps, as a fort of
foretafte of future condemnation. So that the
lefs excommunication feems to have had chiefly in
view the good of the offender; the greater, the
good of the community.

In order to get an idea of Chridian excommuni-
cation in the fourth, lifth and fixth Centuries, it
may be fufficient to keep in mind this diftindion ;
and to read the Form by v/hich Synejtus'' pafles
fentence of the greater excommunication on An-
dronicus. From which it appears,

1. Thr.t when an offender was excommunicated
in one church, public notice was given to other
churches.

2. That one excommunicated by one churchy,
was confidered as excommunicated by all.

3. That if any church received \\\t offender, it
fhared in his cenfure, fo far as to be thought to
dejerve excommunication, though that punifl-i-
ment did not extend to Bodies Corporate''.

4. That the offender was not only excluded
from the Sacrament, but from private, familiar,
convivial intercourfe; from marriage and Chrifhian
burial. Sometimes the pronouncing of fuc'i fen-
tence feems to have been attended with execrations'^.

Yet this expulfion was not confidered as annul-
ling Baptifm ; fo that a perfon, if received back

into

* See Synef. Ep. 58. _ page 199. tranflated in Bingham,
j6. 2. 8. — Cave places him in 410.

" Bingham, ]6. 3. 7, — Burn's Ecclef. Law.

* Bingham, Vol. 2. page 44. col. s. part of 16. 2. 17.

414 BOOK VI. ART. XXXIII. SECT. IV.

inro the church, need be re-baptized. Nor as
taking away natural and r/V/V rights. The of-
fender was fomctimes prayed^ for. — His children
were educated as Chriftians.

As ecclefiallical iociety has no coercive power,
no power over perfon or property, when a fentence
was pad, before any 'Nation was Chrijiian^ there
was a difficulty in getting it inforced. Apphcation
was made in tljis cale, to Heathen powers. The
Emperor Aurelian^ is mentioned'' as having lent
his civil power to enforce the fentence of a Chrif-
tian community.

IV. In the following centuries, as reafon grew
weaker, and fuperflition ftronger, excommunica-
tion kept alTuming a very terrible appearance; and
as it was religiouHy obeyed, its effedU were truly
tremendous. But if men are too often threatened,
though they may flirink for a while, they will begin
to look -about for means of efcaping the florm; —
and thofe who are to execute threats will grow re-
mifs. When excommunications came to be often
repeated, they began to lofe their terrors; and as
it is human to run from one extreme to another,
they at length came, perhaps, to be too little re-
garded. But this obfervation includes fome length
of time.

Excommunication rofe to a great height in the
ninth Century % but ftill higher in the eleventh,
twelfth and thirteenth. — Then it was reckoned a
more terrible puniflmient, than death itfclf. It
diflblved all thofe connexions and mutual obliga-
tions, by which the world is generally kept from
running into anarchy and diforder; the connexions
of conlanguiniiy and affinity; the obligations of

civil

y Bingham, 16.2. 5. ^ Forbes, 12. 3.2.

* A. D. 270—275. •» Bingliaiii, 16. 2. 3.

« Chambers's Di^ilionary.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXII.I. SECT. IV. 4I5

civil authority and fubjeaion.— The pra6lice of
iffuing national Interdi5is is faid to have begun
.about'^the year 1160; but I will read to you Fox's
account of the excommunication of the Emperor
Henry IV. by Hildcbrand, (or Gregory VII.) in
the year 1076 or 1077, as the firft inftance of the
kind;— and Hume's account of the Excommuni-
cation of King John of England, in the year 1206,
as conneded with ourfelves^

Nor has there been greater extravagance in the
efFeds of excommunication, than in the manner in
which it has been been conduded. Ceremonies have
been ufed, more fuitable to the orgies of the
Furies, than to fupporting the kingdom of the
Prince of Peace : torches, bells, trampUng under'
foot, execrations compofed and recited in fet
forms, have ferved to exprefs the rage of the fuper-
llitious zealots, and to annoy the wretched de-
linquents.— The Dead have not been fuffered to
reft in quiet : and Brute animals, fuch as rats, flies,
caterpillars, have had excommunication denounced
againft them. — As thefe could not beejeded out of
any Chriftian community, I Ihould rather have
called it Imprecation : However, as a fentence was
to be paft, it was right to give the rei fair play.—
It is faid, that an Advocate v^as allowed thefe little
intruding animals; an inftance, if true, of wonder-
ful candour and fair dealing \

Indeed,

^ For the infrances here mentioned, fee Bingham, 16.3. 7.
and 16. 2. 5— Fox's Afts and Monuments, Vol. i.page 231.
234._And Hume's Hiftory of England, A. D.,1206.

^Chambers's Dift. from Fevret, a Lawyer of Dijon, who
died in 1661, and is faid to have written a good Treatife de
Mufu. (Ladvocat). — Of infult to the dead, the inftance of
Wickliffe has been mentioned, when we fpoke of the Council

ofConrtance, Seff. 8. Art. xxi. Sea 11, —Fox, ^515.

Bingham, 16. 3. i2.-^Burnet, page 460. oaavo.

4l6 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIir. SECT. V.

Indeed, in more ancient times, when it was the
cuftom to recite aloud the names of all thofe de-
parted Chriftians who had diflinguilhed themfelves,
and who had been recorded in the Diptychs^ or
folding books, it was fometimes found, or thought,
necelTary to correB the^ Lifts : fometimes a name
was to be inferie^, even though the peifon had
been under cenfure, if unjuftly; and fo, fome-
times, a name was to be erafecl^ if any unknown
offence appeared : fuch erafing would be a kind of
anathema. But if pofthumous praife be thought
worth giving, it implies that pofthumous blame is
to be given alfo, when deferved.

The meaning of curfing/^^' Bell^ booky and candle ^
may be gueffed at from what has been faid, but I
will read Dr. Prieftley's^ fliort account of it.

The Schoolmen enter into nice queftions concern-
ing excommunication; and it is a fubjedt not
barren ! — They endeavour to inveftigate how far
God will confirm an erroneous or oppreffive fen-
tence:— how a p;ood man is to behave under fuch
a'' fentencc ; what effe6t any fentence, juft or un-
juft, is to have upon a man's friends or relations;
with what limitations and rcftrictions he is to be
avoided, &c. &c.

We are told by Burn, that the Synod held at
London in 1126, agreed to receive no unknown
communicants at any church, for fear of receiving
fuch as had been excommunicated,

V. I imagine we may conceive Excommunica-
tion as in confiderable force in the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries, but that force rather decaying.
IPlckliffe was excommunicated by the Pope; and in
the Council oi Conjlancc wc find fevcral propofitions

condemned,

*" Bingham, 16. 3. 12.

5 Hilt. CoiT. \'ol. 2. page 179. *> Forbes, jj. 4 41. &c.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. V. 417

condemned, in which he had afferted, that he
ought to account' fuch Excommunication for
nothing.

By the time of the twenty-fifth Seflion of the
Council of Trent, the Romanijh began to adopt
fome moderation and caution on this fubjedt : and
even to alTign experience as the ground of their
moderation : cum experientia doceat (i temere, aut
Icvibus ex rebus incutiatur, magis contemni quam
formidari, et perniciem potius parere quam falu-
tem. — Still they retained the method of excom-
munication, in both degrees. Excommunicatus
veto quicunque, fi poft legitimas monitiones nori
refipuerit, non folum ad facramenta et commu-
nionem tidelium ac fnmiliaritatem non recipiatur,
?cc. but at laft he may be profecuted for Herejy\
which offence would be puniflied by death.

While on the fubjedt of the Romanifts, I will
juft add, that their Sacrament of Penance, and
particularly ConfeJJion^ fuperfedes\ in modern times,
other kinds of difcipline:— and that Diipin^ makes
no objedion to this Article.

Since the Romanifts appear to have been fb
moderate at the time when the Reformed Churches
compiled their Confeffions, we cannot expe6l to
find in thofe Confeffions any great afperity againft
the Church of Rome. That of Augjhurg'^ refers
to paft grievances ; but I do not perceive that any
other does ; except that of Wittemberg, in blaming
the Romilh Theory. Several of them feem de-
firous to reprefent the Church of Chrift as having
more bufinefs with teaching, comforting; or kindly
rebuking^ than with excommunicating. His king-
dom,

' Baxter on Councils, page 432.
^ Burnet. ^ Third Append, to Mofheun.

"^ Sviitagma, page 59.
VOL. IV. D D

4l8 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. V.

dom, fay they, is not of this world; the isroXjTeua»
of Chriftians is in Heaven". But I will mention
a few particular remarks, which I made in running
over the confeflions of the reformed. — The Hel-
'vetic Confefiion is very wary: cautious of plucking
up Corn with the Tares.—'Y\\t EngUjli (by Bifhop
Jewel) is for removing Scandals^ for the fake of
the good" : and underftands, by the Keys (as the
ancients did) the true fenfe of Scripture. — The
Scotch excludes from Sacraments by making ex-
amination neccffary for admiffion. — The Dutch is
for difcipline, and for rebukes from the Senate or
Prejbytery. But gets off by faying, that all will
go well when good Eledions are made.— The Con-
fefiio Argentinenjis (Strafburg) declines fevcrity.- —
That of Augjhurg enters fully into the difference
between civil and ecclefiaftical power, and mixed ;
is mild, but allows of expulfion, fine -lv humana,
fed verbo : it is for warding off Herefy. — The
Saxon holds the mild dodrine. — And that of /-f 7/-
temberg is more intent on denying the recl:itude oi
the Papal ecclefiaftical government, than on de-
fining a more perfeft fchcme''.

The Socinians^ in their Racovlan Catechifm,
fpcak as if they would avoid the company of an
offender, and yet take fome opportunity of admo-
niQiing him as a brother. Or if this does not
reclaim him, then tbiey would ba}iijh him from the
Church of Chrijl, and no longer own him for a
brother, but count him fur an Alien'*.

I do not recollect anM.hin*i in the time of
Henry Vlll. worth mentioning : private difcipline

Iccms

"John xviii. 36. — Phil. iii. 20.
"Syntagma, page 63. 116.

P For thefl' pafiliges, fee SyntPigma, pnge 156. 179. 235.60.
f;8. 1S3. (the paging begins a fecoiul timt).
^ De Ectlcfiu C'hrifti, Cap. 3, pji^e 346.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. VI, 4I9

feems to have confifhed in Confeflion ; and public,
in burning Heretics.

In the reign of Edward VI. the Reformatio
Legum takes very great notice of Excommunica-
tion; and gives Forms' of great lengthy confidering
the fize of the whole Code of Laws. And there
are two' fhort chapters on the principal bufmefs
of our Article, encouraging offenders under fentence
of excommunication. — The puniihments feem very
fevere.

In one of the Canons'- of James I. offenders are
ordered to be denounced four times a year.

VI. When we come lower, we Ihould divide
Englilh Chriftians into three forts ; EraJIians^ Puri-
tans, d.nd Moderate Church of England men.

Some were called EraJiianSy from following the
notions of one Erajlus, a German, who died in
1582. He was a Phyfician, but wrote fome trea-
tifes on Church-government. On Excommuni-
cation, and the power of the Keys. He reduces
all Church power to perfuajion; no one, he holds,
Ihould be kept from the Sacrament^ but only per-
funded that he ought not to receive it unwortJiily.
Chriftianity is offered to all. — As fome provifion
muff be made for ecclefiaftical offences, he ranks
them with ^/v'/7 ones; and holds, that all offences
of every kind, are to be puniflied by the civil
Magiftrate. — This idea was favoured, in the dif-
putes in the time of our Charles the Firft, by
fome men of great character and ability ; both in
Parliament, and in the Affembly of Divines held
in 1645.— ^^/r/^w, Whitlocky and Dr. Liglitfooty are
mentioned" as favouring it.

Oppofite

•■ Page, or fol. 74. and 8c.
* Cap. 6. II. oppofite pnge 77. 83.
' Canon 6;. " Neal, Vol. 2 page 97.

D D 2

420 BOOK IV. ART. XXXII I. SECT. VII.

Oppotite to tliefe were the Puritans, or Prejbytc-
riauSy who held, that excommunication ought to
be only of a Jpiriiunl nature, and deprive a man
only of Tpiritual'' comforts; but that it was in-
tirely in the hands of tiie Church, and wholly
independent on the civil magiftrate; and ought not
to be adminiftered by Laymen. A party of thelc,
in 1645, made a ftrong attempt to eftablifh, as
their right, a power of excluding any Chriftian
from the Sacrament, fubject to no control from
the ftate ; which they were to exercifey'wT divino ;
the Alfembly and the Parliament faw the neceffity
of preventing fuch an impcrium in imperio; and
the Prefbyterians were dilappointcd.

The third, moderate fort of Knglifli Ciiriflians
allowed, with the Eraflians, that a fociety merely
ecclellattical had no power of touching perfon or
property; and, with the Prclbyterians, that fuch a
ibciety is, in its nature, independent on the Slate;
but afErmed, that it is wholly i/;//>r^^/f(//'/t' for an
ecclefiaftical iociety to be compofed of the fubjecls
of any State, and to exill within that State, with-
out connecting itfclf with the civil power; without
borrowing from it llreng-th and torce, and affiilins:
it with good ientiments and principles, productive
of obedience for confcience fake-\

VII. He who keeps thefe three forts of Englifh
Chriflians mi his mind, will want very little farther
information. It may not however be amifs to
mention the modern Baptifls. They feem' to
follow our Saviour's directions given Matt, xviii.
15 — 17. exactly, and with very good etfedt : no
wonder; it is an admirable* plan : it is applied to

differences

* Ncal, Vol I. page yi^.\. — ^^x alfo pa[?;e 158.
y This Uibjcifl is treated Boc k. 111. Cluip. x 1 v .

* Wall, 4to. page 455.

■ D.-. Pricftley feems to fpeak ot it with plcafure. — Hid. Corr.
Vol.2, page 167.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. VIII. 42I

differences l:)etween individuals ; and if any man is
j^uilty of fcandalovis immorality, he is excluded
from the Brotherhood. — The Diffenters complain
of our want of flriftnefs in Church Difcipline, and
with reafon : Dr. Wall laments it, yet makes as
good an Apology as the Truth^ will allow.

VIII. There has been fomething greatly dif-
trejfing in the cafe of thofe, who were excommuni-
cated by a Church, merely becaufe they preached
doctrines contrary to its own, when they thought
themfelves obliged in Confcience to do fo. To
have fuch people fufFer all the rigours of excom-
munication, is to perpetuate every corruption, and
to preclude all improvement.

It is as much the nature of religion to approach
gradually towards pertection, as of anything elfe.
This was the diltrefs of IVkkliffe^ in the fourteenth
Century, and of the Puritans^ at the beginning of
the feventeenth; and very cruel hardihips they
fuffered. Some expedient fliould have been in-
vented to make a difference between criminals and
confcientious men. We now have oncj Tolera-
tion^ : and nothing can fliew its excellence more
clearly, than the diftrelfes now mentioned. The
Scripture fays, *' come out^ of her;" quit a
church which really appears elTentially corrupt :
But there was no way to get out, with tolerable
fafety, when there was no toleration : nor Vvfithouf
making a party large enough to throw all things
into confufion.

In

^ Wall, 4to. page 454.
c Wickliffe died in j 384.

'1 In 1604. Neal i. page 429. — See Warb. Alliance, page yx."
^Book I. Chap. 5. Sed. 2.

« Book III. Chap. xiv. Se<El. xv.
^ Rev. xviii. 4, — 2 Cor. vi. 17.

422 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. IX.

In Bhxktlone'ss Commentaries, we find, that
both the lefs and the greater excommunication iViU
fubfift in our own country. The lefs excluding
from facraments ; the greater from all Society. —
The coercive power is lent by the common law ;
which excludes the excommunicated from all acts
of probiis et legalis homo ; from the acts of Jury-
man, Witnefs, &c. — Burn gives us good infor-
m .tio nB this matter.

I take Warburton's Alliance to be the Book
which gives the beft idea of the Theory of civil,
ecclcfiaftical, and mixed power, and confequently
of Excommunication''.

IX. From Hiftory we deduce Explanation.

In the title^ " excommunicate perfons," may mean
pcrfons under either fort of excommunication, the
lefs or the greater : — the greater growing out of
the lefs.

*' Open denunciation" — refers to the practice
already mentioned; our fixty-fifth Canon was made'
after our Article.

" Of the Church," — what is meant by the
church, appeared under the nineteenth and twen-
tieth Articles; any particular church, confidering
itfelf as making a part of the univerfal church. —
And the conduct of the ancient churches towards
each other, fuits our former accounts very well, as
given in thofe Articles.

" Rightly" — what we have to do, then, is built
upon the fuppofition that a pcrion is rightly ex-
communicated :— that may fave us trouble. It
would be a great hardlhip to be obliged to
avoid any one whom we thought injured. —

And

c Vol. 3. page loa. 410. '' See Imlex, and 2. 3. 3.

i The ninth Chapter of the Reformatio Legum, Dc Excom-
municatione, is intitled, Excommunicatorum denunciatio.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. IX. 423

And who, according to our Article, is to he judge
but ourfeJves^?

*' Cut off,'* is a fcriptural expreffion. — Rom.
ix. 3.— Gal. V. 12. — It frequently occurs, as ap-
pears from the Concordance. Excijion we have
had before.

" The unity of the church" — if a particular
church is a conftituent part of the univerfal
Church, then cutting off from the part^ is cutting
off from the zvJwle ; from whatever link an infecft
is driven, it is driven from the chain. Cyprian
wrote, De Unitate Ecclefia. Allufion is made to
fuch texts as John xvii. ii. 21, 22.--Eph. iv. 3.
and 13.

"The voliole multitude ol \\\q. faithful," — means
all particular churches, conftituting together the
miiverfcd church j the denunciation ufed to be
made to all churches within reach : as we have
feen.

*^ As an Heathen and Publican," — regarding any
one as an Heathen^ is regarding him as a Man;
which is leaving him all the rights of humanity. —
Regarding any one as a 1-ublican, is not what we
are obliged to in the literal fenfe? we cannot be
obliged to look upon an excommunicated perfon,
as a colleclor of taxes ; as an excifeniaUy or cuftom-
houfe-oliicer: but only in that light, in which a
Publican ufed to be regarded in our Saviour's
time '. - Our Article is very indulgent in not faying,

that

^ Suppofe a man thought, with the EralHans, that no man
was rightly cut off: — need he fcruple to afTent to,this Article?
would it not, indeed, be to him a dead Letter? according to
Book IT I. Chap. IX. Seft. IX.?

' It is only fair to take the meaning of the word Heathen m
the fame way; in that light in which the Jetus confidered it :
Hill from the ftory of the Good Samaritan, an Heathen i^ a
man,

D D 4

424 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. X.

that we are to oi'DiJ'" an excommunicated perfon ;
or refufe him our company on every occafion : or
help to drive him from the Lord's table. — 'Our
Saviour fate down at meat with l-'ublicans and
Sinners, when his bufmefs was to endeavour to
reform them".

*' Until," fhews that the excifion here fpoken of
is nox. final, except the offender chufes to make
it fo: — his continuance in his ftate of difgrace,
muft be folcly owing to his refufing to undergo
the punifhment, or penance, to which he is
fentenced.

*' Openly" — implies notification^ fuch as was ufed
when the fcntence had palled : — the Article fays,
" by open denunciation." — The excommunicated
are not to be fuftercd to infinuate themfclves gra-
dually into the church •. as they were excluded, fo
they are to be received, h\ judicial procefs.

x. Now proceed we to our Proof. — And what
is to be proved ?— * Suppofe a perfon rightly fuf-
pended from the uie of Chriflian ordinances, every
Chriftian ou^ht to be cautious of fruftratine; fucli
diicipline.' This mufl be clear enough in itlelf ;
but ftill our bufmcfs feems to be, to take a view
of what the Scripture fays on the fubjeclj either
on the bufinefs of fetting afide thofe whole conti-
nuance in Society is likely to do harm : or on the
nature of our behaviour towards them, uhen they
are fet afide. — I will take fome pali'ages in the
order in which they lie, without dividing them
into two heads. — Matt, xviii. 15—18. — Rom.
xvi. 17. — I Cor. V. 4, 5. 7. 9. II. 13.— 1 Cor. xv.
33.— xvi. 22. — 2 Cor. ii. 10. — 2 Cor. vi. 17. —

2 Their.

" The title mentions ri-oirihr;^, but no precife degree of it ;
and we do not fubfcribe to the iit/ts of the Articlei.
" ivlatt. ix. IQ.— — — xi. ig.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XI. 42^

1 Their, iii. 6. 14. — 2 Tim. ii. 16 — 18. — Titus
iii. 10, 1 1. — 2 John i. 10, 11.

XI. I flioiild think that theie texts muft fatisfy
any man, that Chriftian Churches have good rca-
fon for avoiding, in a confidcrable degree, thofs
under fentence of excommunication, when there
is no ground to fufped: the fentence to be itnjuji.^^
Some of the expreffions want confidering; but
they are intelh'gible enough to be real proofs-, fome
of them were very fparingly ufed by the ancients";
probably, becaufe their meaning was too indefinite
for them to be ufed without feme comment, or
doubt; and perhaps becaufe they feemed ioo terriblg
to be ufed by Man.

I will fay frankly in what light fome of them
llrike me.

As to Matt, xviii. 15 — 17. It feems at firft to
relate only to private wrongs. Your Brother of-
fends you ; you are firft to expqftulqte with him;
if that does not fucceed, you are to delire a few
friends, men of good character, to be witnejjes of
your next expoftulation; fomething may have been
mifunderftood : — they are not prejudiced againft
the offender, as you may be fuppofed to be : nor
he againft them : he may not be aJJiamed to fubmit
to them^ though he may \Q) you. If this fail, ftatc
the cafe to the Ex.xAyicri;*, to fome reputable focicty;
perhaps to thole with whom you commonly alio-
ciate in religious'"' worfliip; and defire their ^r/^i-

traticn,

" Bingham, 16. 2. 16.

P Selden lays, the Eccleji^ were " courts of Lnvv whkh then
fate at Jerufalem ;"— (hefays this in the Houfe of Commons, in
1645;— Neal, Vol. 2. quarto, page 194) —But were thty
yeivijh CoiM-ts} then i Cor. vi. i. or rather the {^me /riuci/i/e,
would be againft referring to them ; and there could not he
any C//;-//?/«;/ Courts of Law fofoon. — It does not feem likelv,
that Chrlft fhould fend his new Difciiiles to Je-jytfti Courts of
Lai'.\ —Yet it may be faid he had nO Difciples j or none formed

into

426 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XI.

tration. If they favour your opinion, you may
have confidence in it : and having done every
thing in your power towards a reconciliation,
you may give it up as dejperate, except your
adverfary makes fome fubmiffion. And you may
avoid the Society of him who was once your
Brother, in the fame manner in which the ftric^
Jews avoid the company of Idolaters, and of thofe
difreputable pcrfons whom the Romans are com-
pelled to employ in collecting their tribute.

I ufed to think this direftion belonged only to
individuals ; but the words which immediately
follow, give it a different appearance. " Verily I
fay unto you, Whatfoever ye lliall bind on earth,
Iliall be bound in Heaven; and whatfover ye fliall
loofeon earth, fliall be loofed in Heaven.*' — Theie
words mufl be a declaration to religious Society.
They had indeed been before addrefTed''^ to Peter
only; but with fome previous declarations; as,
that the Church of Chrifl fliould be founded on a
rock, that no powers (hould be able to " prevail
againft it :" and that Chrill would give unto Peter
*' the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven ;" all
which things fliew, that Peter was to bind and
to loofe as a ruler in the Church. — It now therefore
feems to me, that, though no plan can be better
calculated for deciciing diifeiences amongft indivi-
duals than the one here propofcd, yet an offence,
when transferred from the judgment of a few
friends to a courminity^ might be changed irom a
private into a public wrongs and tlierefore when

fentence

into a Body. But might not Chriftians, as loon as they af^ed
focially, have fomtrthing cor refpor: ding to Jewilh Courts? — If
they had, the term would be ufed for them. Comp.irc Matt.
V. «i, 22. btill recourfe is to be liatt 10 arbitral. en, of men in
fonie fon of public capacity.
1 Matt. xvi. 19.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XI. 427

lentence had been pronounced, all men might be
equally obliged to treat the offender " as an Hea-
then man and a Publican." Moreover, a good
Chriftian may not only be offended by wrongs
done to himfelf, but by any bad actions which will
bring difgrace upon the Churchy or upon Religion.
And the procefs laid dov/n Matt, xviii. 15 — 17.
- — would Ix equally applicable to all kinds of
offences.

The terms bindi;ig and loofing^ and " the Keys of
the kingdom of Heaven," have occationed many
differtations, and much controverfy. It leems to
me as if it were no way neceliary to have a precife
idea of their meaning. — For whom fhould it be
wanted? not for the Governors of t lie Church;
they can but do their befl: in ufing their authority
for the good of mankind: — not for the governed -,
enough is intelligible to convince them, that God
will ratify the ads of thofe, who do every thing
faithfully and modeftly as his Agents. A fliort
and figurative commiffion, is not likely to define
nicely the extent and nature of the authority
which it confers; neither does fuch defining feem
to fall in with the ufual methods of Scripture.—
Having the Keys of the kingdom of Heaven ap-
pears to me to mean, having a pov;cr to baptize
and admit men into the Chrillian Religion, But
the Chriftian Religion, though frequently called
the Kingdom of Heaven, leads, of couife, all
things going on regularly, to the kingdom of
Heaven above. As to binding and loofi.n^^ let it
fignify what it will, if God binds in Heaven what
his Church binds on Earth, and looles in Heaven
what his Church loofes on Earth, He confitrms the
a£is of his Church ; which is our principal con-
cern. Let binding mean tyingy or excommuni-
cating, or obliging us to do a thing, or let it

mean

4ZS BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XII. XIII.

mean forbidding\ tlie whole fentence comes to
the fame thing. God ratifies what his Minillers
cnacl.

XII. Of Rom. xvi. 17. we may remark, that
if a Church was well conllituted, it mioht with
piopriety take cognizance of caufmg divifwis^ as
an offence or crime ; and he who, by a Jury, or
Council, or other Judges, Ihould be found guilty
of caufmg divifions, might juftly be punilhed;
and particularly, avoided'^.

XIII. The next part of Scripture to which we
come, is the fifth Chapter of the firfl. Epiflle to
the Corinthians. In this, the Apoftle repeatedly
orders an offender to be (afi out of the Church :
what kind of perfon he was, and what was the
nature of his offence, Mr. Locke has fufficiently
explained '. But I do not perceive that he has given
any opinion with regard to the expreffion, delivering
the Offender unto Satan. Here the whole church of
Corinth, including St. Paul's vote by Proxy, as it
were, are to deliver an offender to Satan, in the
«^z/;it'and by the ^ow^r of Chrift. In i Tim. i. 20.
St. Paul fays, that he himfelf delivered two offenders
to Satan. The end and purpofe for which the
Church of Corinth were to deliver over their
offender, was, *' for the deftruction of the Flejl!^
that the Spirit [might] be ^^lW in the day of the
Lord jefus." — The end for which St. Paul de-
livered Hyracneus and , Alexander to Satan, was,
that they might "learn not to blajpliemey — Now,
how much evil fliould be referred to Satan, is
arbitrary : to rejed the general belief of the agency

of

' Wotion's MJfna, Vol. 1. page 309, &c,

' It might be confidered how far this ofFence cf caufing
divifions would refemble promoting Sedition; feduciiig military
Jserfons from their allegiance, bringing a malicious profecution ;
offering a fi ivolous petition to our Houfe of Commons, &c.

' Locke on i Lor. v.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XIII. 429

of rpirits, is narrow-minded, and philofophy falfely
fo called ,— to refer to them particular events in a.
literal fenfe, is fuoerftition; but the ufual inde-
finite manner of referring evil to them, meanincr
that they may caiife evil, you know not how, de-
pends upon cuftom, education, fancy. The JezvSy
religious at the fame time and ignorant, referred,
in their language, niany" events to them; and
the Apoftles had no reafon to change their expref-
fions. Indeed, Wkkliffe refers as many things to
the agency of Sathanas^ as any Jews ever did. —
ThtfaJJiion now is, to take no notice of Spirits as
the promoters of evil, or of good. Not that we
differ from our predeccifors as to any facis^ but
only as to modes of exprefTion, — St. Paul would
Ipeak to thofe who were accuftomed to refer evil
to Satan, and would therefore naturally ufe their
language. Inftances are numerous. It would be
natural for him to call depriving any one of Reli-
gion, delivering him lo Satan^. This may be iliuf-
trated by Acts xxvi. i8. and i Pet. v. 8. — As
converting any one to the Chriflian Religion, was
turning him *' from the power of Satan," fo fuf-
pending him from the ufe and exercife of that
Religion, was delivering him back to the fame
power. And Satan, being always, in men's notions,
like a fierce and hungry lion, prowling about,
feeking whom he might devour, would be ready
to feize upon the prey delivered to him. — Yet
this language about Satan was not ufed as if every
thing faid was known to be plain /^c?; but only in
away of eloquence^ when (om^ feHtimental q^qOi was
to be produced; fome good principle encouraged,
Ibme bad one difcou raged-".

But

"^ Art. X. Sed. l. and other places tliere mentioned.
^ Sec Concordance, Satan.

y Our reafoning here is only an ex'emplificatlon of die ele-
tnenti. laid down hx the tenth and fcventeeath Articles.

43'^ B-OOK IV. ART. XXXllI. SECT. XIII,

But why is fuch language uled, as that a man
was to be dehvered to Satan " for the deftrudion
of the FlefJir"'-^o\: that he mis-ht learn not to
hlafpheme^ — "They?f//^'* is often ufed, \w Scrip-
ture for [ht JieJJiiy^ appetites y and nothing could
have a (Ironger tendency to break their force, than
the mortification of being difgracefiilly banillicd
from honourable fociety; from thofe who had
lltewn conilant fidelity and affection j and configncd
10 ignominious folkude.

The offender of wMiom the expreffion is ufed, h
called the Fornicator. — The fame kind of mortifi-
cation, would lower a man's fpirits, lb as to take
from him all inclination to blafpheme : abufive lan-
guage proceeds trom an infolent and haughty fpirit.
(2 Pet. ii. 18.) — Perhaps there is nothing which
has a greater efFecl upon a feeling mind, than a
confcioiifnefs of having loft the efteem of the wor-
thy and benevolent ; than being an objedt of general
averfion or contempt; even though foftened by
gentlcncis and goodnel's. Few men are fo har-
dened as to be able to bear being generally fliunned*

and

^ Rom. viii. I — 15. particularly ver. i; & 6. and fee Park-

hurlt's fifth fenfe of Sa^i. The lielh fometimes fignifies the

BcJy; and bodily ills are afcribed to Si.ita>i. Job i. and ii. 2.

2 Cor. .\ii. 7. (foie exes): — Ambrofe makes (/^eG^oit mean cajli-
gatio; fee ForbtS, 12. 3. 3.

Being in the Jlcjti, is being in this Life Phil. i. 24. — •
Col. ii. I. 5.— (All flofh, means all men) — fo i Cor. vii. cS.
troubles /« //;^ Mv/;. Mr. Locke calls ivcrljly troubles. I flip-
pofe melancholy or drfpair might be called troubles in the flefli :
I do not tliink our interpretation of, delivering to Satan, would
be materially hurt, by taking fli-Jh, in any of tliefe fenfes.— -
Sumctiiing was faid of (Jsgcvr/xa o-agxocj Roin. viii. 6. under
Art jx SolI XX r.

* Our familiar 1 mguage Ciys, bciiMT fliunned, i^c. is the
Devil : fiippofe any one was to ftt on crliiciring ih.ii txprclhon
grammatically, as a literal one! — Yet perhaps it would bear

criiicifm as well as, ttelivering to Sntan ? I'liis bring'; to

mind that other familiar phrafe, of fending to Coventry, the
nioft fcvcre of puniflimcnts to fome difpofition«.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XIV. 43I

and avoided. — This mortification, if it took a
riglu courfe, would put the Spirit in the bed way
to " be faved in the day of the Lord Jefus."

XIV. On I Cor. xv. '2>Z' ■"■ ^^^^ make no re-
marks ; it agrees with i Cor. v. 6, 7. which is part
of St. Paul's argument for calling out the Corin-
thian Fornicator.

And I Cor. xvi. 22. has been difcufled under
the eighteenth Article.

2 Cor. ii- TO. is an argument in favour ofpunirti-
ing in the name and by the authority of Chrift,
becaufe it proves that forgivenefs may be in his
name; and forgivenefs impHes previous punifli-
ment.

2 Cor. vi. 17. is fometimes, I think, u fed for
an argument; but it only orders Chriftians to fepa-
rate themfelves from'' Idolaters, not from diforderly
Chriftians.

2 ThefT. iii. 6. 14. feems intelligible, and may
ferve as a comment on i Tim. i. 20.

2 Tim. ii. 16 — 18. is not fo much a proof in
itfelf, as an auxiliary to i Tim. i. 20. Hymenem
being mentioned in both.— The bad effeds of reli-
gious error arc ftrongly exprefled.

Titus iii. 10, 11. ferves to (liew, that mere falfc
do5irine may be a fufhcient reafon for feparation.—
Unity of DoEirine was proved in the third Book,
to be neceflary for obtaining the ends of religious
Society.

2 John, verfes ic, ii. ihews, that the feparation
for falfe doclrine, is to be extended to doniefiic
familiarity : private conferences have perverted mam' :
compare 2 Tim. iii. 6. Not that men are always

to

^ This ao^rees with Seidell's obfervatioii, Nea!, Vol.. 2. page
194: only he would make all the feparations enjoined, to be of
this kind. — Selden's fpe^ch wp.s mca;ioned before; Seil. xi.

432 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XV.

to refufe their attention to religious argument; but
men are not to liften to fuppofed Herefy Ivghtly,
without caution and deliberation. — 1 mean not to
make any caution for one religion more than
another. The provifion here made, is for the
People :- x.\\Qy were didinguiflied from P/'/76/o/)//c';-i
in our fecond Book.

XV. As we have Ipen the authority on which
Chriftian offenders are fufpended from the ufe of
the ordinances of rehgion, and avoided by their
brethren, we fhould take' fome notice of thoic
texts of Scripture, which may difpofe us to rejlore
him to his former ilate, in cafe of his fmcere re-
pentance and humiliation ;— as the reftoratioa to
tivour fcems to make an effential part of our
Article.

Avoiding a perfon, with a right temper of mind,
mud fall very far fliort of depriving him of the
rigljts of humanity. It ought to exprcfs no bitter-
nefs, or acrimony; but a kind concern^ a benevo-
lent folicitude, an earneftnefs to rectify every thing
wrong, an anxious wilh for the return of a truly
Chrillian difpofition. The prayers of Cyprian ""
would be, no doubt, exprcllive of all this. De-
feflation of a crime, is always to be diftinguilhcd
from hatred of the Criminal. — From i Cor. vii.
12, 13, it appears, that a Chriftian wife may live
with an heathen hufband'. therefore taking a perloa
as an Heathen^ does not extend to dillblving the
feveral relations of human life — St. Paul, as before
mentioned, ordered an offender to be excluded
from the Church of Corinth; but in giving his
Cider he faid no more than what he thought
necefnry to make the Corinthians execute it. And
when he found they /;(7(^/ executed it, nothing can
exceed the tendernefs which he (hewed, left any

fnalei'jlcnt
' Forbes, 12. 3.2.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVI. 4.^^

tnakvolent feverity fliould be iifed, or the offender
" rwallowed*^ up with over-much forrowy He be-
came diffident of his own upright judgment, and
extremely cautious left he fhould be tempted [ttm\itQ A
by Satan) to indulge his well-grounded indigna-
tion fo as to delay his forgivenefs (as the minifter
of Chrift) longer than neceflky required. It is
with this idea that he introduces the words, " if I
forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your
fakes forgave I it, in the perfon of Chrift; left
Satan Ihould get an advantage of us; for we are
not ignorant of his devices*."

After citin^ 2 Theft', iii. 14. in order to enable
us to punifh, we Ihould read the next verfe, to
prevent all needlefs feverity of punifliment; and
all ufe of it on a wrong principle. — As a general
plan of puniftiing Chriftian brethren, we may,
laftly^ take Gal. vi. i.

So much for direct proof.

XVI. In the way of indired proof I will only
propole one ohjeEiion. ■ Is it to be conceived, that
when a man is cut off from the Church, he really
becomes, in all refpects, an Heathen ? — that would
be, according to what has been faid under the
thirteenth and eighteenth Articles, a thing greatly
to be dreaded. To this queftion I anfwer, God
muft finally judge of that; there will be no wrong
at his Tribunal; yet as it is taken for granted thai
He confirms the acls of his Minifters when they
admit men into Chriftianity, is it to be conceived,
that he will make them void, when they exclude ?
It feems a thing which offenders have great reafon
tofear. Even fuppofing that they are excluded

for

*• 2 Cor. ii. 7.

* 1 Cor. ii. 10, II. No one can doubt the delicacy ^m J

kindnefs of St. Paul's fentiments, who reads Mr. Locke on
this paflage.

VOL. IV. E E

434 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVII.

tor what is in itfelf an indifferent adion, yet de-
ftroying or weakening that authority^ which has
been conftituted for the general good, is furely a
fault, and one of great importance. Nay, I (hould
fay, that if a man was bona fide excommunicated
tor a right or good adion, performed for confcience
fake, yet if he did not do all in his poucer (fo as
not to violate duty) both to avoid offe}iding the
facred Magiftrate, and to reconcile himfelf to thofe
in authority, he would flill, though unfortunate in
this life, be punilhable in the next.

XVII. In making an JpplicatioUj we may dif-
penfe with a new form of affent, and alfo with
mutual conceffions : but it is not eafy to quit the
Article without one word concerning bnprovement.
I fear it is wanting both in 'theory and PraBice.
— Our ecclefuiilical Laws were formed at various
times, and on various occafions: (o that fome of
them cannot now be equitably enforced, in their
full extent ; and to adjufh them to the prefcnt
times, by a comparifon of circumilances, would
require uncommon ability. This gives room for
too mucli levcrity in thofc who vire inclined, or
intcrefted, to be fevere ; and for too much lenity
in the timid and indolent, Tlie mere attempt to
make a new Code, would be attended with good ;
as it^vould make our fpiritual inter efts to be better
underllood than they arc at prefent, more worthily
eftecmed, and more efftclually promoted.

With regard to p-aaice^ I bclieye every reli-
gious man will allow, that the ecclefiaftical Magil-
traies, whofe bufinefs it is to vifit and corred the
Church, frequently do not do it effectually. And
what is the reafon ? — Becaufe they have imperfect
laws; and becaufe they have not the firm iupport
of either the great or the fmall? What could
Hildebratid himfelf do in llich a fituation ? The

Great

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVII. 435

Creat are labouring to have all things work to-
gether, either for a fecure majority in Parliament,
or for perfonal influence, or command'. Eccle-
fiaftics are not to make the Reformation of all
men their fole purpofe, becaufe the Great are
their Patrons ; they muft not be ungrateful to thofe
who gave them the dignities they poirefs: —
gave them ? is that a gift which is conferred by
patronage P is not patronage a trji/}, a power ,of
naming, for the fole end of promoting the public
good ?

But as the Great mijiake the nature and confe-
quences of their power, the inferior orders are
carelefs and negligent about theirs ; they think not
of their own real value and importance. Have
they not the power of excommunication in them-
felves, in a very great degree ? and will even the
Great think it prudent to ad again ft the united
fenfe, if plainly rational and virtuous, of the gene-
rality of the people? It is not difficult to fee,
how, in this way, one evil begets a number. —
However, in like manner, one good might beget
a number, if we could once fet the procreation
a going. — Might not our ecclefiaftical Judges
imitate our civil ones ? they have no appearance
of any refped of perfons : They hang the wealthy^
Peer as a common felon. — But they are made, it
will be urged, independent : by what power ? could
not the fame give independence to judges eccle-
fiaftical ? — but we muft not lofe ourfelves in Utopian
{peculations.

-I conclude

f I fear there are too many inftances at prefent of Patrons

embezzling the property of tiie Church; by making bargains to

pay a ftipulated fum inftead of tithes; or by taking the Church

. Lands into their own occupation, and contouuding them with

their own ; or by other unjuftifiable meafures.

* Earl Ferrers.

E E 2

436 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIII. SECT. XVII.

I conclude with the tcftimony of Sir WiHlam
Blackflone in favour of the h'lghejl ecclefiaftical
Judges, left what I have faid Ihould direct any
one's attention towards them. He acknowledges*",
" to the honour of the fplritual courts," that
" juflice is in general" "ably and impartially ad-
mini ftered in thofe tribunals, efpecially of the
fuperior kind'."

•> Book 3. Chap. 7.

* This lad Seflion was omitted at Lefture; cliiefly for want
of time. It did not afterwards feem proper for the beginning of
a Lefture; and was not neceflary for Students.

ARTICLE

BOOK. IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. I. 437

ARTICLE XXXIV.

OF THE TRADITIONS OF THE CHURCH.

IT Is not neceflary, that Traditions and Cere-
monies be in all places one, or utterly like; for
at all times they have been diverfe, and may be
changed, according to the diverfities of countries,
times, and men's manners, fo that nothing be
ordained againft God's Word. Whofoever through
his private judgment, willingly and purpofely 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 (that other
may fear to do the like) as he that offendeth againft
the common Order of the Church, and hurteth the
authority of the Magiftrate, and woundeth the
confciences of the weak brethren.

Every particular or national Church hath au-
thority to ordain, change, and aboliQi ceremonies
or rites of the Church, ordained only by man's
authority, fo that all things be done to edifying.

I. On examining this Article, it feems as if
our beft plan would be, to join the Hijlory and
the Explanation together. Efpecially confidering
what has been already faid under the fixth and
twentieth Articles.

E E 3 II. In

438 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV, SECT. II.

II. In the Title we find the word Tradition; —
it means here, traditional praHice -^ in the fixth
Article it meant, traditional doclrine. KJyftem of
traditional proifticc, ibems to bear fome analogy
to what is called common Lazv. In the Article,
" Traditions and Ceremonies^* come together : thev
mean fomething of the fame kind of thing; and
are Joined here, as they arc frequently, in order to
fliew what fort of Tradition is meant. — A ceremony
enjoined by a written law, would not at tirft be
called a Tradition, yet what are called Traditions,
are fometimes, perhaps, after having been neglecled,
enjoined by written Laws. Generally, they are of
too little importance to be written, and from that,
their name has come; yet their name might never-
thelefs come to be the common name for rites and
ceremonies, and cuftoms, and all human religious
ordinances. The laft claufe of our Article has the
expreffion, " ceremonies or r//t?j."— The term tra-
dition comes from Jcripture\ as appears, not only
from mention of J^w/y/^raditions, but from i Cor.
xi. 2. and 2 ThefT. ii. 15. and iii. 6.

The Confeffion of AiiiJhirg conliders Traditions
as loconim ac temf-onrm ciijcrimiiia : the Saxon calls
them. Rites inflituted by human authority; the
Bohemian mentions cujloms as well as rites".

But though traditions and ceremonies may be
of the fame kind, yet the word ceremony docs
not ufually convey fo extenfive an idea as tradition.
If wc even take ceremony fo as to include Liturgies,
Sic. it confines the attention to prefent times;
and generally it fuggefis only things vifible : but
the word tradition, carries the mind back to pall

times,

* J\i/cs Teem to come nearer Traditions, than ceremonies do.
Rif us, i]i\:i{i, ratus r/ws ( Ainfworth, troni an old Grammarian),

may include any cujloms ; more than ceremcnv does. v-ee Lord

King's Primitive Church, jxirt 2. Chap. 10. or page 19S.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. II. 439

times, and fuggefts various inflitutions, v/hich
many do not diftinguilli from fuch as are of divim
authority. In order to fee how many of our re-
ligious inftitutions come under the idea of tradi-
tions, we fliould imagine ourfelves to aboIiQi, one
after another, all religious obfervances, which are
not exprefly commanded by divine law. Some would
difappear only in part, but others totally. — The
Confellions of the reformed Churches reckon the
great FeJiivaU as traditions; fuch as Chriftmas,
Eafter, &c. and even Sundays-, and morning and
evening prayers. Fajl-days are alfo mentioned in
the number, and Barclay fays, that Infant -Baptifm
is " a mere human tradition." And all Pfalmody,
and what we call Choir -Jervice, is inflanced in by
the Confeffion of Augfburg''. — But 1 only men-
tion here what is fufficient to enlarge our idea of
traditions to its proper extent. Varieties will come
by and by.

The reformed Confeffions lay down their doc-
trine about Traditions, with great care and folem-
nity. One may fee, that it muft be an important
matter to them to fet afide a number of Romifli
obfervances, and that without weakening the re-
verence of the people for fuch as they thought it
right to retain. They muft do it in the face of
their enemy's batteries, who would be attacking
them with the Canon-Law, decretals of Popes,
and all the moft powerful artillery of human au-
thority.—The Saxon Confeffion is fo ferious as to
end with a folemn prayer.

III. " It

^ It is eafy to give injlances', but the difRcuIty is, hy defini-
iion, tb dilliiiguifh univerfally a mutable from an immutable
rite: — is the ivater in Baptilm a mutable rite, as Socinus fays?
is the Cup a mutable rite, in the Lord's Supper, as the Romanifts
fay? (Trent Cat. Sefl. 70. or rather Trent Council, SefT. 21.
Cap. 2.) — Barclay's expreffion is in his Apology, page 355.
Edit. Birm.

£ £ 4

440 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. HI. IV.

III. " It is not necefary that Traditions," &c.
— this rather fecms to imply, that uniformity of
Tn^ditions is defirable.) whenever it becomes prac-
ticable: which lecms farther to appear from the
words utterly alike : they imply, I think, the more
like, the better. The uniformity of ceremonies
was mentioned in the third Book^

*' In all places," — at any one time.

IV. " For at all times they liave been diverfe."
The For implies, that experience of the diver-

fity ot Traditions, is an argument to prove, that
iamcnefs is not necellary. — And the argument is
Ib'ong enough for the purpofe ; efpecially if we
take a time near the firft publication of Chrifhia-
nity. 1 do not think we are intended to compare
diftcreot times j but only different places at the
fame time: indeed we may firft take any one time,
and afterwards any other time; without limit. If
this be a right idea, we cannot lay here, that the
Tews had more Traditions than the Chriftians :
though that obfcrvation may have weight in another
argument.

'* They have been ili-verfe^* — Here a large field
opens upon us. — Traditions, or human inflitution?,
auxiliary to Divine, are congenial to human nature.
A mere general principle of Piety would be rude
and lluggiih : would want drawing out and exer-
cifing; good fentiments die away, if not frequently
brought into a(5lion :— human inflitutions are re-
quired to furnllh occafions; fomc ibcial, lome
fohtary, fomc compofed of both forrs.

Occafions mufl return periodically; mufl remind
men of Ibme events, which will move them. —
Social occafions of exerciiing religious fentiments,
mufl be furnifhed and filled up with employments
of body and mind, fuited to their end andpurpole:

all
« Book Ml. Cl)ap V. Sfv!^. ii.

BOOKlV.ART.XXXIV.SECT.lv. 44*

all our bcft and fincft taftcs and feelings are to be
fet in motion, and made fublervient to Religion j
our love of Truth, our relifh of order; our tafte
for beauty, fublimity, harmony, are to be foli-
cited, engaged, intereiled : our paflions are to be
thrown into a devout courfe, and to have objects
prefented, which will excite and inflame them.

This will give fome idea of the end and deiign
of human religious infticutions, as common to all
men. — But in wliat a variety of ways may this
end be accomplilhed! to trace them out in the
Heathen, Jewi/Ii^ and Chvijiian religions, would be a
work of time.

Heathens will be allowed, at any one time, to
have had a great diveriity of religious rites and
inftitutions.

The 'Jezvs had a great number of ordinances
prefcribed by Jehovah, and by his Minifters;
thefe are not to our purpofe ; but they had what
they called 'Traditions ; not properly of divine au-
thority; their Talmud exifted orally long before it
was coiledled into a Book : and about thefe tra-
ditions they had different and contending'' -parties.

Chrijiians had very few injunctions from divine
authority, in comparifon of the number required
for carrying on a focial, regular religion ; for
teaching, praying, nouriQiing and animating reli-
gious fentiments. They might have an outline,
but each fet or fociety of Chriftians fupplied al!
the internal (Irokes according to its ruling genius
and turn. No wonder they differed ; the wonder
would have been if they had not differed. Indeed
it is impoffible to conceive, that tliey (hould not.
Every difference of judgment, education, liabit,
tafte, fituation, would produce a difference in what
we call Traditions. Nay, there would be fo many

openings
^ Art. VI. Sea. in.

442 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. V.

openings for variation, that if there had but been
one difpofition, the chances would have been infi-
nite againft a perfect famenefs or uniformity.

But let us be more particular j I mean, with
regard to Chriftians.

V. I might read you the opening of Tertul-
lian's Book de Corona militis; but as his Latin is
by no means perfpicuous, I prefer giving you the
tranilation from Wall's Book onMnfant-Baptifm.
—-'Eajler has been celebrated according to different
rules; and thofe who wanted to have Eafter-day on
the fourteenth day after the New Moon, whether
Sunday or not, were called^ Quartodecimans.

The twentieth Canon of the Council of Nice
orders Chriftians x.oJland during prayer. Though
perhaps nniformity was rather the end in view, than
any particular pofture ; it might be more eafy to
make all ftand than all kneel. — There is fomething
in the Canon like this, ut omnia 7F/?«7//ct fiant. —
Socrates is quoted by the Helvetic Confeflion as
fpeaking of the diverfity here meant, and Bifhop
Jewel fays, that Auguftin complained of the too
great number of ceremonies in his time. We
have two Epiftlcs of Auguftin to Jtinuariiis on the
fubject of variety of ordinances, ceremonies, tra-
ditions, in which he ftiews his ufual ingenwoufncfs
and liberality of fentiment.— Januarius had wilhed
to know what he fliould do about feftivals and
rites, in different fdaces where different cuftoms
prevailed: Auguftin's anfwer fcems mvich to our
purpofe^. " Alia vero quae per loca tcrrarun>

regionefque

•■ Wall, page 480, quarto, or Part 2. Chap. 9. Std. 4.

* See Epiphan, Hx-r. T£cro-a^£?xa»jE*aTiTa». Lardner's

Works, Vol. 2. page 243, 244. Lardner, Vol. 4. page 306.

Acriam did not keep Eafter at all, nor any other FelHvals, or
Farts.

^ Auguftin. ad Janiiar. Epift. (feu Lib.) i. Cap. 2. Edit,
Antv. 1700. Tom. 2. (in Vol. i.) page (orcolumji) 94.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. V. 443

regionefque variantur, ficuti eft quod alii jejunant
Sabbato, alii non ; alii quotidie communicant cor-
pori et fanguini Domini, alii certis diebus accipiunt.
Alibi nullus dies prietermictitur quo non ofieratur'',
alibi fabbato tantum et Dominico, alibi tantum
Dominico. Et fi quid aliud hujufniodi animad-
verti poteft, totum hoc genus rerum Hberas habet
obfervationes : nee difciplina ulla eft in his melior,
gvavi prudentique Chriftiano, quam ut eo modo
agat, quo agere viderit Ecckfiam ad quam forte
devenerit. Quod enim neque contT3.Jidem, neque
contra bonos mores elie convincitur, indifferenter eft
habendum ; et propter eorum inter quos vivicur
Societatem, fervandum eft."

The Eajiern and IVeJiern Churches have always
differed in many obfervances, though both under
the fame Roman Emperor. Under the twenty-
fourth Article we got a glimpfe of Afiatic and
Atrican Chriftians : they differ much in rites and
ceremonies, or in what our prcfent Article calls
Traditions, from the Chriftians of Europe.

In later times more Canons have been made by
Councils for inferior inftitutions, than ufed to be
made anciently : but fome Romifti Canons have
grown obfolete at Rome'i fome (of different ages)
have been iufpedted as not genuine; and thofe which
are, or have been, received, prove the diver fity for
which we are contending. Nay, Rome itfelf
allows of diverfity, fo that it be not againft the

Canon

* I fancy this is making ofFerings for t!ie (/ead. See Lardner
under Acrius. A. D. 360. V\''orks, Vol. 4.. page 306. — M>) ouv,

^r;ai, ,t!T^O!X(pi^nv vTTiq lcr^oxiK'-iiXYif/,ivcJv. Tcrtulliail COnfiriTlS

this; fee the palTage jull now referred to. Wall, page 480.—
" We give our oblations every year for the dead on the day of
their martyrdom."

' The circuniftances here mentioned appear from the Con-
feflions of the reformed Churches, particularly that of Augfburg.
—See alfo Burnet on the Article.

444 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. VI. VII.

Canon Law. — Of diverfity of Traditions ^/ince the
Reformation, I need fay nothing at prefent''. Some-
thing was faid under the twentieth Article.

VI. "And may be changed"— it is not faid
by whom 'y — there may be a competent authority;
what it is, may be fpecified by and by : this is the
Theory. With regard to pra^icCy Dr. Powell in-
forms us, that *' nothing is plainly^ wrong but
change;" but we mud interpret him by his con-
text : he is fpeaking of an ordinary flate of things,
in fome one place; whereas we are, in our minds,
comparing different places ; and when change of
traditions is recommended, or allowed, in any one
place, it is fuppofed to be made on fome extraor-
dinary occafion.

Indeed, if we attended only to the exprefTions
which follow, we mull judge, that the Article has
in view differing, at any one time, rather than
changing, that is, more than differing at different
times. However, if it is intended to juftify the
changing of Rotvijh ceremonies, as I fuppofe it
may, its chief meaning is, that traditions, or
human modes of executing divine Laws, may, at
the time when they are iujlituied, afiume different
forms according to different circumftances.

VII. The different circumftances mentioned,
are, "diverfities of CountrieSy times, and men's
manners.^^

Countries,— regionum; we fliould perhaps now
commonly exprefs the idea by Climates, though
climate in ftrictnefs, according to its etymology,

makes

^ One might look at the end of Qiieen Elizabeth's Preface
to her Advertifements (or Articles) of 1564: Sparrow's Col-
ledlion, page 123.— " Temporal orders meer ecchftalUcal,^*
means the fame with the ivaditicmi Ecclefiajiic^, in the Title to
our thiity- fourth Anitle. — Indeed all the things enjoined in
thefe Advertifemtnti are Traditions, in the fenfe of our Church.

' Sermons, page 3 1 .

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. VII. 445

makes only a difference of North and South.—
The manner of baptizing may differ in hot and cold
climates, or regions; immeriion fuits hot climates
better, and fprinkling, cold. In the Greek church,
a Fan is prefented to the Deacon in the ceremony of
Ordination, becaufe the Deacon's bufinefs is to
drive away from the Holy Elements, thofe infeds
with which Eaftern countries are infefted. — Mon-
tefquieu fays, to enjoin abftinence in general, is
reafonable ; to enjoin particular forts of abftinence,
is not fo, in an extenfive religion"^,

" Times" — this word is not in Bidiop Sparrow's
copy, xhoM^ temporum is in his Latin. — Whereas
Benner, in his Collation, has no inftance of times
being wanting, but mentions a MS where temporiim
is only in the margin, written with a red-lead
pencil. — Here the Region is given, as we fay, and
the times are fuppofed to vary. — Holland was once
fubjeft to the Spanifli Government : fuppofe a
fimple fmall republic to fucceed a fplendid monar-
chy, the fame traditions would not fuit both.

" Manners ^^ may vary, in a given region, and
in given times. Montefquieu" obferves, that there
ought to be more Feftivals v.-here lefs labour is
required to produce plenty. And that Conftantine
ordered Sunday to be kept holy in Cities, and not
in Villages ; becaufe though labour in cities is
Ljfeful, in villages it is necelfary".

Hats

^ Efprit des Loi.v, Liv. 24. Chap. 26.

" Efprit des Loix, Liv. 24. Chap. 23.

° Codex, de Fe.nis, Leg. 3.-~Monterqniea fays, that this
Law mull have been for the Pagans; but it i'eems to' me to .have
been for Chriftians. The day indeed is called Dies Solis, and
in other Laws Dies Dominicus, yet either name micht denote
Chriltian Sunday. — The whole twelfth title feems addrefTed, a^
one body of Law, to Verinus, and i'everal 0;' its laws relate to
Eajl-r, Chriflmas, Epiphany, &c. and aretiierefore undoubtedly
for Chrillians. — Pagans might be obligtd not to interrupt or

diEurb

44^ BOOK IV. Art. xxxiv. sect. viii. ix.

Hats are off in Englifli Churches'', on, in
Dutch.

VIII. "So that nothing be ordained agahiji
God's word." The Puritans would not be con-
tented with this ; they would have all ordinances
derived from the word of God : — and fo would the
Dutch Confeflion : the thing is impraclicable, as
was obferved under the twentieth Article j fo they
are obliged to allow little things, w^hich overthrow
their own notion. In the Dutch confc/Tion they
difclaim human ordinances thus; Nos itaque omnia
humnna inventa, omnefque leges rejicimus qu^e ad
Dei cultum funt introducls — ut iis confcicntix
ullo modo illaqueentur, aut obftringantur; - And
then they give the thing up by faying, that their
Prefbyters muft maintain and appoint order, and
preferve fociety : indeed they add, that even their
Prefbyters muft not deviate from what Chrift once
appointed; yet they admit of Z^Te;; when wanted
for concord, or for retaining them in obedience to
God. Who aims at more.^ — The ConfelTion of
Strojhurg, and fome others, like our Article, allow
any traditions which are not repugnant to the Word
of God,

IX. But though there may be an authority
competent to changing Traditions, yet the next
thing laid down is, that a private individual hath
not that authority. There is an authority, which
may repeal a ci-vil law, but yet the Law muft be
obeyed by a private fubiecl.

*' Whoiocver through his private judgment,
willingly and privately," &c. A man may violate
human ordinances involuntarily, or inadvertently,

or

diftuib Chrlllians. The Dies SoUs is, in this Law, calli.\l
venero.hllis.

P Popifh ceremonies would not fuit our Pafbyterian^, wei*
it for nothing clfe but diiFerencc of manners.

BOOK IV, ART. XXXIV. SECT. X. XI. 447

or through fome urgent bufinefs, as when watering*^
cattle on a Sunday; or through adefire of not loling
an opportunity of doing' good ; in fuch cafes, our
Article feems to excufe him. — Another thing feems
required in order to make him liable to the cenfure
afterwards mentioned, that he break traditions
openly. If he be induced to make free with human
rehgious obfervances, there is a difference between,
tranfgreffing difcreetly, privately, with apologies to
thofe who happen to know of his irregularity j
and tranfgreffing in a public, (hamelefs manner, as
if he gloried in it. The latter docs much more
harm than the former,

X. *' Which be not repugnant to God's word;""
—who is iojud^e whether an human ordinance be,
or not, repugnant to Scripture ?— it feems as if
the man who breaks the ordinance was here under-
ftood to judge; and as if it would be taken as a
fufficient excufe if he declared, he could not obey
fuch an ordinance without difobeying Scripture. —
Indeed it feldom happens, that this excufe' is
made; though it has been objeded to human or-
dinances, that they were not taken from Scripture.
— The only punifliment however, mentioned ia
the Article, is Rel?uke. — One confeffion rejeds CeU-
bacy ', as repugnant to God's word.

XI. " Ordained and approved" — it is not 0!
the nature of a tradition, according to its etymo-
logy, to be ordained, but yet that name extends to
all human ordinances for the exercifmg of religiaus
principles. — Approved feems more fuitable.

"By common authority" - common in Latin
is piiblicd. Authority over all tliofe, who are called

upon

•1 Lukexiil. 15. T johnix. 14.

' Neal, A.D. 1566. Chap. $— Powell, page 30.^ John Bxjr-
gcs's Anfwer rejoined, Pref. page 3, 4,

' Shorter Confeffion of Auglburg.

44S ROOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT, XII—- XV.

upon to comply r — not confined to a familj'-, of
finall (iiftridt, but extending to the whole corn-
mini ty.

XI I. " Ought to be rebuked openly," &c. — is
quotation, or nearly fo, from i Tim. v. 20. the
Greek word is iXi'y)(u}y and the Latin, argno.—
Openly, coram omnibus.

XIII. 'T^hree grounds are mentioned, on which
it is wrong for a private man to violate even the-
human ordinances of religion.

XIV. He *' offendeth againft the common order
of the Church." Every degree of difordcr mufh
check the formation and growth of religious ienti-
ments; and muft be hurtful to religious fociety.
Order may particularly refer to religious afjemhlies :
in them, every irregularity frustrates inftruclion,
and checks devotion. Uniformity" of ceremonies
was mentioned in the third Book, as well as the
nature of religious ^^v/^/^/yi)'.

XV. *' Hurteth the authority of the M-igif-
trate'^ y The authority of a magiflrate is not only
maintained by fear of particular punilhmcnts, but
by a general ienle of duty, which never quell;ions
the foundations of Magiftracy, but takes it as a
ihino- cilablilhed : indeed the dread of punifh-
ment is alfo in the mind of obedient lubjecfs,
general, fettled, and habitual : — Now, whatever un-
let ties men's habitrial regard to the Magiftrate's
authority, gives an opening to refradtorincfs in
people, who never before had any idea of rcfifling,
And that evil the condu(ft of him produces, who
openly violates what the magillracc has ordained, or
undertaken to enforce.

XVI. *'And

"• Book in. Chap, iv, Seil. 11. * Book 111. Chap. in.

y Civil or eccIeUallical Maoiftr.Ue? the argument holds as
to either : the ir.t;aber oK tiie Church is under obligntion both
to liis ccclefiaftical and his temporal Governors, to comply wit!^
human ordinances.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XVI. XVII. 449

XVI. " And woundeth the confcieiices of the
weak brethren^."— ^y weak brethren are meant,
thofe Chriftians, who judge by general ruleSy and
prejudices, without being able to fee the foundation
of fuch rules. It often happens, that a rule may-
be a very good one for common occafions, and yet
breaking through it, in fome particular circum-
fiances, may be no way wrong. If the weak
brother cannot diflinguifh fuch circumftances,
breaking the rule innocently, may do as much
harm to his morals, as breaking it in a manner
really wrong. And he who breaks a Tradition,
may do nothing which has in it a moral turpi-
tude, and yet his exa-mple may do as much harm
as if he did. Suppofe a man was perfuaded,
(which I am not) that travelling on a Sunday, and
having cards or mufic in the evening, were not
wicked in themfelves; yet he might abftain from
them for fear of corrupting Servants.

St. Paul fpeaks of this mode of corrupting, with
the greateft earneftnefs. As may be feen in the
following pafll^ges; from which it will appear, that
the expreflion wounding is fcriptural.— -Rom. xiv.
13. 15. 20. 21. — I Cor. viii. 9 — 13. — i Cor. ix.
19, &c. — Gal. V. 13.

XVII. This part about private men breaking
Traditions, was aimed at the Puritans % I fancy,
or fome brethren of their way of thinking; as the
Dutch were. There was a perfon called Flacius
Illyricns, who feems to have been very uncom-
plying: Melandhon held a controverfy with him.
—Indeed the German conteft about Adiaphorijis

was

^ There area great many expreffions in the Confeffions of the
reformed, dhoMtScandal, or giving 0^'Hff.

^ John a Lafco, the fuperintendant of tlie foreign Prote-
Hants in London, a Polifh Nobleman, feems to have been ii
Puritan, in 1550.

VOL. IV. F F

450 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XVIII.

was extended to merits, jullification, &c. — but
with regard to Traditions, Flacius lllyricus feems
to have laid, that it was better to give up any pre-
ferments' than to comply. — We have before had
an account of Bilhop Hooper'' s diftrelfes about
Habits ; and have obferved, that the Puritans ex-
cluded the civil Magiflrate from all authority in
fpiritual matters: how was anything to be enforced?
It was a pity they could not have formed ^.feparate
body peaceably; but of that enough under the
lall Article.

It may feem ftrange, that the Englidi did not
contrive this, while they were feparating from the
Church of Rome themfelves-, bur, I fuppofe, they
never thought of fuch a thing. — They had ad-
vanced fo far as to think, that the Pope had no
riglit to domineer over all nations ; that any Nation
might withdraw itfelf from his religious confedera-
tion ; but that a fet of Chriftians in a Nation,
could rightly and regularly, withdraw itfelf from
the National Church, might never enter into their
minds. — In the Saxon Heptarchy there might be
feven different Churches. And Bilhop Burnet
thought, that the different cufloms in our own
Church, meaning thofe of Sarum, Lincoln, Bangor,
Hereford, all reduced to one by the A6ts of Uni-
formity, might have had their rife under the Saxon
Government.

XVIII. The Familijis complied with all cere-
monies, and cared for none ; as Rogers, on
this Article, tells us from their Founder Henry
Nicholas.

XIX. The

•> Melanfthon, Epift. Theol. page 455. quoted by Rogers,
page 202 — Rogers alfo refers to Melan<^hon ad Paftores in
Coniitatu Mansfield, for a proof of melancholy eiFedts from
non-compliance. — And fee Neal, Vol. i. quarto, pageg;.— —
And John Burgcs's Anfwer rejoined. Preface, page 2. — And
Mofheim, ly Index,

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XIX. XX. 451

XIX. The lafl paragraph is additional: per-
haps it might be thought ufeful, in order to ftate
precifely what is the authority by which Traditions
may be changed. — The firft paragraph faid they
may be changed, but not by whomj the fecond
(as I fhould underftand it) that an individual
cannot change them ; then the third fteps in, and
fays, that a particular church can : that is, for itfelf.
This was a more explicit account than the former,
of departing trom the Church of Rome.

Before Toleration was allowed, there could not
well be a particular church which was not a
national Church, but now, I fliould think, there
might.

" Man^s Authority,'^ — means the authority of
Councils, Emperors, Fathers; Decretals of Popes,
Injunftions of Princes and Prelates.

*' Edifying" is taken from Rom. xiv. 19, — !•
This is a duty of imperfedt obligation ; as in
Art. XXXI I. Seft. XIV.

XX. It belongs to the Hiftory and explanation
of the laft paragraph, to mention fome of the
reafons affigned for changing the Romilh Tradi-
tions. Thofe reafons will Ihew us the faults into
which men may run in fixing upon religious ordi-
nances.— The Romifli Traditions then, we are^
told, were too numerous, fo as to over- burthen the
mind ; fo intricate as to perplex, and fo nice, that
the fear of not performing them all rightly, as not
doing fo was efteemed mortal fin, has driven fome
to defpair, and even*^ to J'uicide. They are not

fuited

'^ Confeffions in the Syntagma.

'' This is cited, in the Augfburg Confefuon, from Gerfrm, a
Romaniil, who was at the Council of Conllance. ( Of a village
in the Diocefe of Reims called Gerfon \ his name was really
Jean Charlier: he died 1429, aged 66.)

f F 2

45* BOOK IT. Amr. XXXIT. sect. XXI. XXI I.

(b^d to the ttofiBciij of the ChnQJati rd^tm,
which abolidied a peat number c4 ceremonies
wnbaat iabftktitirig others in their nxxn. Thej
b^ve y«a/V men prcCutoc oa their merits, aod io
have foperfeded the oiofir impoitiut fnadfia of
die ChrJoftiaa li^; as the flo^ of them has fiiper-
ieded the fbadj of the Scnptcres.— They were
fimeiftitioiB, chi]£ih% ridimiwis mnractfay a£ a
Ibber man. Soppofing cadi inchficreat in kSdi,
tber became finfiol by cxprcffing wraog ifntMiirts;
as m the caie mentiooed i Cor. x. 27, z8.

XXI. Hence tbofe tiaditioDS may be looked
upon as gead, which aie &w, fimple, plea£ng;
vi bicb exfTcife withoat faiJigaaBg^ whidh call into
acLiootbe beft pfindplesof human natme, apf^
them to Reh^oo, and are £ab6snnentt to them :
which ytdtead to no merit, and reqoiie fiole or no
fiudy; which are grave, rsdoojl^ mftrodive, be-
comincr; and ckar hrom all fiiperftidao and f*m-

tidlrn -

xxii. We have now finifhfd Hiftory and £x-
pbnadon: fomrfhing omft be £ad in the way

Tb-c: things n^ht be piopoCbd fcjr proof.

1. Tr^itioos need not be, in all places pre-
d't.y the £uDe.

2. Each hsSvidjud oog^t to cmfmm to thofe
ieakd b?^ that snthoricy to winch he is fubied:.

5. Eadi

e Third part cf Hoah' ob good Works- Bi&Dp Jcvd ia

STr22£i3a. ^KJsg EdwarcTi IsgnVtvug: Sparrow, pape 9

' Htrr, or at i^ ead c^ ihss Artick, aigix be reatl doe
** ' ' 't to oar Book of CoKnon Przjer ; a row^-minon vaack
^SD ociLncdly recosxrjesded.— Ia tUs pfaoe I read at
j,td7'? 2 pa&gCv ■taca imrr.l nsoattBtstr^ c^ib a ciKyiTiOK
of E£zTi c^fied JroeaU exarfims, bf ik Rer. lir. TmmJsI,
p2g£ ::i~i£5. TUb GcackaBii B Aadwr cf dbe Aadqci-
da c'f E^a^sm, tad of ievcnl ai^kal coapoidMi Ik tke
|^ic£ £ik sf GoBfis a&d <

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XXIII. XXIV. 4^3

3. Each particular or National Churchy hath
authority to ordain its Ovvn rites.

XXXI 1 1. For the firft, a reafon is given in the
Article, drawn from the experience ^ of all ages, —
The Confeflion of Augfburg cites Matt. x\'. 3. 9. ii.
— Rom. xiv. 17. — Col. ii. 16, &c.— i Tiai. iv. i,
—Might not I Cor. viii. 8. be added.^*

XXIV. That an individual ought to conform, is
proved from the reafon of the thing, and from
Scripture; but to avoid miftakes, it Ihoald be
again obfen'cd, that no fet of Chriftians is under*
ftood to belong to that Church, though fubfifting
in their ovvn Country, which they would quit, if
tb.ey had a full and free Toleration.

Confining ovirfelves to thofe who are real, willing
members of the Church, we need only aik, on a
foot of reafon^ can any end be obligatory, and not
the means neceffary for attaining that end } If
ever)' one fays, he will ufe his own means of pro-
moting Religion, that, from tiie nature of focial
religion, is the fame thing as determining to ufe
no means at all. All (who aflbciate) muft ufe
the fame means, or the end cannot be anfwered;
and there is no way for men to ufe the fiime
means, but fubmitting to authority. — Suppofe a
{ecretary is told to write a letter, (if I may acrain
ufe the illuftration), he omits to write it; he is
blamed; wQuld it not be thought very child ilh if
he faid in his excufe, that he never was ordered to
take pen, ink and paper ? all that he neglected was
what he had never been ordered to do }

\{ fcriptural proof be wanted, in a cafe where
fcripture might be fuppofed to be filent, we may
alledge the condud of St. Paul as recorded in
Acts xxi. 20, 21. 24. 26. and in Acts xxviii. 17.

on
e Sea. jv.
F F 3

454 EOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XXV XXVII.

on which may be read Dr. Wotton's'' remark. —
The firft fixteen verfes of i Cor. xi. relate to things
of Inferior moment, which had been taught ver-
hally. — The fecond verfe contains praife for keeping
-sTx^xSoc-it^y tranllated in the text ordinances, in the
margin, traditions. The fixteenth verfe founds the
obfervance of them on cuJlom\ and the lad verfe
of the fame Chapter fhews, that St. Paul intended
to give more verbal direftionsj fuch, feemingl}'-,
as he did not think it worth while to deliver in

writmg.

1 Cor. xiv. 40. fhews, that it is a fcriptural duty
to provide means foranfwering any end propofed.

2 Thelr."*ii. 15. and iii. 6. are about 7ij-afa(^o(rs»?,
which might relate to either doflrine or pradice.

XXV. Each particular or national church hath
authority to ordain its own rites. — This was, in
efFedl, proved of every religious Society before'.
With regard to a national Church, as diftinguilhed
from any other particular church, we might ob-
ferve, that either it can fettle and unfettlc its own
rites, or feme external power can oblige it to attend
Councils ; the contrary to which was fhewn under
the twenty-firft Article.

XXVI. As to zW/;Ti?7 proof, I do not recoiled
any objection but one, which feems of any weight ;
that is. Can a church oblige its members to obferve
all ordinances whatfoever ? — and this was anfwered
under the twentieth Article.

XXVII. Neither do 1 fee that I need detain you
by an Ai^plication. A form of alien t is not wanted.
— Mutual concefiions were confidered under the

twentieth

* Mifiia, Preface, pnge xlvi. See alfo Lardner's V^''ork?;,

Vol. II. page 346—353. In this DilTtitation of Lardner's

there is a good account ot St. Paul's Compliances.

i Art. xx. Sea. iv.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIV. SECT. XXVII. 455

twentieth Article. And improvements at the end
of the third Book ^.

^ The fubjeft of eating BIooJ might come under this Article.
— T did not enter into it farther than by giving the contents of
Lardner's DiiTertation on Adls xv. and of his remarks on A fts
xxi. 20 — 26. adding anything that occurred to my own mind.
A comparifon of thefe two paflages of Scripture would be very
ufeful to any Governors of Chriftian Societies, who were at a
lofs for rules of conduft when they were defirous of fuiting
man'i prejudices The Editor of Lardner's Works has given an
Index of Texts explained, by which the tw o paiTages may be
eafilv found.

F F 4

ARTICLE

45^

BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I.

ARTICLE XXXV.

OF THE HOMILIES.

THE fecond Book of Homilies, the feveral
titles whereof we have joined under this Article,
doth contain a godly and wholfome Doctrine, and
neceflary for thefe times, as doth the former Book,
of Homilies, which were fet forth in the time of
Edward the Sixth ; and therefore we judge them
to be read in Churches by the Minifters, diligently
and diflindly, that they may be underflanded of
the people.

Of the Names of the Homilies.

1 1. Of Alms-doing.

12. Of the Nativity of
Chrift.

13. OfthePafHonofChrift.

14. Of the Refurredion of
Chrift.

15. Of the worthy receiv-
ing of the Sacrament of
the Body and Blood of
Chrift.

16. Ofthe Gifts of the Holy
Ghoft.

17. For the Rogation-days.

18. Of the ftate of Matri-
mony.

19. Of Repentance.

20. Againlt Idlenefs.

2 1 . Againft Rebellion.

I . Here

1. Of the right Ufe of tlie
Church.

2. Againft peril of Idolatry.

3. Ot repairing and keeping
clean of Churches.

4. Of good Works ; firft of
Fafting.

5. Againft Gluttony and
Drunkennefs.

6. Againft Excefs of Apparel.

7. Of Prayer.

8. Of the Place and Time
of Prayer.

9. That Common Prayer
and Sacraments ought to
be miniftercd in a known
Tongue.

10. Of tlie reverend ellima-
tion of God's Word.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I. 457

I. Here again we begin with Hijlory,

The ancient Greek Fathers, Chryfoftom, Bafil,
&c. ufed to preach plain difcourfes to the people;
and the proper name for fuch a difcourfe was
*0^\hi9.. Sermo anfwers to it in Latin. Neither
word implies anything refined or elaborate: but
each rather denotes familiar, and popular difcourfe.
And fuch 2i\\Jermons ad Populum Ihould be.

In later times, the word Homily fignifies a popu-
lar difcourfe, or Sermon, regularly compofed ; but
it includes the additional idea, of being publicly
read, and profeffedly, by one who was not the
Author. Thofe of which we ufually fpeak, are
fuppofed to have been publifhed by authority.

Sparrow, in his Rationale, page 223, fays, that
by a Council at Vaifon (Cone. Vaf.) in France, in
cafe of the Prieft's ficknefs, &c. the Deacon was
ordered to read the Homilies of the Holy Fathers.
— I fee, by Cave, that one Cone. Vaf. was in
442, another in 529. — I Qiould imagine the latter
to be meant by Sparrow.

We are told, that in the ninth Century, fo large
a number of what v/e Ihould now call Homilies
as 209, were compofed by our Countryman Akuin,
Preceptor to Charlemagne, and ufed as ours were
intended to be \ — That Great Emperor fecms to
have known how to improve mankind. — I feel re-
gret that they are loft; probably they would be
plain, fliort, inftrudive.

But though in the ninth Century Preachers
might want helps, yet at the time of the Reforma-
tion, the need of them was inconceivably great. —
The country Priefts were extremely ignorant, if
they had defired to inftruft the people ; but they
were, a great many of them, given up to idlenefs

and

» Wheatly, page 283. from Sixtus Sinenfis.— Prieftley, Hift.
Corr, Vol. 2. page 125.

45S BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I.

and worlvlly plcafures. And from thofe who did
employ themfelves at all in inftrucftion, little good
was to be expected, either to individuals, or the
community. — The Papift taught in one extreme,
the Puritans in ^another; and the proper Englifli
reformed Miniftcrs, in a mean between the two;
but a mean, though the mofl reafonable, is leafl
■' likely to ftrike men, or to fucceed. — Nor were
teachers only of thefe three forts; all mens minds
were afloat, all running wild, being {ct free after a
long and flavi(h confinement; one might fay, there
were almoft as many feds as teachers What
effects mufl this have on the minds of the people 1
how delUudive mufl it be of every good prin-
ciple! — Dr. Balguy obferves, " That the fupport
of oppofite religions tends to the deflrudlion of
all religion ^" It happened moreover unfortu-
nately, that the Puritans were more able as well
as more diligent than thofe Teachers, who were
moii fupported by authority; fo that thofe of the
Englilh Lhurch, who uillied to do their bejl, were
not able to contend with their adverfaries; nor
. were they able, generally fpeaking, to give a fatis-
• .fadory account of the doctrine of Jiijlification, on
which the Reformation turned ; or to anfwer the
long-eftabliilied arguments of the Ronmnijis in
in favour of their Sacraments, celibacy, &c. — In
Ihort, all was either neglect of religion, or con-
fuf.on about it. — No wonder that preaching was
frequently fcrliddm. — It was forbidden by Henry
VIII. by Edward VI. by Queen Mary; and by
CHietn Elizabeth ; nay, in the latter end of the
reign of Elizabeth there were" ftill very few

preachers.

•• Dr. B;i!giiy, Charge v. pnge 256. and before and after
this pailagc.

"^ la 1^7?. See Neal, Vol. i. page 114. ij6. — See alfo
Nr.:I. I 2.;5. and John Burge?, Tref. page 3.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXV, SECT. I. 459

preachers. Neal fpeaks of eight thoufand parlfhes
which had no preaching'^ Miniiters. — And in Bifhop
Sparrow's coUedion we may find many authentic
expreffions'' to confirm the account now given.

There was, in the time of Henry VIII. an
intention^ of publifliing a coUeclion of Homilies,
but it v;as never executed. — Our firft Book, which
is mentioned in our Article, though the titles are
not there given, v^-as prepared in the firfl; year of
King Edward VI. in 1547, and copies of it were
diftributed throughout the Nation. — It is faid to
have been compofed, for the mofl part, by Arch-
bilhop Cranmer, though fome think that thofe
eminent men who had affifted in reforming the
Liturgy, were joined with him in compiling the
Homilies; Ridley, Thirlby, &c. and Heylin ,
fancies, he perceives in thofe compofitions, the
popular ftile of Latimer. — The method of diftri-
buting them was by a Royal vifitation :— a folemn
affliir 1 fuperfeding all other vifitations, not only
of Archdeacons, &c. but of BiOiops and Arch-
biihops. Not that the King went into any diftrict
in perfon; he was very young; but every thing
was tranfaded in his name. The nation was
divided into 7/.v circuits^ and a committee of five
was appointed to vifit each; confiding of two
Gentlemen, and one Civilian; with a Divine, or
Chaplain, and Regiftrary : a copy of the firll Book
of the Homilies was left, in this vifitation, for
every parifh Prieft.

Oux fecond Book of Homilies, the titles of which
are mentioned in our Article, was publifhed early

in
^ Neal, I. page 320.

<= Sparrow's CoUeftion, page Ji. 7^, 76. 123. 127.— See alio
Heylln's Laud, page 8, and Rutherforth's Charges, pagei.

^ Strype's Cranmer, page 148. For the other thiirgs here
mentioned, fee page 14.6. — Neal, i. page 31, 3a. and Hcylia'.-
Hi(t. Qiiinqu, page 550.

460 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I.

in the reign of Queen Elizabeth ; in 1560. — They
had been prepared, or nearly To, before the death
of King Edward ; and they feem to be, in a
manner, promifed in his Injundlions. — They were
compofed, in a good meafure, by Bifhop Jewel,
author of the famous Apology for the Refor-
mation^-.

Fox fpeaks of fome Homilies in Queen Mary*s
time.

After this, the Puritans were fo diligent and
powerful in preaching, and at the fame time fo
regular and decent in their manners, that fome of
their adverfaries, in the Church of England, wifhed
for more Homilies and lefs preaching : more homi-
lies for the Churchmen, lefs preaching from the
Puritans. This was the cafe of ArchbiOiop Ban-
croft *" at the Hampton Court Conference in 1603,
and afterwards of Heylin '. This looks as if the
Homilies had incidentally contributed towards a
remijjhefs about improvements in preaching : how-
ever, the number is very fmall for one to be read
every Sunday and Holiday. — Alcuin's 209 would
Lave been a properer number.

The number of Sermons prefcribed by Law,
was fmall, in the time of Elizabeth : and preach-
ingr Minifters were diftin2;uinied from others, be-
caufe none could preach without a licence from
his BiQiop. — But James I. made a Canon ordering
a Sermon to be preached every Sunday^; the

Puritans,

i See Sparrow's CoIleAion, page 11. — Neal, Vol. i. page

108. Compare Burnet on the Articles, Prefnce, page xii.

odtavo, with expofition of this Article, near the beginning.

Wheatly on the Common Prayer, page 283, fays, the fecond
Book of Flomilies was publillied in i 563, the year of the Con-
vocation.

^ Neal, I. 416. ' Heylin's Life of Laud, page 9.

'' Canon 4;;, that is, by a licenced preacher. — If any one
was not licenced, he could only, by Canon 49, read an
Homily.

BOOK. IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. I. 46 I

Puritans, always attentive to their bufinefs, con-
trived to get Sunday afternoons to addrefs tlie people
in : they would not call their difcourfes, Sermons-,
they were LeSiures : and that was the origin of
Lehtires; thefe Ledures would of courfe be in a
degree hoftile to the Church at firft; now they are
not fo in the leaft. — Puritans pleaded againft' any-
thing but Scripture being read in Church; they
were always enemies to the Apocrypha.

Dr. John Surges has been mentioned"" /?e/ore : —
he refufed to fubfcribe the Articles, except his in-
terpretation of fome paffages, might be accepted
by thofe in authority. Not being at fiiil: attended
to, he was deprived, in courfe. But afterwards,
James I. Archbifliop Abbot, and his Diocefan
accepted his fenfe as the rig//.t fenfe, and he was
reflored.— One Ardcle on which he offered his
interpretation, was this thirty-fifth. His Book,
in which this appears, was publilhed by command
of Charles 1".

Dr. Balguy° fays, " it feems, we are allowed,
not required, to read the homilies of the church,
inftead of our own private compofitions : efpecially
as thofe homilies are recommended to us with a
particular reference to the times in which they were
written." Yet in many laws, &c. minifters are''
ordered to read the Homilies unlefs they be licenced
to preach. — And the Rubric which fays, " then
iliall follow the Sermon or one of the Homilies,'*
&:c. muft mean a Sermon by a perfon authorized
to preach : a fermon, if the officiating IMiniftcr

be

' Rogers on the Article.

^' Book Hi. Chap. vii. Sed. iv. — Bookiv, Introd. Se£t.
VI. and in other pkices.

" X — 4 — 10, Sid. Coll. entitled, J.n anfivcr rejoined, &c.
page 23—26 : — The Dedication is to Charles I.

" Dr. Balguy, Difcourie 7 page 1 iS.

9 See Burn's Ecclefiallical Law, under Public Worjhip.

462 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II.

be a liccnfcd preacher, and chufe to preach a
fcrmon ; othcrwife an Homily. Neverthelefs, Dr.
Rilguy^s opinion appears to me to be juft : for it is
now the general p-n8ice to preach ; and not check-
ing pradice, is ratifying it. Then the form of or-
daining a Priefl is, " take thou authority to preach
the word of God." And old Canons before the
Reformation*^, enjoin preaching. — For a while
there was a neceffity for putting a ftop to preaching
without licence; that neceflity is acknowledged,
in our Article, to be the ground of publilhing the
Homilies; but in all cafes ofneceiTity, when the
difficulty which prefles is over, things return into
their former regular channel ; theretore, in this
cafe, when preaching is no longer dangerous, the
obligation to ufe the Homilies ceafes.

I conclude this Hiftory with mentioning, that
/)///)/;/'' fufpends his judgment in regard to this
Article, having never read the Homilies which are
the fubjec'l of it. — Some things in them might
pofTibly occafion difficulties.

II. Our next bufinefs is Explanation.

Godly^ — fometimes Euo-fSn? means pious, as op-
pofcd to virtuous^; and fo, 1 think, it does here;
though fometimes it means good, in a popular
fenfe, without diftinclion of Religion and Virtue;
as when it is oppofed to uSmog^ — All religious doc-
trines are not Vv'orthy of this epithet. The dodrine
of the Mais has been called blafplieinous.

" JPliolfumc'' doctrine, we had in Art. xi. lalu-
tary, ulciul; — "full of mercy and good fruits,"
according to" St. James's expreffion; or what we

fliould

? Burn, ibidem; and Sparrow's Rationale, i2mo. page 219.

T Third Appendix to iVlolhcim.

• Tit. ii. 12. * sPet. xi. 9.

^ James ili. 17.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II. 463

fhould more commonly call, of a good 'moral
tendency; godly relates to Religion, and wholjome^
to Virtue.

" Doctrine'' — the Latin word Docirka conveys
a more JLift idea than the EngliOi word Doclrine.
The meaning feems to be, teaching, inftrudtion.

DoSirine is fometimes '"^ oppofed to argiinientSy
illuftrations; figures of fpeech, &c.

Saying that the Homilies convey pious and moral
inftrudion, or " good and wholfome doctrine,"
feems to me to be oppofed to any high preten-
fions; feems to fay, they may not h^ perfccl^ they
may not be above criticifm^ but they are good and
ufeful. — And who that has read them attentively,
unprejudiced by the language.being fomewhat an-
tiquated, is fo perverfe as not to allow this? who
indeed does not allow it of any Sermon he hears,
if the fundamentals of it are not to him, heretical,'*
That cannot be the cafe while we conceive our-
felves members of the Church of England; becaufe
the principles of the Homilies muft be the lame
with thofe of the Articles. — Take the words
literally, and it is enough if piety and virtue are
inculcated in two pages, though all the reft be
worthlefs and infipid ; or even foolifli. — But in all
interpretation, we fhould aim at finding out the true
intent and meaning of the Author : and any perfon
means to fpcak, or exprefs himfelf, on any fubject,
as it is tifually fpoken of.

Suppofe then you had been hearing a Sermon,
might not you fay of it, naturally, ' Our Preacher
gave us a very good Sermon to da)', in a fpirit of
true piety and virtue; I hope his hearers will reflect
upon it.— That reconciliation of St. Paul and St.
James, though a fenfible one, was not the very
befl in my judgment; but the Sermon was a very

' good
^ Bennet's DIredions; on the Article.

464 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II.

good and ufeful Sermon r'— Such fecms to be the
meaning ot the account which our Article gives of
our Homilies. It cannot poffibly mean that they
are totally perfedy unexceptionable, fuch as can
never be improved upon by the human underftand-
ing. Indeed the charadler given of them (hews
great moderation; efpecially confidering how very
good they mud appear when new.

*' And neceJJ'ary for thefe times -^^ — that is, for the
beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign : as the
Epiftle to the Galatians was for the times in which
it was written: — but necejjary feems oppofed to
godly and wholfome: — the difcourfes are godly
and wholfome in themfelves, without confidering
any particular flate of things, but for thefe times,
they are necejpiry : for times when all would be
confufion and diforder v/lthout them; when that
tmi/y of do^rine, which is neceffary to the very being
of religious fociety, is unattainable in the common
method of preaching. — I would farther obferve, on
the word necejjary, that it feems to imply what
we ordinarily call a cafe of necejfity : the nature of
which is, to occafion certain meafures for a time,
and to have them left off when the neceffity
ceafes ''.

" And

y I never was more furprifed by a piece of crlticifm than by
one in ihe Mcnt/ily Revieiu fov September 1790, page no, per-
filled in, page 360, of the fame Vol. in fpite of the remonftrance
of E. P. — In which, the words, " //le/e tizzies," are fuppofed to

be iinderftood by each fubfcriber, of his oiv?i times. The

Critic ridicules the notion of any one's underrtanding them of
the times of the Reformation ; and argues, by way of reduclio
ad abfurdiini, thit, if fuch were the cafe, any one who fub-
fcribed the Article, mufl underiland ////?o/;>S nay, he might go
on to oi/icr articles, and take t/ia.'i as declarations to be conllrued
by fome fort of reference to the times in which they were made.
— How much Hiftory any one muft underftand for oar pre/'ent .\rt.
has already appeared; with regard to ct/iers, I have endea-
voured

BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II. 465

*' And therefore we judge them," &c.— who is
meant by the word we ? Queen Elizabeth, I ap-
prehend.? not the Subfcriber. The words feem
part of an injunftion; I do no remember any
thing like them in the Articles ; except " we
decree" in Article xxxvi.

" By the M in i Iters, " — feems to confirm this
notion ; it would be an odd thing for a Candidate
for Deacon's Orders to fay, I think it proper, that
fuch a particular fet of Difcourfes (hould be read
by '* the Minijlers''

" Minifters," are diftinguiflied from Ucenfed
preachers.

" To be read," - thefe words want no explana-
tion ; but yet they fuggefl the difference between
preaching and reading. When a man reads any-
thing he does not anfwer for its being true : a man
may read what is ever fo filfe, without the lead
impeachment of his veracity. In a Court of
Juilice, if a Cryer reads a depofiiion, he has no
concern with the truth of it. The honefh Chap-
lain of Sir Roger ^ de Coverly, read to the Family
a Sermon, firfh of one author, and then of another;
he gave their illuftrations and arguments fairly ;
they might differ from each other; that was no
concern of his. If the Statute Lazv of the Land
requires me to read feveral pages of a book in a

certain

voured in the third Book (Chap, ix.) to fhevv how far Hirtory
is ufeful for afcertaining their fenfe : and on every Article I have
thought it well worth while to make fome hiftorical obferva-
tions. — T believe the fenfe of " thofe thnes" given by the
Reviewers, is quite ne^-w. All other accounts which I have
ever feen, make the expreffion relate to the times of the Reform
?fi at I on. — {Book ui. Chap. ix. Sedt. vi.)

There is an appearance, in the above Criticifm, of defpijing
the fubjedl, {0 as not even to iKiiJh to feem tQ be reifonable
upon it.

2 Speftator, No. io6.
VOL. IV. G G

466 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. II.

certain aflembly, it muft be very bad ir\deed, or
very erroneous, idolarrous, &c. before I fhould
think myfclf obliged in honour and confcience to
refift : in fuch a cafe might not the reader be
allowed to fufpcd his own judgment ?

Heylin wilhes there had *' been more reading
of Homilies, in which the reader fpeaks the fenfe
of the Church ; and not fo much of fermonizingy
in which the Preacher many times fpeaks his own
fadious and erroneous^ fenfe." — I have fometimes
thought, that even a Preacher ought to preach
the fenfe of the Church, and not his own fenfe;
as I had once an occafion of mentioning before **.

Is then Bilhop Burnet's obfervation juft, that
one fhould believe the Romanifts to be Idolaters,
before one figns this Article ? The Reader need not
form a judgment; he reads to the Congregation
the pafTages which arc quoted in the Homily, from
Romifli writers ; and the arguments which are there
ufed; let every man judge tor himfelf.

The titles of the Homilies vary, in different
places where they occur, more than might be
wilhed: of the Homily of Juftification we fpoke
under the eleventh Articled That called the
tenth Homily in our prefent thirty-fifth Article, is
entitled thus, " 10. Of the reverent eflimation of
God's Word;" but in the Book of Homilies it is
entitled, " An information for them which take
offence at certain places of Scripture ;" and one
ihould be aware of the fame irregularity in other
inflances. - Sometimes a title is more full in one
enumeration, fometimes in the other.

III. We

* Heylin's Laud, page 9.

'» Book III. Chap. v. Seft. v. — I am glad to fee a Confir-
mation of this idea Irom authority : See Sparrow's Rationale,
page 2ig, duodecimo.

«^ Art. XI, Ssft. xxK

BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. III. IV. 467

III. We (hould now proceed to Proof; but it
ieems to me, that our Explanation has rendered
proof unnecelTary : at lead dire A proof: perhaps
it m;iy be thought, that we ought to mention fome
objeEiions to the HomiHes.

IV. I. It has been faid, then, that when our
HomiHes reprefent'' different Patriarchs as defirous
to have the Meffiah for a defcendapt, they err;
becaufe it was well known, that the Meffiah was to
be of the Tribe of Judak. But the Homily is
fpeakingof Abraham and Jacob; who both would
entertain fuch a with before Judah was born.

2. It has been faid, that paflages of the Apocry^
pha are^ afcribed to the teaching of the Holy Ghojl.
— But the compilers of the fixth Ardcle would
fcarcely make an Homily to contradict that Article
m fenfe : — on examination it appears, that forae
paffages of the Apocrypha are mixed and incor-
porated with otheTS from the Book of Proverbs;
and they, all together^ are pioufly referred to the
Holy Ghoft. And why may we not refer any ex-
preffion, as well as any a6tion, which we think
good, to divine influence ?

Such a fentiment as is exprefled in our Homily
by words taken from the Apocrypha, if it occurred
in a work of the Imagination, in polifhed lan-
guage, would by fome be called an heavenly fenti-
ment. Little more feems to have been meant, in
former times, when fome mention was made of the
Holy Ghoft : only the view of the fubjedl might
be always religious when fuch an expreffion was
ufed. For the ordinary manner of referring events
to heaven, fee Art. x. Sed. xxxix.

Making

^ Homilies, 8vo. page 290.-— The objeftion is mentioned in
Eingham, Vol. 2. page 742, folio.

^ Page 303, oitavo. — on Alms, feccadPart.
G G 2

463 BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. IV.

Making fuch poor objc6lions as thefe does in
reality rcfled: great praife upon our Homilies.—
Some exceptions, I think, have been taken to the
Homily on Rebellion^ The reconciling of St. Paul
and St. James has been thought not fo good as
fome more modern. I have owned that I could
not quite come up to fome exprcflions about good°
works. But if we even fubjcribed to the Homilies
(which we do not) and many more improvements
had been made fince they were written, than thefe,
or than have been made, I Ihould think myfelf
fafe, on the principles laid down in the third Book*".
I have hitherto fpoken, fince 1 entered on this
Article, as if our Homilies were only excufeable,
and deferved no praife; but diat was only for the
fake of thofe who have a lefs favourable idea of
them than myfelf. — I have really a very high opi-
nion of them, and I read them with much pleakire;
they fecm to me to fhew ftrong intelleds and fine
feelings ; a very great infight into the true mean-
ing of fcripture, and a very nice and accurate
knowledge of mankind. They abound with fine
ilrokes of eloquence, and they contain fome in-
ftances of the ridiculous, which may be imitations
of ElijaJi's farcafms on the Prophets of Baal.

The authors of them have been alfo very con-
verfant in the writings of the Fathers, and in
Church- Hiftory.

To mention one or two in particular; I have
already quoted palfages from the fecond, third,
fourth, and fifth, fixteenth, twenty-firfi, and the
twenty-feventh. I have alfo recommended that on
Matrimony'. But I thought we received the molt
important fervice from thofe on what may be

called,
*" Bennet, on the Article, (D*ire£lions).
K Art. xm.Seft. v. Homily, part ift. on Good Works.
*■ Book n I. Chap. vi. and Chap. ix. Sed, x.xi.
» Art. XX v.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXV. SECT. V. 469

called, in a, large fenfe, Jujlification. — Strype is of
opinion \ that the Homily on Salvation was par-
ticularly the compofition of Cranmer himfelf. And
Billiop Horjley praifes the fet' which we now fpeak
of, and recommends them ftrongly to the perufal of
the Clergy" of his Diocefe,

When we were treating of fingle life, I had in-
tended to read the conclufion of the eleventh, as
fusgeftincr rules for makins; that ftate innocent.

If thefe compofitions contam fo many thmgs
worthy of notice in the prefent times, how valu-
able muft they have been in fuch a dearth of
Dodrine as prevailed at the times when they
were publifhed! — I before had occafion" to ob-
ferve, that they throw great light upon our
Articles J and therefore I will now only add, that
I find them continually improve upon me; jhe
more 1 read them, the more I find in them to
approve and admire.

This opinion, being in reply to objcclions, is
part of our indireft proof.

V. As the " times" are, in this Article, ex-
prefsly taken into confideration, any Application,
arifing from eftimating the difference of times,
feems to be unneceflary.

To enter into a difcourfe on the nature and
benefits of preaching, would carry us too i\x out
of our way; yet I may juft obferve, that our
approbation of the Homilies muft not be under-
ftood as if they fuperfeded the compofition of
Sermons at this time: I faid fomething of this
before, in the third Book °.

^ Strype's Life of Cranmer, page 149.

1 See thefe fpoken of coUeflively, Art. xi. Sed. xxi.

>" Charge, 1790, page 36.

" Introduftion to Book iv. Se£t. iv.

" Book III. Chap. v. Seft. vi.and Chap. ix. Sed. vi.

G G q ARTICLE

470 BOOK IV. AUT. XXXVI. SECT. I.

ARTICLE XXXVI.

OF THE CONSECRATION OF BISHOPS AND

MINISTERS.

THE Book of Confccration of Archbifhops and
Bilhops, and Ordering of Priefts and Deacons,
lately fee forth in the time of Edward the Sixth,
and confirmed at the fame time by authority of
Parliament, doth contain all things neceflary to
fuch Confccration and Ordering : neither hath it
any thing that of itfelf is fupcrflitious or ungodly.
And therefore whofoever are confecratcd or ordered
according to the Rites of that Book, fince the
fecond year of the forenamed King Edward, unto
this time, or hereafter fhall be confecratcd or or-
dered according to the fame Rites; we decree all
fuch to be rightl)'-, orderly, and lawfully con-
fecratcd and ordered.

I. The twenty-diird Article was about the fub-
]e6t of ordaining in general; this is about the
EngliJIi mode in particular.' Jt will be difficult to
avoid fome repetition; but I will endeavour to
avoid it as far as may be, without maiming our
prefent fubjefl.— I begin with Hijlory. And here,
as in fome former Articles, it appears to be our
beft plan to begin with what feems to be the
general reafon of the fads before us.

A religious

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. I. 47I

A religious teacher, commiffioned immediately
by Heaven, has a fyftem of religion to publifli
throughout the world. He muft employ men
under him as his inftrumcnts. — He fends a fmall
number on the bufinefs, he travels about to fome
places himfelf. He dies. His adherents are not
difmayed; the fame fmall number take a leading
part: they conceive themfelves encouraged from
above : they fet themfelves upon fixing their new
Religion in different towns and cities; they form
focieties at each place, which may fubfifl and in-
creafe, after they have left it.— That is, they leave
fome perfons veiled with authority. Thefe mufl
be fteady, fober-minded perfons, and of mature
age and prudence. Sometimes they meet with
one man much more fit for their purpofe than the
refl; to him they give the more authority on
that account ; fometimes they find feveral perfons,
equally qualified, or nearly fo; they divide autho-
rity amongft them, make them a Council or Senate.
Yet, in order to proceed fmoothly, fome one mufl
prefide even in a Council. — And when one man has
the chief authority lodged in him, he muft alk
advice, and confult with others : no fear of that,
where a man has the good of fociety entirely at
heart, and is unbiafTed by interefl, or ambinon, or
other indired motives. Nor, in fuch a cafe, is
there a necelTity for defining exadly each man's
powers; or forming what is called a Conjlitutioni
each man will know, or be taught, the place he is
lit for, and in that he will ad. Syflems of rela-
tive powers, or conflitutions, are only for thofe,
who, without them, would fall into diflenfion and
anarchy.

In different places, fomething is found to depend

upon men's habitual notions and feelings ; that is,

upon the kind of government to which they have

G G 4 been

4/2, BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. I.

been accuftomed, in civil, religions, or domeftic
fociety. — But ihoie who want to eftablilh reli;:;ious
focieties, mud not only have proper perfons to
govern, but to perform the offices of religion. It
leems a thing of courfe, that Ibme of thofe offices
fhould be performed by thofe who prcfide, or
govern; even the moft diflinguiflied offices; but
perhaps there may be a want of fome perfons to
give themfelves "doholly to performing offices of
Religion, and therefore to have no part in tlie
cares of government; if fuch want appear, fuch
officers muft be appointed. — The things now men-
tioned are capable of a great variety of combi-
nations, fo as to produce a great variety of forms
of religious fociety.

Now only ufe the common nama for the perfons
here defcribed, and we have a general view of our
lubject. — For the one m:in, and the prefid^nt, put
Bi/Iiopy or overfeer : for the Council or Senate, put
pre/bytery ; and for the Senators, Elders or Pre/-
byters\ and for the officers ot Religion, put Ajjjhovoj,
Minifters, Deacons; and it is cafy to conceive,
that a Bifliop may be an Elder, that Elders may
a6t as overfeers; that a Billiop may be a Ajaxoysj,
and that a Ajaxovo? may be an Elder : and yet that
a Bilhop may be a fuperior to Elders, and lupcrior
lo LiccKovoi.—j^ldermen are Elders: a Alayor is an
Alderman, and yet fuperior to Aldermen; Mayor
and fome Aldermen may be Minifters (Aij^xoyoj) of
Juflicc; and a Corporation may have fome Minif-
ters of Julticc which are not Aldermen '.

II. Let

" See Rom. xili. 4. for Miniflers or Ben.cons of Jiiflice, if I
may fo fpeak. The word Minijitrs is the Englilh for in:vtinoi\,
Luke i. 2. and i Cor. iv. 1. Therefore I ufe the word .^ia«o»o«
in Greek, becaufe il it is trar.flattd eitht:r Minilhr or Deacon,
it fec-ms to exclude the other. Mi^ht it Jiot be al.vays tranf-
lated Minijier? — For JUcrmatiy fee ijkixiner's Lexicon Ety-
mologicon.

HOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. II. 473

II. Let us now turn to Hiftor\\ and as It does
not appear to me, that the Scriptures lay down any
form of carrying on Religious Society, which Is
to be followed on fcriptural authority, in ail places,
and at all times, I need not rcferve fcriptural fads
for Proofs but may make them a part of the
Hijlory. — Acls xi. 30. Elders arc mentioned (I
mean Chrijlian elders, tb.e Jewilh were members of
the Sanhedrim), but their appointment is only
implied. Acts. xiv. 23. Elders are Iblemnly ap-
pointed, and in every church : the fort of perfons
and the numiber, no doubt, fuitable to each place.
— Ads XV. and xvi. Apoftles and Elders are men-
tioned together, and Acls xv. 23. Apoflles^ Elders
and Brethren -y the Apoftlcs were moveable, the
elders and brethren, or commonalty, fixed ; the
Elders governing the Brethren (or commonalty)
in the abfcnce of the Apoflies.— ■ Ads xx. 17. St.
Paul at Miletus fends for the Elders of Ephefus to
come to him. — i Tim. v. 17. Elders who ride
well arc to have honour. — i Tim. I v. 14. com-
pared with 2 Tim. i. 6. feen^.s to fliew, that the
Elders joined in the ceremony of ordination; even
of Timothy himfelf: in 1 Tim. v. 22. Timothy
is mentioned alone, as ordaining, but as it Is in
the way of exhortation or advice to Timothy, the
Elders might not be mentioned though they did
join. — Ads vi. 6. all the Apollles lay on hands. —
Tit. i. 5. Titus is to ordain (xaSirw/z-t) Elders in
every city:— an hundred cities in Crete^ and no
Bilhopbut himfelf. — James v. 14. fpeaks of Elders
as cuftomary. — i Pet. v. i. Peter calls himfelf a
o-uiWTT^Eo-SuTE^o?, a fcllow-prcfby tcr, or Elder; and
in the next verfe, fpeaks of Elders as untrxoTiivTiq,
overlooking, and feeding the flock of Chrift, the
A^;)^t7ro</x»iv.— St. John calls himfc'f, at the opening

of
^ Powell's Thefis, page 366.

^74 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. II.

of his fecond and third Epiftles, 'O Tsr^fo-^urf^o?,
« the Elder." No Epiftle is addrefled to tlie
Elders. That to the Philippians is addrefled to
the Chriflians at large, with the Ettio-xottoi? and
Ajaxoioij: it there were '■^ ciders \ri every city ^\\\\Q.'it
muft be at PhiUppi : they might be included in
tlie word nrKyy.oTron;, as e-mjy.onhvTit; : why che, for
fuch a Church as Philippi, is E-mc-KOTroi in the plural
number" ?

The name of Ettjc-xotto? has been thought to
come from the lxx, If. Ix. 17. It fignifics Over-
Jeer. In the Englilh Bible the word Bilhop occurs
but three times, befides Phil. i. i. already men-
tioned, and I Pet. ii. 25. which lad is figurative :
the words are, " the fhepherd and billiop of your
fouls." The idea of Shepherd is more common than
that of Overfcer : but they are joined Afts xx. 28.
as well as here: the Greek word in Ads xx. 28.
for Overfeer^ is ETncxoTro?. — timothy may not be
failed a Bilhop, but he confers honours on the
Elders, proportioned to their dcf^rts. He receives
accufations againil them : and Titus ordains them:
thefe are ads of a Superior. At firft, Apollles directed
Elders. — Ads XX. 17. Paul, as before, fends for the
Elders from Ephetus to Miletus. — Peter exhorts
Elders. And the exprelfion, " Apoftlesand Elders,"
occurs feveral times. -Whatever is fuperior to
Prefbyters, we fliould call a Bifliop''.

The

* Lardner mentions a notion, not as his own, that there
mio-ht be, early in the Iccond Century, /a-o Bilhops of Antiocli
at one time, one over Jcwijh, the other over Gentile Chrif-
tiam. Works, Vol 2. page 66 there might, at any time, be
fome ETTiffxoTroi fuperior to the ordinary Elders.

^ For the ground of the oblervations here made, fee Afts

XV. 22. — I Tim. V. I. 17. 19. — Titus i. ?•— » P<^t. v. i

I Tim. V. I. feems at firll as if Timothy nad not a right to
rduhe an Elderj but when we compare that paffage with the

otliers.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. III. 473

The word Deacons occurs but in one Chapter
(except Phil. i. i. before-mentioned) namely,
I Tim. iii. — Atav.ovo? ofcener; Minijlers about five
times, but not as the name of an office; ServantSy
or Injlmments would have ferved the purpofe as
well, — It is commonly faid, that Deacons were
appointed, Ails vi. — the peiibns ordained to an
ceconominal office are not called fo : nay, thofe
who were not appointed, are faid to perfevere in
the Ataxovtft — T8 Xoyv^ as the others in the Ajaxovj*
Tvi HaOiifxE^iv'*). — Patil was a Ataxovo?".

Such are the Scriptural Fafts with regard to our
three ranks of perfons ETrto-jioTroj, rTcfc-fuTf^o?, and
Ataxovo?. I have meant to make a complete enu-
meration of them : they feem to confirm our
notion, that anyone may be all three; though the
ETTtfl-jtoTroj is fuperior to the two others, I have
feen no mention of any authority in the ■nr^ta-^vTs^o?
over the Aiaxovo?^: nor do I fee all three mentioned
together, in Scripture.

III. We come next to the Apcftolic Fathers.
Firfl premifing from Bingham^, that the Grecian

and

others, the meaning feems rather to be, that though in ftrifl-
nefs he might rebuke an Elder, yet on account of" his youth,
and the age of the Elder, it might be advifeable for him to
faften his rebuke into an intreaty : nay, his youth might make
it more becoming in him to ufe gentlenefs even towards younger
Chriftians. — Rebuke not, but, fcems to have fomething of com-
parifon in it ; or a preference of one mode to another ; both ia
ftriftnefs allowable.

* I Cor. iii. 5. — aCor. xi. 23. — On this fubje6t one might
read Lardner, Vol. a. of his works. Preface, page vii. ix.— -
And one might afk, why St. Stephen and the perfons ordained
with him (Ads vi.) have hetn czW^di Deacons . Even the accu-
rate Dr. Powell, page 366, calls themfeptem Diaconos.

^ That the Aia^^o^/o? might be of dignified rank, appears from
Bingham's account of Archdeacons, i. 21. 1. 3. — An Arch-
deacon was the head of the Deacons, and was fometimes made a
Bifhop. SeeaJfo Bingham, 2. 10. 5.

* Bingham, 9. i. i.

47^ BOOK VI. ART, XXXVI. SECT. III.

and Roman ciiflom in forming chil focietics in
Towns and Cities, was not unlike what has been
now mentioned. — Each Town or City was governed
by a Senate, and by a chief Magiftratc, who was,
at the fame rime a Senator, and above the Senate.
The Council had the names of B«A», and Senatits^
Ordoy Curia; and the Magillrate was called Ditia-
tor^ or Defenfor Civhatis: his authority extended
to a little dijtance round the city''.

Now it fecms as if the Apofllcs and their (\k-
ccflbrs, in planting Churches; had formed focietics
fimilar to thefe, leaning a little more or Icfs to the
Monarchical, or Democraiical forms, according to
the abilities and difpofitions of the perfons, and the
cujioyns of the place. So that, the combinations of
power admitting of fo great a variety of forms, it
might happen, that no two Chriftian Churches had
precifely the fame form of Government.

Clemens Ronianus, wiiiing to, and therefore about,
the Church of Corinth, fixed in a Grecian mer-
cantile city, fpeaks as St. Paul does wTiting about
the Church of Philippi : he mentions only Erjo-xoTre*
and Aiaxovji '. — He laments a perfon's being de-
pofed TYig ETTto-xoTTt)? — from the fuperintendence:
and then adds, happy are (not the E-rrKyy.oTroi, but)
the Eiders who cannot be depofed ; who are fixed
immoveable in Heaven^. He alfo, according to
Lord King, makes rtyn [j-tvci, wliich was a name for

BiJhopSy

^ The fettlcment now (1792) fixing at Surra Leof/e, is
governed by a Superintendent and Council.

^ Clemens Rom. 1. Ep. ad Corinth' os. Edit. Rufiel, (Patres

Apoftol) Sed.. 43. compared with 44. Ewtic-xottoj in the

plural, in one church, mult, I Ihould think, imply fome kind
of Council : even if Epifcopi were a few leaders, they would
confult together.

'' Ibid page 170, i7r.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. III. 4/7

BiJJjops, equivalent to IT^fo-^uTE^o*'. He fpeahs of
jiibjehion to Prefbyters.

Polycarp alfo writes to the Pliiiippians, and of
conrfe, of the Church at Phihppi ; a town in
Europe, of Grecian manners and cuftoms, pro-
bably; I do not fee that he mentions BiJIiops; but
he exhorts the Philippians to be fubmiffive to the
Prcjhyters"" and Deacons. Yet he himfelf was Bifhop
of Smyrna, and writes from thence ; in his own
name, and the name of the Pre/byters who were"
zvith him. — Compare his Prefbyters and Deacons^
with Paul's Bljliops and Deacons., when addreffincr
thtfame Church, and they will fee m to mean the
fame Officers. — I Ihould conjedure, that a monarchi-
cal Form of church-government, had never place
at Phillppi.

Ignatius was bifliop of Antioch in Syria : and
from thence he was dragged, even to Rome, to
be torn in pieces by wild beads : on his way,' he
was fuffered to flop at Smyrna, with Polycarp,' the
Bifliop there. From thence he wrote to the
Romans; and to three Churches near him; to
the Ephefians, Magnefians, and Trallians. And
.afterwards, when he had proceeded farther on his
journey, he wrote from Troas to Polycarp", and

alfo

» Lord King's Primitive Church, page 89.— Clem. Ep. Seft.
57. page aio, RulTel, and page 211, notei_Twv ^^^s^a^v ^

But I find one or two places where >;>a/'/,evo» feems to me to
mean ci^vil Magiftrates, and ■B^sj^v-n^oi old men; the aged :
fee Sea. _i. (pase 8.) and Seft. 21. (page 94.)— And docs not
the lall lentence in Seft. 40. mean three orders of Chriiliau
Mhiijlers? Le-vite w'^'i not uncommon amongfl Chrillians for
a lower order of Church Minifters, or Clergymen : and the
context here is about Chriltians. For fubjedion to Prelhyters
fee Chap, or Seft. 57. '

ni Polycarp. ad Philipp. Se^fl. 5.

" In fcription. — Could o-fi/ avrJ tsr^saCvTe^o*, imply Syp-^.'sc--
«vT6^oi } Fello-iv Prefbvtersr
° Ad Pel. Cap. i:.'

478 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. III.

alfo to Polycarp's Church, the Church of Smyrna;

and to that of Philadelphia. In all the Epiftles,

except that to the Romans, which relates to him-

felf and the fufiferings which awaited him at Rome,

he mentions diftincliy our t/:ree orders, BiOiops,

Prefbyters, and Deacons: and fays very ftrong

things in favour of fubjeclion to the two former,

efpecially BiJIiops. — I may read to you, of the

Epitlle to the Church of Smyrna, Chap, or Seel.

8. 9. 12. — Of that to Polycarp, (which changes

from lingular to plural number). Chap. 6. — Of

that to the Ephefians, Chap. 6. and Chap. 2. where

fubjeclion isinjoincd, to Bi/Iiop and Prejbytery, as it

is in Chap. 4. — Of that to the Magnefians^ Chap. 2.

and 6. — The Bifhopat Magnefia wd^s young, which

gives Ignatius more opportunity of contending for

his epifcopal authority : he mentions the Bilhop

as being in the place of God ; and the Prefbytery

as being in the place or fituation o-uveJon* tm

AworoKoiv^ i and the Deacons as being intruded with

the Anzxovisc Ijjo-)* Xoirrs: adorning this part with

words; perhaps in order to make the want of

power and authority lefs perceivable. — Of the

Epiftle to the PJiiladclphians, I might read the

Inlcription. — Of that to Trallimn, Chap. 2. and 3.

and 7. and 12. where the Elders are to a.)ix\'oyivt

Tov Ettjctko^ou, refocillare Epifcopum; and 13, where

the Church is to be fubjed to the Bifliop and

Prefbytery '*.

From thefe paiTages I conclude, that the govern-
ment of Chriftian Churches was more ttionarchical
in /Ifia Minor than in Europe ; particularly than at
Plulippiy and ihr\t mart of Commerce, Corinth.

And

P Compare Ign. ad Smyrnrcos, Cap. 8. ad Trail. 2.

'^ Dr. Powell would not have ohjedled to this plain enume-
ration of Fm'is.— Scs his Thefis, in his Volume, p;ige 364 .—
" Quis eaim, poft inimeufos," Sec.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. IV. 479

And if we fuppofe a greater difpofition towards
Defpotirm in the Afiatics, and towards Repubii-
caniim in the Europeans, allowing perhaps Tome-
thing for the great perfonal weight of Pclycarp,
Ignatius and others, tiie difference may be fuffi-
ciendy accounted for.

if there was any Form of Church Government
which was properly Chriftian, how can one
account for Poly carp's iaculcating a kind of fub-
jedion to the Philippians, different from that
which his own Church (at Smyrna) was exhorted
to pay, by Ignatius? Polycarp alfo fends to the
Philippians thofe Epifties of Ignatius, which in-
culcate fubjedion to ETrjo-noTrot ; not becanfe they
do that, but becaufe they contain ntov «ajj 'UQii.Qnv
HKi Tsrota-xv oiKo^o[Jt,riv^ &c. (Pol. ad Phil. Sedc. 13 )
However, the difference of language as to fub-
jedion would thus be generally underftood : the
exhortations to fubmit to Bifhops would be known
to Churches of the moft republican form, and
vice versa.

We muft not let our prejudices lead us to
imagine, that a primitive Bifliop of Smyrna was
anything like a modern BiOiop of Durham; any
more than that Kifig Romulus was like Louis Qiia-
torze, or a Perfian Monarch.

IV. We have now gone through the mofl
fignificant part of our Hiftory. As Chriftianity
fpread, it filled whole provinces; thefe were divided
widi fome fort of analogy to the civil. divijions'
found adually fubfifting. And it muft generally
be moft convenient to have the place of public
refort for_ civil affairs, to be the fame with that for
ecclefiaftical bufinefs ; people can moft eafdy get to
it; and the circumftances which made it moft
convenient for the one, will generally make it moft

" Bingham, Book 9. Chap. r.

480 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. V.

fo for the otiicr. The more complex public wor-
(hip grew, the more officers would be wanted,
and orders would become more dijiant : Bifliop3
would become higher Officers, Deacons lower. —
At the Council of Nice^ Paphnutius fpoke* of
three orders as we fhould: and lb fpoke Auguftin'.
— The Aeriam'' confidered Bilhops and Prefbyters
as the fame ; but they leem to have been fingular
in this ; at Icafl our notion was by far the moll
common".

It has been before obkrved that the IValdenJes
had fcm.ething like our three Orders. — Art. xxiii.
Seel. IV.

V. I am not aware -' of anvthing farther worth
mentioning till the time of the Reformation. Then
that great change took place of ordaininp; wholly,
in feme churches, by Elders — Anii at that time,
there was an idea of contracting Diocefes^, or
making many more, and thcretore many more
Bidiops, in a given fpace.

We mentioned, under the twenty-third Article,
Seel, vt, the Lutheran Superintendents, and the
ideas of ordaining amongfl PrcPoyterians and the
Ind -pendent Congregr.tions. But we did not

mention,

' See Council of Nice, in Socrates, lit. and Suidas.

' Ep 21. repeatedly. — Aug. is ar..\'iDus about not being_^/ to
be a Pricft; he would ftudy, tcc. and writes for a BijQiop'i
advice.

" ^ee I.cirdncr's Works, Vol. 4. page 306.

* See Brocter on Councils, page 81. the 22d Canon of the
Council of Milevi.s A. D. 416. — And feveral inftances fronri
Clem. Alex. — Origeii, and Tertu'lian, in Nicholls on Common
Prayer, on the Preface to the forms of Oniination. And that
expreflion of Apoftolic Canon 2. ' Let a Prefbyter be ordained
by one Bifhop,' (hews, that Prefbyter and Bifhop could not always
be fynonymous.

y Art. XXI! I. S-:(5l. iv— Neal fays, that Wickliffe held only
two orders ; Bilhopi or Prefbyters, and Deacons, 1. page 3. —
WicklifTc fecms to have had fome Puritanical authority.

* Bingham's Works, i. 409. folio.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. V. 481

mention, that the Enghfh Forms of ordaining
Bidiops and Priefts were, at the time of the Re-
formation, lefs plainl)' diftinft from each other than
they are now. However, the a6l of Ujiifcrmity^
made tipon the Relloration, requires us to alFent
to our prefent Article according to the Forms now
in ule% which were only compofed in 1661, or
26621 — Bifhop Burnet mentions a fcruple in the
time of Queen Elizabeth, which occafioned Par-
liament, and the compilers of our Article to look
back, and to declare all Ordinations valid iince the
end of the fecond j'ear of Edward VI. which had
been performed according to the Book compofed
and publifhed, in the third year of King Edward,
though riot ratified by Parliament till his fifth
year.

Anciently, all Bifhops were appointed ^ by Elec-
tion. But Eleiftions grew too tumultuous, and
rhe appointment got into the hands of 2. fezv : it
occafioned great difputes between the Popes and the
Sovereigns of Europe 5 but our Henry VIII. fet-
tled

* See the end of the A£l of Uniformity in the fourteenth

year of Charles II. And Beanet's Diredions. See alfo

Mofheim, 8\'o. Vol. 4. page 91. add Neal, i. page 43. 1 do

rot feem to underlland Neal in this pafTage; he feems to {peak
as if in King Edward's tim^, in 11549, our forms of ordainina,
or confecrating, had been the fa7>ie for BiQiops and Priells ;
whereas they are only the fame in things common to both ranks:
as about fludying the Scripture, and oppofmg Herefy. In other
things they differ. — And the principal difference between Kincj-
Edward's Forms and thofe made at the Reftoration of Charles II.
confifts in this ; in the old ones words of Scripture were ufed,
addrefTed to Timothy as Bifhop, (a Tim. i. 6, 7.) and in the
new ones the nuord Bifhop was ufed; and fo of Priejl.

'• Bingliam, Book 4. Chap. z. — Stillingfleet, Unreaf. of
Separ. part 3. — Clem. Rom. Ep. Seft. 44. page 168. Edit.
Ri;flel. — For Ele^liosis growing tumultuous, fee Bingham, 4. 2. 6.
— Baxter on Councils, page 66. (and, I think, page 99. roi.)
— Nicholis on the words, " The elefted Bilhop," &c. and Dr.
Powell's Thefis, in his Volume, page 365.
vox. IV. H H

482 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. VI. VII.

tied the matter in England, as it now is; giving
a Conge cCelire to a Chapter, but punifliing them
if they did not eled" the perfon whom he nomi-
nated. Bifliop Warburton confiders (lich patronage
as a compenfation made by the"' Church to the
ftate for protedion, and for the ufe ot a compul-
five force.

VI. Mofheim' fays, that the Socinians (the
early ones I fuppofe) have four facred orders ; to
our three they add that of Widows ; why not
DeaconeJJes alfo, like the Puritans? or thofe men-
tioned I Cor. xii.? — I do not fee Widows men-
tioned in the Racovian Catechifm.

VII. If we wifh to fee what the Council of
Trent fays on our prefent fubje<5V, we may read
the fourth, fifth, fixth, and feventh Canons of the
twenty-third SefTion^ — With regard to uninter-
rupted fucceffion of Bifliops, we have faid enough
before; as well as upon the fubjeft of re-ordain-
ing.— And upon the Puritanical notion, that all
rules are to be derived from Scripture. In Strype's
Annals, we have an account of a Puritan Profeflbr
at Cambridge, Cartwright^ who v\as complained of
to the Chancellor of the Univerfity for having
held, that " Officia et nomma mpietatisy* are intro-
duced into our Church; meaning Archbifhops, &c.
— Cambridge was then " a Nell of Puritans," —
According to the Article of 1532, people, in fub-
fcribing to it, fubfcribed to the Liturgy \ but in
1562, alTent to the Liturgy became unneceflary :

how

e Blackftone, Index, Conge d' elire.

^ Warburton's Alliance.

« Molhcim, oftavo, Vol. 4. page 185, Note.

•' For the things mentioned in thefe fixth and feventh Setflions,
fee Art. xxiu. iJedl. vii.xi. — John Burges, page 3. 26. 42.
—Strype's Annals, Vol. i. page 583. A. D, 1570 — Neal,
Vol. 1. i^age 190 428. where is our 7th Canon of 1604. —
Dr. Powell, page 28.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT VII. 483

liow the Church was again driven into requiring it,
Dr. John Burges (hews in very few words; and at
the fame time that he accounts for our fubfcription
to the Liturgy in general, he declares, that he only
ali'ents to the ttfe of it, and the fame of the rites
of our Church.

But it is time to put ah end to our Hiftory : I
will only mention then one or two things briefly.
- — Bingham exprefles, in 1726, a wi(h", that Z)/<?-
cefes could be contraEied^ according to the idea of
our Reformers. — Mr, Granville Sharfs notion of a
right appointment of a Minifter, is, that he ihould
be appointed as Matthias was*'; by /o/, out of two
fixed upon by fuffrages of the Church.

Dr. Powell's Thefis is to be much recommended,
in which he proves, that neither the Church-
Government of England, nor that of Scotland,
is repugnant to the Law of Nature, or to the
Word of God. It contains all the Elements of
Religious Society, expreffed in the beft manner.

Dr. John Burges' told King James, (&c. as be-
fore), that with regard to our prefent fubjecft, he did
not mean to exprefs approbation of every phrafe,
&c. in the Ordinations, but only to declare, that
our calling and ordination was, on the whole, fuch
as not to be deemed unlawful, or contrary to the
word of God.— His fenfe was accepted as the
right one.

The Romanijls feem to make the fame three
Orders which we make. See Council of Trent,
the fixth Canon of the twenty-third SelTion.— As to
Nicholls's faying, that they make Bilhop and

Prieft

s Bingham, i. page 409. folio.

^ Ads i. 26. — This is what Mr. Granville Sharp has men-
tioned to me, in Converfation. I hope I have rightly under-
flood him.

^ Burges, page 26.

H H 2

484 BOOK IV. ART, XXXVI. SECT. VlII.

Pried equal, becanfe the Priefl can make his God,
and the Bifliop can do no more, that is charging cou'
fequences of opinions, contrary to our fixth Canon
of Controverly. Book 11. Chap. v. Se(fl. vi.

Dupin, difputes the validity of fome Englifh
Ordinations in T/ieory, but would allow them in
pradice, if an union took place''.

VIII. We now come to Explanation.

In the tide, " Minifters" includes Priefls and
Deacons.

" In the time of Edward VI," there were two
Reviews of the Liturgy j one in the fecond, and
the other in the fifth of Edward VI. but only'
one form of ordination : we have no concern with
this matter now, as we fubfcribe to the Forms
made at the Reftoration.

" Doth contain all things neceffary^^ — this is
modeft : it is not faying, that our Forms are the
mojl rational and fcriptural that ever were or could
be made; nor even that they are not defective;
but only, that they have no liich capital defedt as
to deftroy the ejjence of an ordination.

Neither have our forms anything in them that
" \s fuperjlitions and ungodly:'' they may be inele-
gant, unbecoming, injudicious; but they cannot
be called fuperftitious or impious,— in Latin, im-
pium-, which reminds one of Cartwright's "officia
et nomina impietatis." *' JVe decree,^* is the fame
ftiie of Injun£iion that was remarked in Art. xxxv.

The expreflions amount only to this, that our
Forms have no defedl or fault fo great as to annul
our Ordinations.

IX. And

^ Appendix Third to Machine's Molheim.

' So I gather from Burnet on the Article; and Neal under
Edward VI. — Yet Nicholls mentions fomething which was
different in the firft and fecond books of Edward VI. —the
Ordination Oath.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. IX. X. 485

IX. And now with regard to Proof, what fhall
we fay .? all that we have to prove is, that * the
Englifli Ordinations are valid j or not invalid.*—
If every Church can fettle its own rites, the thing
is proved; and that this is the truth, muft appear
from the Hiftory now given, and from what has
gone before, in the twenty-third Article. From
thefe we are led to conclude, that it is our bufi-
nefs, and our duty, to adopt that Form of Church-
Government which falls in beft with our circum-
ftances and habitual notions : that it would be
wrong therefore to have a monarchical Church-
Government in a fmall republic, or a republican one
in a large monarchy.

Indeed we might go through our Forms, and
defend the feveral expreffions we meet with ; but
that would be unnecelTary labour; a better plan
would be, to fee what ObjeBions have been made
to them; or what difficulties they have occafioned;
if thefe admit of folution, we may take for granted
that the reft is unexceptionable.

X. Thus we are led to indired proof: — and the
objedions are fuch, that we may propofe them
together, and fo anfwer them without interruption.
That Orders is no Sacrament, has been fliewn
under the twenty-fifth Article ; and the word
" called'^ has been explained at large. Nor need
we take farther notice of the Romilh arguments
againft our Ordinations.

I. Is it rioht to have officers in the Church
whofe very names'^ are not found m Scripture ; as
Archbi/Jiops, Archdeacons, &c. ?.

2. We

"o This was the notion of Profeflbr Cartwright before-men.
doned ; fome of the other notions might be found in Strype's
Annals, in the years 1570 and 1573, in the affairs of Cart-
wright, Dering, &c. — Bering is mentioned. Vol. 2. page 27'.
H H 3 He

486 BOOK IV. ART. \XX\'l. SECT. XI.

2. We meet \w\th t/iree names, indeed, ETrtTxoTror,
Ilffo-SuTf^of, and A»«xoi/of, but we have no right to
conclude from thence that there were three dif-
tindl Ranks.

3. And fuppofing there were, BiJJiops ought not
to be men of worldly dignity ;

4. Nor Prefbyters, now called Priejls, fo far
inferior to BiQiops, as they are made in the Church
of England.

5. Nor ought Deacons, appointed originally for
purpofcs of (economy, to be fo much of fpiritual and
clerical perfons as the Englifh make them.

6. Then, making ecclefiaftical ordinations, or
trufts, to have any dependence on temporal powers,
in the way of patronage, or otherwife, is contrary
to the nature of Chrifl's fpiritual kingdom. Such
ordinations mud want completing" by fcriptural
Prejhyteries. — Thefe fix objections are all of the
puritanical caft.

7. But it has alfo occafioned difficulty, that can-
didates for Deacon's orders are afked whether they
truft that they *' are inwardly moved by the Holy
Gliojl to take upon" them the office of Deacon.

8. And, that the ordaining Minifters undertake
to convey the Holy Ghojl to thofe whom they ordain.
— Now in effeft we have already replied to mofl
of thefe objections and difficulties; but a word or
two direftly oppofed to them, may have its ufe.

XT. When Bilhops become numerous, they
muft have fome Jubordination fettled amongft them,
clfe they could not aft jointly, or with unity.—

That

He writes to Lord Burghley for relief. — I think Lord Burghley
was both Minifter of i>tate and Chancellor of the Univerfity of
Cambridge. — " Of collei^ors for the poor, or Deacons" -h a
fynodical title of the Puritans, in i 576. Neal, i. 232.

" See Bingham, French Church, Book 4. Chap. 5. — Neal's
Hift. Pur. Vol. I. page 23 3. — Qawton's Letter to the Bifhop
of Norwich after deprivation.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XII. 487

That fubordination might fometimes be tacit,
through general refpeft to fome great and good
Prelate; but ordinarily it muft be by means of
authority exprefsly given. And fuch authority
requires an official nojne" to denote it, and make
it inftantly felt. There is nothing more in giving
fuch names, than providing that all things *' be
done decently and in order." — If there are many
OverfeerSy how can order be maintained without an
i/^<7^-overfeer? — But it muft not bethought that the
names of Archbilliop and Archdeacon were invented
by the Church of England : they have exifted ever
fince they were wanted. Metropolitans and Arch-
deacons have been known in the Church thefe
fourteen hundred years. — Nay, we might have
Jerom's authority for adding Arckprefbyters^.

XII. Suppofing it were allowed that there were
only two orders in the Church of Philippic or,
Corinth; though to me it feems probable that the
ETrttTKOTTo; might be fuperfor to the ordinary Pref-
byters ; yet there can be no doubt but the AJiatics
had three orders^ and only one Bifhop in each
church. Let then the Prefbyterians have a
Council to govern them, I fee no harm ; but let
as not be blamed {ox having Bilhops. If all are to
go by Scripture, why do not feparatifts imitate the
orders, or ranks, mentioned i Cor. xii. 28. and
Eph. iv. II..'' Our opinion is, that we are to
have what, in our circumftances, beft anfwers,
according to our judgment, the ends of religious
fociety. We conceive, that Chrift no more in-
fifted on a Prefbytery without Bifhop; than on
Aldermen without Mayor; or than on the newly

appointed

• See the reafon for giving the unfcriptural name Sacrament,
Art. XXV. Sedt. xi. — Chrift is «^;i^iwoift»v, t Pet. v. 4.
>* Bingham, Book 2. Chap. 16 and 21.
H H 4

^88 BOOK iV. ART. XXXVl. SECT. XIU. XIV.

appointed Council of Sierra Leone without Super-
intendent.

XIII. Why Bifliops fhould have worldly dig-
nity, fome reafons have been given in tlie third?
Book. *' Let no man defpife thee," fays St. Paul
to Titus', fpeaking of the exertion of fpiritual
authority : if the injunction be not for Titus,
but his flock, flill it lays an obligation on them,
and on all, to prevent the contempt cf the Clergy. —
We have no good reafon to think, tiiat Chi ill had
any objedion to Kings being nurjing-fathers to his
Church, or that if St. Paul \vere now alive, he
would fay, that Chriftian Biiliops lliould not
'' fland' before Kings," and in luch a form as
would help to promote the right fpirit of courtly
afTeniblies. — At firft, Chriftians could only pray
for Kings* and for all that were in authority; but
other means of promoting the good ends of civil
government, they never feem to have avoided, as
things not belonging to them. The revenues of
the Church have been fomctimes applied too much
to purpofes of Luxury ; but fuppole a well-chofen
Bilhop to confider them as a triijl, and to difpenfe
them in promoting virtue, piety, and learning; in
furnilliing libraries, &:c. <kc. (which is the only
right idea of them), they would beof immenfe value
to the public. The Gofpcl was to be preached to
all nations : a nation, as fuch, might become Chrif-
tian, of whatever ranks and Qrders it confifted.

XI v. Prejhytcrs'' or Priefts, may not be, in all
refpecls, what they originally'' were; all things

mull

<i Book ni. Chap. xiv. Sedl, viii,

' Titus ii. 15.

' Prov. xxii. 29. ' 1 Tim. ii. 2.

" Prefby ter, Preftre, Pietre, Prieft. (Nicholls).

^ Lardner, who ftems to hold but two ranks, fays Prefbyters
were 10 preach, reprove, rthukc, S;c. Works, Vol. 2. Introd.
page ix.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XV. XVI. 4S9

muft yield, muft dilate, contrad, and fuit them-
felves to utility, in different circumftances. As
the Church encreafed, and more nations came Into
it, Bilhops grew higher. Deacons lower; Priefts
were intermediate , though even then the three ranks
were only fuch as Clemens defcribes. — The civil
Magiftrate found himielf induced, and called
ujpon, to interfere; this might take off from the
ruling^ of the Prefbyters, and turn them more to
teaching and minifterial offices. — Only let us not
have two different ideas of the fame word, and
difpute as if we had the fame. Such contention
muft be endlefs.

XV. It feems right that we (hould have fuch
inferior minijiers as we want; as to their official
name being Deacon^ it is of no confequence. I
do not know that, according to Scripture, Stephen
was a Deacon more than St. Paiil^. Nor do 1 fee,
that Eufehius^ calls Stephen a Deacon. But if he
had been called Deacon, he certainly did fpiritual
offices ; Fhilip baptized the -Ethiopian, Stephen
worked miracles, and harangued the Jews. He
would not have ht^n Jioned for ferving tables.

XVI. Unlefs civil power fupports religious
fociety, the maintaining of it feems quite impra^ii-
cable; as we have before obferved. Suppofe a
company of Players chofe to profane the Lord's
Day at Edinburgh, where it is kept with great
liridnefs, how would the church of Scotland pre-
vent the profanation by any power merely ecclefi-
aftical ? — Thofe who maintain, that " Chrift was

the

y I Tim. V, 1 7.

'^ I Cor. iii. 5. as before, Seft. n.— -Rom. xv. 8. Chrift was

^ Beginning of his Ecclefiaftical Y^Aoxy.^ Ignatius feems to
confider Deacons (that is, Aiaxonoi reckoned w/M Ettj^tkowo* and
•ErfEo-^VTEfoi) in a_/^;V//7/«/ light. Ov yoi.^'B^u^a.Tui xon 'monrui
nctv Jtaxofoj, a^^' ixx^rjtriaj ©sb »7r»}§£T«».— Ad Trail, Se(5l. 2.

490 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI, SECT. XVI I.

the only Lawgiver in his*' Church," muft give up
m pra^ice ■wha.t they hold in theory"-. — But of this
enough before. — The nature of Patronage was
mentioned juft now.

After all, the general defigns of the Puritans, to
ftrengthen religious difcipline^ to make it pervade
every order of men, and notice every immoral ad:,
feem to me very ^ laudable. Nay, it is no way
neceflary, for our prefent bufinefs, even to deter-
mine which mode of Church-government is beft,
theirs or ours ; perhaps neither may be good abfo-
lutely, in all circumftances; nor either bad in
certain iituations : our Article only afferts, that
ours is not radically faulty, fo as to have no effi-
cacy; fo as not to retain the eflence of a Church''.
— The remaining difficulties may be more amongft
ourfelves.

XVII. As to the queflion, " do you truft that
you are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghoji to take
upon you this office," &c. it cannot occafion much
difficulty to any one who has accuftomed himfelf
to obferve the manner in which every good aflion
or purpofe, is, in fcripture, referred to the Holy
Spirit. This was our fiibjc5l in Art. x. and has
been feveral times mentioned fince. — Phil, ii. 13.
— James i. ly. might revive former ideas. Thefe
things confidered, the queftion amounts to no more
than this. Are you conjciom of good intentio>is in your
prefent undertaking? are you " in all things'
willing to live honeflly^'' in the fituation to which
you aipire ?— Befides, a candidate is only afked
whether he trufls that he is moved; this implies

uncertainty,

** Neal I. page 233, as before.
^ See Dr Powell's Thefis, page 369, top.
*• Neal I. page 232. Clafles.

* See Archbifhop Wake to Pere Courrayer, July 9, 1724.—
Mofli. Cent. 18. Sedl. 23. 8vo. Vol. 5. page 94. Note.
' Heb. xiii. 18.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XVII. 49 I

\mcertalnty, and entirely excludes entluifiaftic pre-
lumption : indeed as die Reformers were no enthu-
fiafts, a man might affure himfelf beforehand, that
they had no enthuliaftic meaning.

Similar enquiries might be made of one entering
into any other profeffion, where he might poffibly
have an end in view diftind: from the good of that
profeffion. — Do you really mean to make a good
Soldiery or only to wear a gay uniform ? are you
infpiredhy a true martial _/p/r// .^ So, do you really
mean to make a good minifter, or only a tithe-
gatherer, or a lounger ? — But if this be the mean-
ing, you will fay, why not remove all difficulties
by afking the queftion in the words which now
explain its meaning ? I fuppofe the reafon is, be-
caufe the phrafe ufed, is mo(k fcriptural ; cfpecially
for Deacons -y (indeed the queftion is not propofed to
Priefts, or Bilhops;) to fee this, one need only read
Adts vi. 3. 5. (which is transferred into our quef-
tion,) and conlider circumftances. Se^;en men
are chofen, to make a fair diftribution of what
bounty has thrown into a common llock : a qua-
lification for this temporary office was that aMfeven
muft be "/?/// of the Holy Ghojiy'' as well as have a
good charadler, and prudence; that is, knowledge
of accounts, market-prices, &c. — We can imme-
diately fee the propriety of fuch men having a good
character, and being prudent ; being full of the
Holy Ghoft is a phraie not now familiar; we muft
confider with what it \% joined: it muft mean fome
rcquifite for managing the temporal concerns of
religious fociety : might it mean, full of an holy
temper? interefted about Religion ? a good temper
or intention is to be referred to the Holy Ghoft. —
But there are many other texts which tend the
fame way, and would ferve to confirm thofe who
framed the queftion, in their purpofe —Luke i. 15.

AcT:s

492. BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XVIII.

Ads vii. 55.— ix. 17. — xi. 24. — xiii. 52. — xx. 28.
— 2 Pet. i. 2i.-There and others would ferve
alfo to make the phrafe more familiar to us ; and
thereby remove our greateft difficulty in the ufe
of it.

XVIII. When our ordaining Minifter fays,
" Receive the Holy^ Gholl for the office," &c.
there can be no doubt of his ufing thofe words of
Scripture, John xx. 22. — In the office for Priefts,
he goes on to ver. 23. in that for Bifhops, he
proceeds to 2 Tim. i. 6, 7. — John xx. 23. is an
Ordination, or Confecration.

This might be of an higher kind at firft, than
fince, in the ordinary ftate of the Church, as we
ha,ve feen of fcveral things: but what could be a
more proper way of givmg a commilTion to preach,
abfolve, &c. than repeating the words which our
Lord ufed v;hen he gave the fame commiffion; un-
derftanding them in a lower fenfe f' Suppofe you
had to compofe a Form for the purpofe : would
you not fay. This muft not be expreffed like a
jecular and civil appointment ; it fliould be ex-
preffed in fome words, of Scripture. " We preach
not ourfelves*", but Chrift Jefus the Lord:" we
are not difciples of Paul, or of Apollos, but of
Chrift : that commiffion which Chrift gave^ we
hand down from generation to generation ; how can
we more flrongly mark it for his, than by ex-
preffing it in his words ? — As the Holy Ghoft is
to guide us into all truth, and as Chrift is to
be with his Church to the end of the world, it is

not

8 This is not the office of Deacon', he trujis he is mo-vedhy
the Holy Ghoft, and does not receive it : Prieil and Bifhop think
in their hearts that tliey arc truly called, and do receive the Holy
Ghoft. Is anything particular meant by this ?

' 2 Cor. iv. 5.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XIX. 493

not to be imagined that any appointment of a
facred minifter can take place without fome bleffed
heavenly influence \ but it is not mmi who caufes
that influence, but Chrift himfelf. Man only-
repeats a Form as Agent for him who inftituted
it. If man could convey any fpiritual bleffing
by his own power, he would ufe his own words;
the words ufed by an Herald when he proclaims
war or peace, may found prefumptuous, as if he
pretended to give one or the other ; but they are
not his own words; they are always underflood
to be the words of his Sovereign ; and nothing
but fome great ahufe, can prevent, their being
efFedual.

This form feems to have been quite eftabliflied
in the time of Auguflin', in the Latin Church:
and in the Greek Church there has been in ordi-
nations fome mention of the Holy Ghofl. Yet,
in general, it is faid, that the Greek Forms have
been more indicative, the Latin ones more opta-
tive or precatory ''. As, « mayefi thou receive the
Holy Ghoil.' Some have thought that our ex-
preffions might bear that , fenfe ; like, * Every
good attend yon: — < Be you happy, whatever be-
comes of me^* &c.

XIX. As we do not feem to have occafion for
an Application, in this Article, I will clofe my re-
marks upon it by a fort of paraphrafe, of the
words, " Receive the Holy Ghoji;' &c,

* As Jefus Chrift, when he fent his Apoftles to
preach the Gofpel in all the world, gave them
his comm.iffion, and promifed a ratificatian of their
authority; and as it is his will that a Commiffion,
in kind the fame, though of a lower Degree'

fhould

' Aug. deTnn. It;. 26. (NIcholls).

^ See a like diftinaion in the Form of Abfolution\ Art. x.vv.
Seft. IV.

494 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVI. SECT. XIX.

fhould be perpetually conferred for the benefit of
his Church ; I, heretofore regularly appointed, do
confer the fame on You ; ufing the v/ords of our
Lord, as beft conveying the nature of the Trnjh,
and leaving it to his unbounded wifdoni to fulfil
them in that degree which (hall feem to him, in
any ftare of his Church, mod fuitable and ex-
pedient.'

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. I. 495

ARTICLE XXXVII.

OF THE CIVIL MAGISTRATES.

THE King's Majefty hath the chief power in
this Reahn of England, and other his Domi-
nions, unto whom the chief Government of all
eftatesof this Realm, whether they be Ecclefiafti-
cal or Civil, in all caufes doth appertain; and is
not, nor ought to be fubjed to any foreign Jurif-
didion.

Where we attribute to the King's Majefty the
chief government, by which Titles we underftand
the minds of fome flanderous folks to be offended;
we give not to our Princes the miniftering either
of God's Word, or of the Sacraments ; the which
thing the Injuncftions alfo lately fet forth by Eliza-
beth our Queen, do moft plainly teftify; But that
only prerogative, which we fee to have been given
always to all godly Princes in holy fcriptures by
God himfelf; that is, that they fhould rule all
eftates and degrees committed to their charge by
God, whether they be Ecclefiaftical or Temporal,
and reftrain with the civil fword the ftubborn and
evil-doers.

The Bidiop of Rome hath no juril<di(5lion in
this Realm of England.

The Laws of the Realm may punifli Chriftian
men with death, for heinous and grievous offences.

It is lawtul for Chriftian men, at the command-
ment of the Magiftrate, to wear weapons, and ferve
in the wars.

I. The

496 BOOK IV.. ART. XXXVII. SECT. I. TT.

I. The Hifiory of this Article may confift of
two fcparate Hiftorics: and the fecond of them
may include the Miflory of the two following
Articles, the thirty-eighth and the thirty-ninth.—
The firft Hiftory Ihould be of the Pope's Supre-
macy; the fecond, of the notions of thofc, who,
aiming at perfenion^ reje(fl fome practices which
arc ordinarily reckoned ufeful or neceflary in
human Life : fuch as governing by Ch-ll Magif-
trateSy inflifting capital puniJJimcnts^ carrying on war^
poffeffing property^ and taking oaths on folemn oc-
cafions. That thefe may go together^ will appear
hereafter.

II. Firfl, \\t i^kt iho. Pope's Supremacy : a great
deal has been written on this fubject, but it is now
Ids interefling than it was in the time of our
Henry VIII.

Hiftorians tell us, that Chriftianity was planted
in our liland fo foon as the' Apofbolic age; though
it is not known what perfons lirft taught it to our
Anceftors. At the great Council of Nice in 325,
it was underftooci, that the Britifh Chriftians were
not brought under any foreign Patriarch or Metro-
politan, but were an independent Church ^ — The
Ifiand was invaded by Saxons^ who were then Ido-
laters; and Gregory the Firil:, (or the Great) fent
a Monk called Aitgujlin, very early in the feventh
Centuiy, to convert, them. He required the Britifh
Chriftians to be in fome fubjeclion to the See of
Rome, but they refufed. The Saxons Ihewed

more

* Collier's Ecclef. Illllory, from Glldas, kc. — Comber's
Advice, page i t r.

'' Can. 6. Dionyf. Exig. refcncd to by Comber. This

Dionyfius, called the Little from his ftaturc, was a Scythian by
birth, but rcfidcd at Rome; lived to near the midale of the
fixth Ccntviry ; was famous for making a good colleftion of
Canons, &c. and is fiid to have been the beginner of our
cullom of reckoning time from the birth of Chrill. (Ladvocat.)

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. II. 497

more refpe'^ to thofe by whom they had been con-
verted, but kept clear of fubjedion. At that
time it appears, that the Bilhop of Rome, (who,
like other Bidiops, was fometimes called Papa^ a
refpeftful appellation,) was fubjed to the Emperor,
and con'iidered the Emperor as governing" Jacred
perfons. Indeed the Emperors had always, till the
time of Gregory VII. in ibnie degree conferred
the Popedom: he was the laft Pope whofe eledion
was confirmed by the Emperor. The early Chrif-
tian Emperors had always ordered Councils^ and
prelided at them ; how much authority they exer-
cifed over the Church, appears from a great many
Roman Laws now extant in the Corpus Juris
civilis.— Though the Popes, in the day of their
greatnefs, affumed unbounded authority, yet in
the early times of Chriflianity, they had only that
'precedence which naturally arofe from Rome being
the feat of the Empire. Under the nineteenth
Article we had occafion to compare the fee of Rome
with thofe of Jerufalem, Alexandria, and Antioch"^,
Pope Vidor, who died in 201, (hewed a good
deal of arrogance in the difpute about Eafter, and
excommunicated fome worthy^ men who differed
from him ; but even thofe of the Latin Church
did not think it a duty to fubmit. — The mild and
good Irenaiis^ oppofed him, and wrote to him a
a letter, from himfelf and the Brethren in Gaul,
ftill extant in Eufebius. — About the year 372,
VaUntinian'^ publiflied a law, by which, in order to

avoid

^ See Bower's Lives of Popes, Vol. z. page 500. where
Gregory I. fays, that God gave the Em^Qvortiominari/acer'
dotibus.

^ Art. XIX. Sea. 11.

« See Lardner under Polycrates; Works, Vol. 2. page 243.

^ Lanlner, Vol. 2. page 157. — Euieb. cap 34. BoW'^r's

Life of Vidlor.

8 Bifliop Hallifax on Prophecy, pag<9 336. from MoiheuB,

VOL. IV. I I

498 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. II

avoid going to profane Tribunals, Bifhops were
obli(;ccl to refer their difputes to the fee of Rome :
this might be one reafon why the papal pretenfions
kept rifing till the Council of Chalcedony in 450.
At that Council it was held, that, as there were
two feats of Empire, the two Prelates who pre-
fided at them, (hould be upon the fame rank. —
This continued till 580, when Conftantinople
claimed univerfal church-fupremacy. But Phocas,
an Emperor of flagitious chara6);er, being rather
checked for his enormities by the Patriarch of
Conftantinople, and ftrongly flattered by the*"
Pope, declared the latter the fupreme Governor of
the Catholic Church.

In the ninth Century the Eaftern and Weflern
Churches fcparated. The Pope became a fecular
Prince, by the Revolt of the Exarchate of Italy,
in the contentions about Images, which muft help
the growth of his fpiritual dominion. He in-
volved, at one time or other, moft European
Nations in great troubles; of which there feemed
likely to be no end, fo long as he could make re-
ligious terror, and other paffions, operate on the
minds o^ the ordinary fubjecfts, and maintain a
llrong feeling for the fancftity of religious orders. —
In England he gained an influence about the time
of the Conqueft, by affifting the Conqueror ; and
from that time to the reign of Henry VIII. it was
a perpetual conflid between the See of Rome and
the rational part of the EngliOi Nation.

The Law, in Theory, was againft the See of
Rome, and during the reigns of Henry II. Ed-
ward I. and III. and Richard II. feverai Statutes

were

'' Gregory!, fee his Life by Bower. Phocas died 610.— •
See Nicholis on the Ordination-oath. — Gregory's Letters to
Piiocas, are a "rcat dilj^ruce to him.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. II. 499

were made, declaring the rights of England, and
enforcing them. The Statutes of the Parliament
at Clarendon, thofe againft Provifors, and thofe
decreeing what is called a pramiinire^ are fo well
explained in Sir William Blackdone's Commen-
taries, a Book to which every one has accefs, that
I need not dwell upon them : it is enough to
mention them to the Student.

Civil 'wars kept the nation, for a long time,
from exerting itfelf unanimoufly to regain its rights,
and the Popes were always ready to take advantaoe
of all divifions. — Henry VIII. at firft a6ted and
wrote in defence of Popery, againft Luther, from
Vv'hence he got the Title of Defender of the Faith;
but quarrelling with the Pope about a Divorce, he
fet himfelf earneftly, with all the vehemence of a
warm temper, and of princely loftinefs, to throw
off the Papal Supremacy. — The occafion might
not be equally creditable with a pure fenfe of
reditude, and a love of law and liberty; but yet
the manner of conducing the emancipation of our^
Church and State, feems to have been regular,
legal, conftitutional ; and to have implied the re-
covery or declaration of ^n old rights detained for
a while by mere violence. — The Supremacy of the
Pope was rejeded by Engliih Papifts : all the
povvcrs of the Nation united in rejecting it.

The Necefary Dodrine^ on the Sacrament of
Order, contains a good account of this matter^
plain and clear j as for the people : the work of
Cranmer, moft probably, who was raifed to emi-
nence by his efforts to redeem the kingdom. —
Thus Henry VIII. alfumed the Title of Head of
the Church, in fpite of Bulls difcharged againft

hiin

* Heylin, in his life of Archbifliop Laud, page 1. has a flibrt
account of this. — Neal's account is not long-.
I I 2

500 BOOK IV. ART- XXXVII. SECT. III.

him from Rome; and his fucceflbrs have retained
the Title, though Elizabeth thought fit to give
an Explanation of it in her Injun5iions mentioned
in the Article, llmilar to the explanation in the
paragraph which refers to them.

Several attempts have been made, (ince the time
of Elizabeth, to reftore the Papal power; a fliort
and clear account of which may be found in
Bifiiop Gibfons Poftfcript to his fifth Paftoral
Letter.

Of late years, the Pope's power over the Englidi
Papifts feems to have been much weakened. We
have had about feventeen hundred of them avow
this by figning their names : they call themfelves
Protefling Catholics. Parliament has paft an aft
for their relief, taking place June 24, 1791. Yet
even over thefe the Pope has fomeyp/n/yW autho-
rity : their oath only imports, that they allow him
** no temporal or civil jurifdiftion" " within this
Realm." — And even this Oath great numbers of
Engli(h Papifts cannot take. - Indeed, I believe
the notion, that there ought to be one Head of
the Cluirch, and that the Bifiiop of i^ow^ has good
prctenlions to that pre-eminence, is deeply rooted
in the minds of many.— We are told, that even
*' many men of Learning and Piety," in the
church of Rome, are fenfible of its errors, but do
not chufe to feparate themfelves from what they
cdeemthe true Univerfal Church of Chrifi:".

III. Having finiflied our firfi: Hiftory, let us
proceed to our fecond, — Declining, through
fcruple, the ufe of thofe expedients which the
generality of ordinary men have adopted for the
purpolcs of human life, has arifen from a defire

of

^ See fecond .Appendix to Monieim's Hifiory. — About Dr.
Courrayer, page i lo.—Comber too prefl'es thii point moll of any.
Advice, Scd. 6. page 1 10 — 136.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. III. 50I

of attaining to Perfe6lion: fuch defire is fome-
times a part of a mild, gentle, refined tem-
per; fometimes of an harlh and auilere one. —
The former, intent upon the good always likely
to refult from improvement; the latter dwel-
ling on the faults and failures which feem to
obftrud it.

It muft be owned, that Magiflracy, capital ^
punifhments, war, property, and oaths, all imply '
great imperfection. If we were as we ought to be,
and had amongfl us no *' ftubborn and evil-doers,"
we fliould have no need of Magifirates (much lefs
of fflp//<7/ puniOiments and war) nor even of riches,
which occafion fo many diffeniions, fo much anxiety,
and fo many vicious acts. — If our veracity were
to be relied on, oaths would be needlel's.— Tliefe
are real m/f, though as they prevent greater evils,
they are confidered as benefits. — Every fcruple pro-
ceeds upon fomething in Scriptnre.

1. The prohibition of Magiflracy, on Matt.
v. 5. — XX. 25. — Gal. V. I.

2. Of capital punifliments on Matt. v. 21. —
vi. 15.

3. War, on Matt. V. 39—44.

4. Riches, on Matt. vi. 19. — xix. 21 — 24. —
Lukexvi. 19, &c. i Tim. vi. 9, 10.

5. Oaths, on Matt. v. 34. and James v. 12.

It does not happen, that every one who declines
one or two of the things we are fpeaking of,
declines them all; feme do not allow of oaths, or
of war, who do allow of property; but the titrn
and temper feems to be much the fame in all who
decline any; variations are moft likely to happen
where there is the leaft folid reafoning and plain
fenfc : a particular tafte, connexion, intereft, &c.
may fet fome perlbns, though of this temper,

113 upon

_502 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. IV. V.

upon juftifyins; to themfelves fome^ one of tlie
things in queftion; and, in fuch cafe, their argu-
ings will rarelv fail of fuccefs.

IV. The Pythagoreans feem to liave had a dif-
pofition to dccHne fome things, which common
men make iife of: their leader perfuaded the Sici-
lian Dames to ftrip off their more fplendid orna-
ments, and make an offering of them to a local
Deity. — He made his followers fell their patri-
mony, lay the produce at his feet, and live in
common, without property. — Ht held, that war
was only lawful on five occafions, fuch as againft
the paflions, and fo on j meaning, that it was never
to be carried on with fire and fword. He would
not kill even" Brute Animals.— The neceiTity of
Laws he faw too clearly to be mifled. — He there-
fore endeavoured to improve, not annihilate,
Legiflation.

V. Some of the Chriftian Fathers may be next
mentioned. LnEiantins feems to make the com-
mandment, " thou fhalt not kill'' to be univerfal;
to admit of no exception whatfover: he is even
againft killing by word, as he calls it, that is,
accufing of a capital crime. God wills man to be
fandum" animal. He would not have a man
fight, as a foldier, in the jullell caufe. What he
fays againft fights of Gladiators, and the expofing
of children, appears to me to be very good, what-
ever the reft may feem.

The Mauitheans feem to have° been againft war :
Angujlin^i in oppofmg them, is clearly for juft war;

and

' Fielding defcribes Col. Bath well, talking as a Chrijiian
about Duelling.

"> Ladvocat ; collfcfled from various Lives.

" Laftantiusdc vero Cultu, cap. 20. — A. D. 306.

<• Lardner, Vol. 3. page 476.

P Au^. Contra Faullum, 22. 74.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VI. 503

and argues well in excufe for ir, calling Soldiers
non homicidas fed miniftros Legis, — falutis pub-
llcze defenfores. — Fauftus had been arguing againft
the Old Teflament, and had inflanced in the
wars of Moles. Auguftin fays, quid culpatur in
Bello?

The Pelanans were againft oaths.— And againft
Riches'^: they held, that a man ought not tojwear
at tf//;— and that rich converts muft give up their
whole fubftance, or Baptifm would not profit,
them. Auguftin oppofed them in both thefe
points, though he himfelf had given up his pro-
perty, and had perfuaded fome to do the fame :
as appears from his Letter to Hilarins, who had
written from Sicily to inform Auguftin of the.
Pelagian notions fpreading there^ But feveral
Fathers feem to have been againft Oaths, thinking
them allowed to JewSy but wholly forbidden to
Chriftians. As Bafil and Chryfoftom : Jerom alfo
and Gregory of Nazianzum might lean that way.
Cyprian however feems to have been on our fide ;
but, in early times, fwearing was confounded
with fwearing by Heathen Deities; that would be
reckoned wrong by all. Fegetitis gives an account
of the Oaths taken by Chrijlian Soldiers^ : fo that
Chriftians did enlift, and had a San-amentum ; they
alfo profefted to honour the Emperor next after
God.

VI. The IFaldevfes feem to have been very
likely to take the turn of which we are ipeaking,

Accordingl)'-,

"J See the pafTages in Voffius's Hift. Pelag. page 723. 727. —
Wall on Bapt. page 179. 183.

' See Wail, i. 19. 21. page 182, quarto.— The Pelagians had
fold their property, and condemned every one who did not.—
Auguflin had fold his, and had perfuaded fome to fell theirs,
but cenfured none who did not.

« Quoted by Voffius, ibid, page 727.— See alfo Lardner, end
erf" 8th Volume,

I I 4

504 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VI.

Accordingly, Mofheim informs' us, that — " Their
Rules of pradice were extremely auftere; for they
adopted as the model of their nioral difcipline,
tl e St-rmon of Chrift on the Mount, wliich they
interpreted and explained in the moft rigorous and
literal manner; and, of confequence, prohibited
and condemned in their Society, all ivars, and fuits
of L^w, all attempts towards the acquifition of
wealthy the infli6ting of capital punifliments, fe!f-
d' fcince againlt unjuft violence, and Oaths of all
knds."

Aladaine^ in his note on this pafTage, obferves,
that thefe perfons only meant to revive Piety ^ and
oppofe abufes.

fVickliffe had fuch a mafs of corruption to re-
move, that he might not at once difccrn what was
pradicable : he feems to have had a tendency to
decline fome of the ufages of which we are fpeak-
ing. At the Council of Conftance one of his
condemned propofitions was, " Oaths made to
flrengthen human contracts and civil commerce,
are unlawful"." — And Gilpin tells us, he was
againfl capital punilhmcnts, and thought war
*' utterly unlawful''."

Vows of /JovcT/)' may be mentioned; efpecially
as they are generally attended with meeknefs, and
fet men at a diRance from war and bloodlhed.— In
France, about twenty years ago. the Convents of
Monks living in poverty filled very flowly ; they
fell far fliort ot their complement.

The German Anabaptijis are mentioned in our

thirty-

* Moflieim, Cent. 12, 2. 1;. 12. 8vo. Vol. 2. page 454.

'^ Bavter on Councils, page 433.

" Gilpin's Reformers, tage 79, 80. — Collier's Ecclef. Hift.
J. 631. mentions four Books of his on the Sermon on the
Mount, and thtec Books of civil Government.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VI. 505

thirty-eighth Article. — I gave an account ^ of them
formerly. Luther^ who knew them well, defcribes
them in few words, as far as concerns our prefent
piirpofe: docentes Chriftiano'' nihil elTe poffiden-
dtm, non jurandum, nullos magiftratus hab.endos,
non exercenda judicia, neminem tuendum aut de-
fendendum, uxores et liberos deferendos, atque id
genus portenta quam plurima. — In Sleidan's^ Hil-
tory, John Matthew orders all goods to be in com-
mon, and people bring their goods to the common
ftock; partly, perhaps, through fear of two pro-
phejying Virgins, who difcovered all embezzling. —
The Landgrave tells them, they mean to overturn
all Government'". — Cheynell fays, "the Anabaptijls
go to fea without any ordnance in their iliips" —
travel without any *' fword,"— one of them does
" not think it lawful to be a C////d'r^"

The firft ^ocinians have been thought to originate
from the Anabaptifts ''. In a note on Mofheim's
Ecclefiaftical Hiftory^ it is faid, *' there is this

peculiarity

y Art. VII. Seft. in. — There arefomeAfts of Henry VIII.
and Edward VI. againft them. See Burn, under DiJJenters.

^ Pref. to Ennarations on Matt v, vi. vii fol. i. page 2. —
Works, Vol. 7. fol aparaphrafe onChrift's Sermon on the mount.

* The Latin title is, Commentaria de Statu Religionis et
Reipublicje, Carole V. Caefare. in 26 Books. It is tranflated
into Englifh by Bohun. — See alfo Wall, page 414 419. 425.

*» The Anabaptilb refilled Government by virtue of their
Chriftian Liberty. — Art. vii. Sett. 11 1. — And becaufe Magif-
trates imply imperfe^imt; Rogers, page 224. — ConfelT. Augfb. i.
Cap. 17. the Godly fhall rule and poffefs the Earth, at laji -^
ergo begin diredly.-^^Q& Molhcim, Cent. 16. 3. 2. 3. 16. 8vo.
Vol. 4. page 153.

= Cheynell on Socinianifm, page 51. (inT — 5 — 38, Sid,
Coll.)

^ Moiheim, 8\'0. Vol. 4. page 178. Cent. 16 3. 2. 4. 8.

' Ibid. Se£t. 10. page 185. Svo. fee alfo Cheynell on Soci-
nianifm, page 51, 152.— for connexion between Anabaptifts
and old Socinians. — He is fpeaking of fome fortofSocinians

when

506 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. VII. VIII.

peculiarity in their moral injuiKflions, that they"
prohibit the taking of oaths and the repelHng of
injuries.'* — The modern Socinians have not this
peculiarity.

VII. The reformed Churches would be all
earneft to clear themfelvcs of the imputation of
being feditious, and of favouring the Anabaptifts.
— The Helvetic Confeflion condemns them ex-
prefsly. The French mentions the error, about
a community of Goods, as then fubfifting. The
Scotch allows the Magiftrates to purge Religion;
— would it allow Tipopijh Magiftrate ? — The Dutch
much the famej and it fpeaks of the Anabaptifts,
like our thirt^'-eighth Article, as to holding a
community of goods. The Bohemian is flrongly
againft the Magiftrate's interfering^ in religious
matters. The Auguflin condemns the Anabaptifts
warmly; and mentions Magiftracy, War, Oaths;
and the belief of the adtual iinai Dominion of the
Saints.

VIII. I rather fufped our Article of aiming at
the Fiiritans^ : blaming the Anabaptifts for any
puritanical error, would be a way of throwing
odium upon the Puritans. — In the P/ay called the
Puritan^ one fays, " We (Puritans) muft not fzvear,

I can

when he fays, page i;2. " God hath not given his people any
earthly goods or poiTeflioni under the Golpel;"— there is more
of it: printed 1643.

' It might be inquired, whether thofe who were for the
magiftrate's interfering in affairs of ReHgion, had rot the
Magiilrale on their fide? and thofe who were againft tiie magif-
trate's interfering, had not him for an adverfary ?

8 Rogers refers to a paffage in the Preface to Hooker's
Ecc'efiallical Polity, in which it is faid, that Puritans made a
pradlice ofdecYin'uv^oat/is in Courts of Law, when their brethren
were under proj'ccution, and if they were fworn, they would
then hc/ile7it. But this feems nothing to a Dodrine ot unhyj-
fjilnefs of oaths; only as it would//// the Puritans upon making
what objedions they could, in their own defence.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. IX. X. 507

I can tell you:"—*' We may lie, but we muft not
fwear :" — and, " No rich thing fliall enter into
Heaven, you know." — The character of Corporal
Oath is probably intended to heighten the puritani-
cal character, by contra{l^

IX. In or near 1573, there were a fet of Chrif-
tians in the Ifle ot Ely\ who are faid to have
mixed the notions of Gnoftics, Arians, and Ana-
baptifts. — They deduced from Matt. v. that they
ought not to take any oaths; from the command-
ment, " thou fhalt not kill" that all capital punifh-
ments are unlawful : and from A6ls ii. 44, 45.
that riches are unchriftian. And they held other
notions not conneded vi'ith our prefent fubjeft.
They were thought worth denouncing to Govern-
ment.

X. The Family of Love feem likely, from what
has been already faid of them, to have run into
the errors of which we are treating j and in the
Proclamation of Elizabeth" againfh them, it is
mentioned, that they would take an Oath before a
INIagiftrate, and not fcruple to deceive him if he
was not one of their own {^ck. However, Rogers
on this Article refers to H. N.'s work, Spirit.
Land. 6. 5, as railing at Magiftracy, and to
another work as encouraging men to accomplilh
the dominion of the Saints. And alfo to palfages
condemning all wars, and prohibiting the ufe of
all zveapons.

The ^lakers take up fome notions which the
Anabaptifts' laid down ; they hold all war to be

unlawful;

' See the Play amongfl: Shalcfpeare's, A61 i. Scenes and 3.
and A£l 3. Scene 6. " Peace has more hidden oppreffions, and
violent heady fms (though looking of a gentle nature) than a
profeiTed ctw." — This is laid with a miew to Puritans.

^ See Collier's Ecclef. Hift. Vol. 2: page 545.

^ BilTiop Sparrow's Colledlion, page 171.

* Burn, under DiJJeniers.

508 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XI.

unlawful i and all oaths; but they exprefsly allow
of property, and difference of ranks. They fpeak
feelingly of the Civil Magijlrate's interfering about
Gpiniofis : but they feeni to take for granted the
lawfulnefs of his temporal authority ""•; and indeed
their addieifes to our King have been always loyal :
— they ground their opinions on Scripture.— One
might read an expreffion or two of Warburton, in''
his Alliance.

At the Refloration there" was a very fevere
act againll the Quakers, the tendency ol which
was, to compel th^m to take Oaihs; but at the
Revolution their fcruples found relief : — and I hope
a iblBcient one.

The Moravians, who flile themfelves " Uuitas
Fratrtm^'' or " United Brethren" are called by
Limborch^, Communijiay as having goods in com-
mon j but I have known Perfons of Fortune mem-
bers of that Community. Perhaps they might at
firft have one common flock. In 22 of George II.
ihey had an act of Parliament to relieve them
from taking Oaths ; yet they make declarations
** in the prefence of Go^%"--confidering God as a
'* Witnefs*' I obferve they are called a " proie-
ftant Epijcopal' Church."

XI. We may now proceed to Explanation.

Some, I think, have fcrupled to fign our Articles,
becaufe it was originally, in the Articles of 1562,
" tlie ^teen's Majefty," and not, " the King's
iVlajeily." Such a fcruple requires a conftant luc-
cefiion of female fovereigns.

" The

« Barclny's Apol. prop. 14. " Page 91. 121.

«• Burn, under Diflcnters, 13 i^- 14. Chap. 2. c. i.
f l,imborch on Adsii.

1 Aiiguftin would tell them that they do not know what
iwcaringis. See Wall, 4to. page 185. Aug. ad liilariura.
■ ' Burn, under Difienlcis, 4to. page 525.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XI. 509

" The chief power" — in Latin, fummam liabet
poteftatem : which is fometimes called the /«j5r <?;»£-
or fovereign power.

" Foreign jurifdiftion," can only allude to the
fee of Rome : however, the general terms convey
fomething of reafoning. — The tirfl; paragraph is
againft the Papijls, the i'econd againft the } uritans.

'* By which titles^'' — fapreme in ecclefiaftical
caufes, fupreme in civil caufes : this feems to be
the meaning; but the grammar feems fcarcely ac-
curate. This Article is made out of one of i ^^^\
and there is more grammatical danger in alterations
than in original CGmpolition\

*' Slanderous folks," are in Latin, calnmniatores :
the Puritans are meant. — The Injun^iions Ipoken of
are in Sparrow's Collection' : we may look at them,
" Lately"^ — in 1559.

*' To all godly Princes in Holy Scriptures" —
the aft of a wicked pagan Prince, might not have
made a good precedent. — But fome fcriptural pre-
cedents {hould be mentioned. — Exod. xxxii. 22,
Aaron fubmits to the Lay-lawgiver, Mofes. —
Deut. xiii. 5. A prophet inticing to Idolatry, is to
be put to death. — i Kings iii. 26. Solomon judge>
Abiathar. — 2 Chron. xix. 5 — 9. Jehofiiaphat give^

judicial powers to facred perfons. — xxix. 4, &c.

Hezekiah gives orders to the Leviies.— See alfo
ver. 1 1 . — ver. 2 1 . he commands tlie Sons of Aaron':
fee alfo ver. 31. — 2 Chron. xxx. i. Hezekiah orders
a Pxiffover. — xxxi. 2. He orders the courfes of
Levites. — David, and Jofiah are alfo mentioned as
ioftances".

' Thefe

^ I fhould like to know, if it were pofTible, whether theQueefe
herfelf had any hand in tranfplanting her injunction into -this
Article. One can coriceive, that her Majelly's grarnnatical
inaccuracy might remain unconeded.

' Sparrow's Colledion, page oi.

" Scotch Confeffion. -Syntagma, page i^^.

510 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XII. XIII

Thefe things are mentioned in the Explanation^
left the precedents of tlie Old Teftament fliould
not be now thought fufficiently binding upon us
Chriftians, to make a part of our Proof.

The " civil Jword^' &c. feems an allufion to
Rom. xiii. 4. " no jurildicftion," — temporal or
fpirituai.

The words '■'■ Chrijlian men'''' occur both in the
paragraph about capital puniQiments, and in that
about war, which fhews that our authorities are to
come from the fcriptures of the New Teftament. — ■
*' Wear zveapons^'' is the expreffion, probably, of
Anabaptifts, and the Family of Love.

XII. Let us now go on to our Proof.

1. The King of our Realm, and not the Pope,
is the Head of our Church.

2. The King is not a Mimjler of the church.

3. Chriftians owe obedience to the Civil Magif-
trate.

4. Capital punifliments arc not always unlawful
in a Chriftian country.

5. It is not always unlawful for a Chriftian to

engasfe in war

Though we have now had the Hijiory relating
to Property and Oaths, yet the lawfuinefs of them
had beft be proved under the fubfequent Articles.

XIII. The King of our Realm, and not the
Pope, is the Head of our Church. In the third
Book the principles of Alliance"^ between Church
and State, were briefly laid down and defended.
There it appeared, that when a Church is com-
pofed of the fubjeds of a ftate, there muft be one
Head of both, in order to elfefl unity of Govern-
ment; and that it is much more ufeful to both
that the King (or civil maglftrate) fhould prcfide,
under regulations arifing from the nature of the

Alliance,
* Book HI. Chap. xiv. Se£t. v.

EOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIII. rii

Alliance, than the fpirltual Head of the eccle-
fiaftical fociety. So far all lies within the nation.

As to any foreign fpiritual power interferino-,
there feems no good foundation for it, either in the
Law of Nature, or in the'' Gofpel. And till the
middle of the fecond Century we are told, thac
all Chriftian Churches were independent of each
other, and'' without any common Head. — But is
not the Church Univerfal ? — Chrift did mean to
form all his Difciples into one Body, but never
obliged a fmali part of his Difciples to continue in
communion with a large body, contrary^ to all
the didates of Reafon and Confcience. Each
particular church, as has been frequently obferved,
ought to confider itfelf as part of the Catholic
Church J and treat the Members of all the other
Churches as Brethren, from whom, human weak-
nefs caufes a prefent feparation. This is the moil
likely method of forming finally a folid union.

But if it were allowed, that the Catholic Church
of Chrift ought to have one vifible head, what
pretenfions has the Bifhop of Rome to be that
Head? none which can be conlldered as eftablifhed
by general content. E.ome was once a feat of
Empire; if Chriftian churches, in or near that
Empire, had then occafion to confult too-ethcr,
fome precedence would be proper and convenient.
for the lake of maintaining order, and unity of
aflion; — reafons of convenience, and analogy,
might make a determination to fall, when a de-
termination miifl be made, on the Bi(hop of
Rome. — But fuch reafons are now all againjl a
Bifhop of Rome.

Befidcs,

y Powell, page 35^.

=^ See An. xxi. — Bingham hath fomething on the fubie-a.
Book 2. Chap. 4. & 6.

^ Rev. xviii. 4- — Art. xix.

512 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIIT.

Befides, if the whole Church of Chrift is to
have one head, would it not now be btft to
fix upon one in fome other fituation? America
muft now be confidered, and the (late of Chridi-
anity in Africa, and in Afia : in the Eaft Indies
pofiibly Chriftianity may make fome progrefs;
nay, would it not be right to have an Head of
the Church, if one be neceflliry, in different pi ices,
at different times, according to the aftual flate of
the Chrillian world? we muft not for a moment
fuppofe worldly ambition or intereft to throw any
difficulties in the way : certainly the Bifliop of
Rome never was in the office, if fuch an office there
be, of head of the univerfal Church of Chrift.

It may however be faid, that the Bilhop of
Rome has exercifed fpiritual Power in England.
He has; but it was one founded in no right, nor
tscx fiibmitted io, more than as the plundering of
a robber is fubmitted to vvhilft his piftol is at your
breaft. Whenever this nation has been free enough
to be capable of making a contracf, it has declared
againft. papal ufurpations A contract ought always,
in order to be valid, to promote the mutual
benefit of the contrading parties; the fpiritual
power of Rome has been exercifed merely for the
iDenefit of Rome.

All Chriftians ought, no doubt, to aft for the
good of Chriftianity; but nothing would be more
contrary to the general interefts of Chriftianity,
than for the Pope to have authority over the
Church of England :— we have left the Church
of Rome from the tulleft convidlion of its errors
and corruptions : in what way could the head of
that Church now excrcile authority over us, but
in the way of controverfy and perfecution? wc
fhould rejijiy and the event muft be, that Roman
and Englilh Churches would hurt each others re-
ligious principles materially.

No

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIV. 51^

No; if a Courayer, or if other learned and pious
nien, anxioufly vvifli to have a Catholic church in
jaEl, as well as in Theory, let them encourage
general toleration, and quiet feparation of thofe,
who cannot confcientioully hold communion to-
gether. Let the BiQiops of Rome give up all
ambitious and lucrative projefts, let the Romifli
Clergy enlighten \\\€\x people, as much as they are
themielves enlightened : — this done, the Church
of Rome is no longer atl objeft of our jealoufy;
we have no longer occafion to be upon our guard.
Intercourfe will generate confidence and mutual
good opinion ; thefe will generate benevolence ;
mutual benevolence is mutual attraction: attrac-
tion produces Unity. So that the firfh approach
to Unity, is complete independence,, and fepara-
tion.

Should fuch unity prevail as to give a reafonable
profpeCL of benefit from Councils, fome 'Precedence
may again be wanted. In that cafe let him pre-
iide, who fhall appear to be the beft fituated and
. qualified for prefiding. Our Ifland will fcarcely
afpire to the honour. But whoever prelides, let
him be aware of arrogance and oppreffion 1

I iliouid hope our firft propofition may now be
confidered as proved.

XIV. The King is not a Minijfer of the Church.

The reafons given why the King Ihould be
Head of the Church, his compulfive and pro-
te(fling power, his ability to maintain the Minifters,
fliew, that, in the Alliance of Church and State,
there is no view of his having any employ that is
not of a temporal nature. For prieftly offices he
is unqualified, and his time is occupied in others.
Our reafoning on this head in the third Book
was general; and there is nothing in the Engliih
Church or State to be the ground of an exception :

VOL. IV. K K But

514 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XV~XVII,

But all parties being of one mind on this propofi-
tion, an elaborate proof of it, is unnecefTary.

XV. Chriftians owe obedience to the Civil
MagiJIrate.

Here we quit the Billiop of Rome, and come
to thofe fcruples or prohibitions, the Hiftory of
which we have given colleftively. Let us obferve
of them all together, that the error of them turns
upon not diftinguifliing between what is defirabk,
and what is praElicahk. However defirable any
end may be, if we adopt any impracticable mea-
fures, we only get farther from it ; whereas if we
begin with pradlical meafures, we make fome pro-
grefs, however fmall; and we may, by perfeve-
rance, attain our end at lafl: : to content ourfelves
with what is pradicable, is the mod likely way to
attain what is ultimately defirable.

For proof that Chriftians owe obedience to civil
Magiftrates, we may refer to Matt. xxii. 21.--
Rom. xiii. i — 7. — Titus iii. 1. — i Pet. ii. 13. —
But the cogency of thefe proofs will be beft under-
ftood by reading Bifhop Sherlock's Difcourfe'' on
Rom. xiii. i. which I would earneftly recommend.

XVI. Capital pnniJJiments are not always unlaw-
ful in a Chriftian country. — In the Gofpel it is
taken ior granted, not ordered, that an offender
may be punillicd with death. —Ads xxv. ir. —
Rom. xiii. 4.

The Jewijli capital punifliments prove, that fuch

■ punifliments are not fo eflentially wrong, as never

to be right in any cafe. And nothing of the Jew-

i(h Law, relating to punifliment, is repealed under

the Gofpel.

XVII. IVar is not always unlawful to Chrif-
tians.

Here again we fay. In the Gofpel, war is not

ordered, but taken tor granted. — See Matt. viii. 9.

Luke
*> Bilhop Sherlock's Difcourfes, Vol. 4. Difc. xiii.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XVIII. 51^

Luke iii. 14. — A6ls x. i, 2. — 2 Tim. ii. 4. Each
of which texts (liould be confidered with this
queflion, what would have been faid, had war been
univerfaliy to be prohibited? — Would not our
Saviour, or St. John'' Baptift, have thrown in
fome exhortations to quit tiie mihtary profeffion ?

Under the Old Law we find manv wars ; and
the Pfalmift bleffes God for teaching ^ his hands to
war, and his fingers to fight. To which no blame
is annexed in the Gofpel *".

XV III. We have given a dired: proof of our
propofitions, but fome indirect feems wanting;
efpecially for the two^ laft.

It may be afked, in the firft place, are not
capital punifhments inconfiftent with the benevo-
lent fpirit of the Gofpel? I would anfwer, firll,
that every right punifliraent is a fpecies of benevo-
lence : and is inlli6ted fimply with adefire of doing
good. A man by punifhing may fometimes do
inore good than by forgiving.

But ^^ thou //lalt not kill :^'—l would here borrow
the words of St. Paul ; *' it is manifeit that he

is

*= I was glad to find Auguftin putting a fpeech into the

mouth of John Baptift, in the way here mentioned. Contra

Fauftum, 22. 74. quoted in Seil. v.

■^ Pfalm cxliv. 1.

^ Would Chrift have been called the Captain of our Salva-
tion if all military offices liad been held in utter abomination?

* The Papills are apt to urge, that the Pope has a right to
Supremacy, as fucceflbr of St. Peter. The claim feems to me
fo weak, that I am unwilling to detain you upon it. Limborch,
in his Syftem of Theology, (L. 7. c. 9 Sc 10,) enters into the
fubjefl. — And Macknight takes notice, (Sed. 70'. end; on
Matt, xvi, 17 — 23.) of the worldly turn of St. Peter's mind, at
the time when he is faid to have received his Commiffion.—
Limborch {hews, both that St, Peter was not the Head of the
Difciples, {o as to have any authority over them, and that the
Biihop of Rome was not fucccfTor to St. Peter. — See aifo J.
Hales's Tradis, page 251.

K K 2^

5l6 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XVIII.

is excepted" who docs not conimit murder \ and
the Jevvilh praFlice (for this was part of the Jewilh
Law), makes this ftill more evident. — This is a
fliort command, but if it were as long as a modcrrr
Ad of Parhament, it would ftill be liable to limi-
tations taken from its true intent and meaning.
For inftance, if a man attacks my life, I am furely
to prevent him from taking it, though by taking
hisi — one life muft be lolt either way : — and if he
attacks my property, I may defend that, otherwife
my right is nothing : and if I cannot defend it but
by taking his life, then I Ihould fay, he deftroys
himfelf; 'tis the fame thing as if I hold out my
fword, and he runs upon it.

A Nation^ however, you will fay, is fafe, they
may Jecure the offender, and therefore need not kiU
him. This may not be pradlicable in all cafes :
luppofe, in any cafe, it is; yet, in ftriclnefs, what
right has the criminal to force the community to
maintain and watch him ? if they are not obliged
to maintain and watch him, then'they have a right
to defend themfelves againft fuch attacks as he may
be expeded to make if they do not maintain and
watch him. — Yet it muft be owned, that, though
fome may perhaps, everi by man, be given over
to a^ reprobate mind, it is a rational exer-
cife of mercy and benevolence, to fecure others,
even fuch as had no ftricl right to be fpared. —
The poflibility of repentance is worth attending
to : Reformation would be fo great a good, that
a light evil mi<2;ht be born for the chance of it.

But we are only concerned with Scripture. —
Scripture might not ' reveal moral phiioibphy
fupernaturally, any more than natural phiioibphy.
A time may come when capital punilhmcnts may

be

5 Ron. i. 28.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIX. 517

be rpared; and yet they might not ht forbidden^ in
Scripture; which is all our concern.

XIX. In the next place it may be aficed, with
regard to war, is it not contrary to Matt. v.
38 — 41'. P-Bifliop Burnet fays, this is "a very
great difficulty." — Suppofe there was a feni'G in
which this paffage prohibited all war, (as it cer-
tainly does all forwardnefs in going to war) ; that
fenfe could not be right, becaufe one part of fcrip-
ture is to be interpreted fo as to be conftfient with
other parts.

The Sermon on the Mount is to be interpreted
as being in fome meafure the language of reproof;
the language of reproof is a part of Eloquence :
what is intended to mortify and correft felf-fuffi-
cicncy, is not to be interpreted exadly in the
fame manner as what is delivered to the ingenu-
ous and modefl enquirer. In what our Saviour
delivers, each Chriftian precept is contrafted to
fome fault prevailing amongft the reputable part
of the Jews : fo that one iliould keep the felf-
fufficiency and the malevolence of luch Jews, con- ■
tinually before one's eyes : the Jewiih character
feems to have been malevolent, the Chriftian bene-
volent.— The Chriftian precept now in queftion,
is oppofed to the pracftice of Retaliation: to male-
volent rancour, flying inftantly, on the receipt of
an imagined injury, to feize eye for eye and tooth
for tooth. — This muft not be Chrijlian condu(ft5
fays our Saviour j it is not r/V/// conduct, nay, it

was

., ^ I think I faid here, in giving this L edliire, that fome nations
might be fo barbarous, or fo circumftanced, after the publica-
tion of the Gofpel, that rights could not be fafe, if no crimi-
nals were put to death : and therefore, that fcripture could not
well prohibit generally capital puniihments, whatever it might
have done if publifhed in times very much improved.
* Barclay's Apology, Prop. 11;.

K K Q

5l3 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XIX.

was never intended to be JevviOi. — But why is it
not right /* becaufe it is not the mod efFeftual way
to banifl-i all injuries from the world, and to perfect
human happinefs : — it is a natural movement, on
the receipt of an injury, to fly to revenge; but
this muft be checked: it fliould be a Rule, to yield,
to bear, to give way a liule, as we do to a bodily
Jiroke, Vk'hen it would otherwife be painful : great
good would arife from the pra6lice of this rule;
we fhould find the imagined injury no real one;
or wc fhould foften the offender, or we (hould
bind to us by ties of gratitude, one of an hafty
but generous temper. It is not, however, to be
iinderflood, that this rule is invariable, or univer-
fal, any more than another ; when punilliment will
clearly anfvv'er a better end, and can be infli(fted in
the genuine fpirit of benevolence^ it muft be ap-
plied ; elfe there is a voluntary negleft of t.\\t greater
good. But, commoydy, men want much more per-
fuading to yield, than to puniOi. The miftake
Vv'ith which we are now concerned, is this; if a
Ride is given, it is taken as an only, or ////^/d" Rule;
whereas, though each rule is given fingly, it is not
meant to exclude other Rules. One rule is, to
let our light Ihine before men; another, not to
let our left hand know what our right doeth ; both
excellent Rules! on different'^ occafions : but nei-
ther of them can be followed fmgly, on all occa-
fions. Thefe limit each other ; but every rule,
if not limited exprefsly, is to be underftood to be
fo tacitly, by confiderations of the greatefl good.
The very next words to our diflicuk paifage, are,
" Give to him that afketh thee; and from him

that

^ Matt. xii. 37. irakes our final fentence to depend upon
owx I'ocrdi. Rom. ii 6, &c. on omt ailions. — I r.eed fcarce fay,
that refennccis here made to Matt. v. 16. and vi. 3.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVII. SECT. XX. 519

fhat would bprrow of thee, turn not thou away."
— Another excellent Rule, in its place :— no one
has ever followed this without limitation ; and yet
it would be difficult to aflign any reafon why it is
more variable, or liable to limitations, than that
which immediately precedes it.

This may fuffice to folve our difficulty ; but
I cannot quit it without obferving, how irkfome
it is to be obliged to urge anything, which can
have any tendency to lelTen the force of that
divine rule, yield to evil, '* give place unto
wrath j" — a rule didated by that wifdom, which
is from above, delivered from the mouth of him
who knew what v^^as in man : a rule fo much
wanted, and fo replete with good, that one would
not foon find one's fclf weary of expatiating on its
complicated' benefits to mankind.

This is all the indireft proof I will give.—
Any one might confult Grotius de Jure, &c.
I, 2. 6, &c.

XX. If any application were wanted, we might
obferve, with a view to mutual concejjion, that war
is generally, or always, owing to fome defect in
Wifdom or in Virtue; to miftaking rights, to am-
bitious reftlellnefs : though we cannot own, as a
confequence, that no Nation can lawfully defend
itfelf. To give up felf-defence is impracticable.
—I have wilhed to imprefs the diftindion be-
tween what is defirable, and what is pradicable :
and therefore I will conclude with the following
incident: we are told, th3.t zhe Penjj-hajiians, 3.he£
high profeffions of fuffering anythmg rather than
fight, determined to retake by force,' a Hoop
from a Pirate.

The

' Reference is here made to John ii. 25.—— Rom. xii. 19.
and James iii. 17.

K K 4

520 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVlI. SECT. XX.

The excufe they made was "", that they did
it as MagifirateSy not as ^iahrs. The account
is taken from a printed Book of Trials -y of George
Keith, and others.

«" Leflie's Snake in the Grafs, Sed, 18.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. I. II. ^21

ARTICLE XXXVIII.

OF CHRISTIAN MEn's GOODS, WHICH ARE NOT
COMMON.

THE Riches and Goods of Chrlftians are not
common, as touching the right, title, and pof-
feffion of the fame, as certain Anabaptifts do falfly
boaft. Notvvithftanding, every man ought, of
fuch things as he poffefleth, liberally to give alms
to the poor, according to his ability.

I. Having taken the Hiflory of this Article
into the Hiftory of the preceding, we may begin
with Explanation.

II. The Title is in the hmt form with thofe of
the twenty-fixth and twenty-ninth, on which we
have had fome remarks.

The Latin title feems obfcure; De illicita bono-
rum communicatione; may it be tranllated, Of
the unlawfulnefs of ading as if all goods were
common? — that feems likely to be the meaning.

*' Chriflians," — this word fliews, as before, that
our concern is only with the Scriptures of the New
I'eftament, the true meaning of which we fuppofe
fome of our Chriftian Brethren to have miftaken.

Our Article confifts of two fentences; the firll
of which exprefles rights and duties of perfeB
obhgationj the fecond, thofe oi imperfea obliga-
tion.—At firft fight it feems odd to infer t in lin

Article,

522 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. 111.

Article, a duty, of the pradice of which the
Agent is to be the fole judges fuch a duty feems
only matter of exhortation : yet we have had
fimilar inftances in the thirty-fccond and thirty-
fourth Articles. And where the miftake of our
brethren, who differ from us, depends very much
upon taking indeterminate duties of Scripture for
determinate, there it is immediately neceflary to
mark out the difference. But it is proper alfo to
do it, when a ftricl duty of perfed obligation
would feem harlfi, and* contrary to Chriftian bene^
volence, if its defcds w^ere not fupplied by a free
voluntary duty. In Article xxxii. it feemed proper
to fet marriage in an honourable light, by ob-^
ferving, that to fome perfons it might be the ftate
productive of the greateft virtue : lo here, it feems
proper to fet ftrid Juftice in an honourable light>
by fhewing, that it is the ground, of all that volun-
tary Benevolence, which is contrafted with it, and
which cannot be reduced to deteiminate rules with-
out more harm than good. — The inftitution of
property thus appears in its true light, and is
feen as greatly beneficial to mankind.

III. 1 fee nothing more for explanation.

And for Proof, I fee but one propofition.

' The inftitution of Property is not contrary to
the Gofpel.'

For as to beneficence, that is not mentioned as a
matter in difpute, but only as completing the idea
of moral and Chriflian duty, with regard to pro-
perty i and as fliewing property to be ufeful.

The dired proofs of our propofition, to he
found in Scripture, are very numerous : I will only
aim at mentioning a number which may be fuffi-
cient. — In Matt. v. 42. gi'i'ing and lendingy both
imply property: fo in Matt. vi. 3. do alms.—^
I'holc of whofe miftake we are now treating,

ground

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. IV. 523

ground their notions very much on our Saviour's
Sermon on the Mount. — From John xix. 27. it
appears, that St. John had an home, which af-
forded a refidence to the bleffed Virgin Mary.—
We may read alfo Rom. xii. 13. as marking,
(Uke the texts from St. Matthew,) both the duties
mentioned in our Article, determinate and inde-
terminate.—2 Cor. viii. anfvvers the fame purpofe,
and fiiews (ver. 13.) that Chriftians had in St.
Paul's time, unequal fliares of property. Eph.
iv. 28. iovhids Jiealing, and advifes induftry for the
purpofe of raifmg a fund for beneficence — i Tim.
V. 8. fliews an ufe of property prior even to bene-
ficence itfelf. I Tim. vi. 1 7. prefuppoles not only
property, but even riches. James iv. 13. pre-
fuppofes traffick, or Commerce. — And particular
perfons who were poffeffed of property, are fpoken
of with commendation : Cornelius, Philemon,
Gaius. Not to mention Zachseus^ or Jofeph of
Arimathea.

IV. This direft proof muft be furely fufficient;
but the indirect feeras to require the greater atten-
tion on the prefent Article. — Yet it may be here
obferved of every text which is brought againft
the inftitution of property, that no fenfe of it can
be admitted, which is not confident ^ with fome
fenfe of the texts already quoted. I imagine we
need not examine, as feeming to favour our ad-
verfaries, more palTages of Scripture than Matt.
vi. 19. — Matt. xix. 16, &c. about the wealthy
young man to whom Chrift propofed felling all he
had. — Luke xvi. 19, &c. about the rich man and
Lazarus. — Afts ii. 44, 45. about the firft Chrif-
tians having all things in common j and i Tim. vi,

9, 10
^ Luke xix. a, &c.
^ As before, Art. xxxvii. Seft. xix.

^2^ BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. V. VI.

9, 10. or feme paflage of like import, exprefling
the mifchiefs attending riches.

V. Matt. vi. 19. is only a comparative cxpvcC-
fion, though it has, no doubt, been fomctimcs
underftood abfolutely. Its meaning only is, that
men ought to />?Y/tT heavenly treafures to earthly.
We have had inftances of this negative mode of
comparifon" before.

VI. With regard to Matt. xix. 16, &c. the
propofal made by Chrift to the wealthy young
man, is certainly one intended for extraordinary
emergencies. [t cannot be made a ground of
adtion in ordinary life, without the kind of pro-
portion mentioned in the eleventh Chapter of the
firft Book. If the rich young man was, in his
circumftances, to ad in fuch a manner, how am I
to a6t in my circumftances?

This might fuffice; but even take the tranfaction
as it was in our Saviour's time, and it is no an-
nulling of the inftitution of property. A very
great adl: of beneficence is held forth, or propofed,
on a very great occafion y fuch as might be pro-
pofed on fome few other great occafion^; fuch as
the captivity of a parent, an invaiion of one's
country, a flrugglc for civil liberty, he. but I fee
no hint of any difapprobation of the inftitution of
Property. — It does not appear that the refufal was
blamed ; it does not appear to niey that the donar
lion would have been accepted.

This might fufficc as an anfwer to our objcdion,
but it may be ufeful to rcfleifl a little more on a cafe
which has had very impoj-tant** effefts.

When the young man began to confer with our
Lord, no one prefent had any idea of riches; nor

indeed

« Objeftionsto Art. XXVI I.

* Aug. ad Kilarium. Wall, page 183, quarto.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VI. 525

indeed till the very end of the conference j and
then the mention of them was incidental. A
worthy and amiable youth, of a wealthy family,
had an ambition, turned, as I hope many others
have, towards religious perfedion : he feem.s to
have been perfuaded, that he had pretty nearly
attained his end. Jeius having become known and
<:el€brated, this young man comes to confer with
him. He hopes to be told, that he is very near
perfedion : " what lack I yet ?" — " Jelus beholding
him, loved him." He loved this worthy youth
how fangidne foever he might be; and loved him
too well to flatter him. Perfe<5Vion? alas! man hsii
not attained to that; it may be an objedl of pur^
fidt, a mark to look forward to; but that man is
very imperfe<5t^ indeed, who thinks he has already
attained perfedion: *' what lack I yet?" you fay;
fee here my difciples ; is there nothing for you to
aim at ? what think you of becoming one of them?
we have a religion to publilh, which will be as
great a bleffmg to mankind as they chute to let it
be : the religion of the Mejfiah. Is there now
nothing to do for one who aims at religious per-
fedion?— He who publilhes.this religion muft be
my difciple : and I have not where to lay my head !
he muft call the poor his brethren: he himfeif
muft be poor in fpirit : — you are alarmed; and well
you may ; for being my difciple might be the ruin
of your fortune; nay, it might coft you more than
fortune; you might have to take up your Crofs,
if you followed me.— The young man's fanguine
hopes are all blafted. He had been flattered into
an expedation of better things: he retires^ morti-
fied, and dejected. — Our Lord, without blaming
him, takes occafion to obferve, that the rich will
with difficulty (J'uitxoAwj) be made ufeful in .Ipreading

■ See Phil. iji. 12.

^26 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VII.

his religion : though there is no natural impoffi-
bihty of their becoming converts, it is not to be
expected. On fome accounts the poor^ will be
more eligible, at firft ; yet whoever does facrifice
worldly advantages for the fake of Chriftianity,
fliall be amply rewarded.

This is the idea which the palTage conveys to
me. Yet it is not to be expedted that we lliould
fee all the reafons which our Saviour had for any
meafure that he took^. And it is poflible he
might, on many occafions,-efpecially at firft, avoid
a language perfectly clear and explicit ; and intend
only to fet men on thinking for themfelves. I can
conceive it polTible, that he had no thoughts of
engaging the young man to be his difciple : why
fliould he have ?i youth to follow him? why fhould
'^ he incur the fcandal of inveigling pious young
men of fortune from their parents?

As to the cxpreffions, " go and fell that thou
hafl" — " come and follow me" — they feem to
amount to no more than a propofal; they make
that propofal in a clear and lively wayj but only
to the purpoie which we have mentioned. — We
may consider the cafe of this young man as an
inftance of what is delivered Luke xiv. 26 — 33;
and that paflage as illufbrating this. — On the wholo,
the account of the rich young man, fliews no
abfolute perfedion in parting with one's fortune -.
great occafions may happen, when we may be called
upon to make great facrifices. Ordinarily, per-
fediion may be Tp^im\fnigcility.

VII. The parable ot th.? rich man and Lazarus,
Luke xvi. 19, &c. is calculated to have a ^vcry
good effed in producing a right ufe of riches, but

does

^ I Cor. i. 26. 28 James ii. 5.

8 Art. XIV. this cafe was mentioned ; Seft. iv. in the way
of objedlion; to which the anfwer was given, Seft. v.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VII. 1527

does not feem to have been intended to terrify tnen
out of the pofleffion of them. — It reprefents two
extremes in human life, fplendor and indigence :
death intervenes, and then there is a reverie ; he
who had been high in this world, is in a ftate of
torment J he who had been low and wretched, is
in a ftate of blifs : the rich man intreats him who
had been poor, to adminifter fome reliefj but all
intercourfe is cut off.

It is not to be inferred that every rich man muft
be in fuch a ftate of inferiority to him on whom he
had looked down in this world -, but only that he
may be ; that is, if he be v/icked, and the poor
virtuous and good. — How little do the generality
of rich men attend to what fo plainly follows from
the belief of a future ftate of rewards and punifti-
ments ! How do they fufFer imagination and habit
to reprefent to them the fcenes of this life as con-
tinued into another !

That reprefentation, then, which will awaken
men from fuch dreams of prejudice, wants nothing
more to make it of the utmoft importance. It
prompts every rich man to fay, of every poor
wretch with whom he has had any intercourfe;
* great and luxurious as I am, and mean and
deftitute as this milerable creature is, it may hao-
pen, through my folly and his goodnefs, that he
may be exalted to rejoice in the fociety of Ano-els,
whilft 1 am abafed to undergo the torments of
Hell, and the taunts and infults of Devils; nay,
I may one day be glad to be a fuppliant for re-
lief and afliftance, to him, who now intreats my
help in vain.*

This being the thing particularly wanted, we
may allow it to be the thing particularly meant. —
And therefore we need not trouble ourfelves to
inveftigate what the crime of the rich man was ;

he

528 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. VIII.

he was condemned, ///fr^/br^ he had been wicked ;
the poor man was rewarded, therefore he had been
good : though certainly a rich man may be good,
and a poor man wicked. — That the good in every
ftation, will be happy, and the bad miferable, is
proved in all parts of fcripture : fo that when we
are told, that a man is happy after death, we may
take his goodnefs for granted; as we may the
wickednefs of the damned. — The end oi the para-
ble then was, to imprefs upon the minds of the
rich, that thofe wliom they now defpifed, or op-
prefled, might hereafter, whilfh they were cafl
down beneath all earthly meannefs, be foaring far
above all earthly grandeur. — Sappofe a rich man,
by meditation on this parable, to acquire an habit
of feeling this, and of reprefenting it to himfelf
whenever he has any bufinefs or convcrfation with
any poor perfon; though it need not make him
throw his wealth into the fea; yet what an hea-
venly difpofition it muft generate in him ! what
mildnefs and humility! what condefcenfion, huma-
nity, and even reJpeEliox the poor and needy!

VIII. Much has been faid of Acts ii. 44, 45.
(and iv. 32. 34.) but it does not appear to me,
that property amongft Chriftians was ever abolilLed.
They were called upon, by the exigencies of the
limes, to offer large contributions for the fupporc
of the poorer converts; to large, that they were
obliged to fell fome polfeflions in order to make
them. But all was voluntary beneficence. Indeed
afler the fales were made, and the produce thrown
into a common flock, that flock was * poiieil'ed by
Chriftians in common. And popularly fpeaking,
before fuch ialcs, the generolity ot the richer con-
verts was fo great, that all might be faid to be
welcome to every thing that any poflcffed. But

the

BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. IX. 529

the expoftulation in Ads v. 4. dearly implies
the continuance of p-operty, and A6ts ii. 46.
{hews, that Difciples kept their honfes. — Nay,
if Chriilians had, llridly fpeaking, given np their
property at firft, we could only infer any rule
for ourfelves by that proportion, or compariibn
of circumftances, of which we juft now fpoke.
— Lucian mentions Chriftians as havino; thingfs in
common, and in the lame popular fenfe, m which
I underftand the two palTages in the Ads of
the Apoftles ^

IX. Such paffages as i Tim. vi. 9, 10. only
exprefs/^^j, not any general doEirine^ or Theory.
— Many evils, no doubt, arife from the abufe of
riches j and the defcription of an abufe is fome-
times apt to make well-meaning men fo eager to
avoid it, that they go much farther than was in-
tended. Breaking a bad habit requires fometimes,
at firft, almoft as much refolution as parting with
a Limb ; and therefore the Scripture tells us, we
muft be read}' to part with a limb if it offend us,
or be the occalion of our fmning:— but advice to
correct an abufe^ is not to be miilaken for advice
to throw away the v.fe of anything'; we are ad-
vifed to reform the abufe of anything in order that
we may afterwards have all the advantages from
it,, which it is capable of producing. Spiritual
power has been abufed by the Bidiops of Rome;
that is a good reafon for a reform, but not for
laying afide all Ordinations.

Here we clofe our proof, direct, and indirect.

X. An

'' See Lardner's Works, Vol. 8. page 71, bottom; or
Luciaii's Peren-iuiis.

i See Matt. v. 29, 30. — Origan's mutilation was remedying
an abuic by taking away the ufe; and that by parting with a
Limb. Matt, xix, 12.

VOL. IV. I^ L

530 BOOK IV. ART. XXXVIII. SECT. X.

X. An Application might lead us to confider
the rules of voluntary beneficence ; and to inquire,
whether any reftraints might be laid on the ac-
cumulation of property ? — But thefe things not
being our immediate concern, I forbear to enter
upon them.

ARTICLE

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. I. II. 53I

ARTICLE XXXIX.

OF A CHRISTIAN MANS OATH.

AS we confefs, that vain and rafli Swearing is
forbidden Chriftian men by our Lord Jefus
Chrift, and James his Apoftle^ fo we judge, that
Chriftian Religion doth not prohibit, but that a
man may fwear when the Magi ft rate requireth,
in a caufe of faith and charity, fo it be done ac-
cording to the Prophet's teaching, in juftice,
judgement, and truth.

I. The Hijlory of this as well as of the fore-
going Article having been given under the thirty-
leventh, we immediately look whether we have
anything before us, which requires Explanation.

II. " Vain and rajlz fwearing," is oppofed to
that which is important ^ and deliberate^ or done
upon principle : it arifes from habit, and is intro-
duced for no good purpofe ; it muft have fome
motives, but they are fome kind of wrong fenti-
ments; often parts and kinds of vanity.

*' Forbidden Chrijiian men," here again our
concern is only with Chriftian Scripture : die paf-
fages referred to, when Chrift and St. James are
mentioned, are Matt. v. 34, &c. and James v. 12.

*' fP'^e Judge" — cenfemus — this is not dogmatical.

*' Doth not ^ro////'//"— fuppofe a man thougl>t,

that Scripture difcouraged {\vG2inngy even in evidence,

L L 2 and

:;32 BOOK IV. ART. XjCXlX. SECT. II.

and that it was mod fafe to avoid it; ftill he
might allow, that Scripture did not prohibit it.

*' When a Magiftrate requiretji," — this is op-
pofed to the vain and raQi fwearingi— therefore,
though a man might ufe vain and ra(h i\vearing
before a Magiftrate, yet that is not the thing meant
here. The vain and ra(h fwearing here meant, the
Magiftrate is fuppofed to have no concern with ; it
is fuppofed to be in private life.

" In a caufe of faith and charity^'' in causa
fidei tx. chdritatis y — that is, from motives of afcer-
taining the truths that Juftice may be done ; and
of doing good. — Fidem facere is to create confidence,
or make one's felf believed:— cauja feems to be ufed
by Cicero where we fliould now ufe the word cafe\, —
in a caufe of faith and charity, may therefore mean,
in a cafe which requires credit to be eftablifhed for
the fake of knowing the real ftate of it, as a ftep
to doing Juftice : or in a cafe, in which, by taking
an oath, you may do an a6t of charity or benevo-
lence.— Dr. Ogden feems to have had our expref-
fion in his mind, when he ufes the expreffions,
" in caufes of importance, for the fake of Truth,
in fupport of Juftice, at the call' of Charity;"
— Luther^ fays, v/e may fwear if commanded by
the Magiftrate, or if not commanded, yet from
motives of charity., as we may do other things not
quite regular : — But in our Article, fcemingly,
both in the caufe of Faith and the caufe of charity,
the Magiftrate commands our evidence. — If fo, it
may be faid, we cannot make ourielves pcrfedl
judges what kind of caufe or cafe it is. It Items as
if we could not ; but an Article is not for pradice\

it

" Fifth Sermon on the Commandments, Vol. 2. page 63.
12 mo.

'» Works, Vol. 7. Enarrations on the Sermon on the Mount,
—On Matt. V. 34.. or thereabouts.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. III. . 533

it only lays down what is right : every man mufl
avoid oaths, in cafes not ot faith and charity, as
much as he can*". — The concluding part of our
Article does alfo point out what is right ; adopt-
ing the words of the Prophet Jeremiah^ ; which
feemalfo to be ufed in other places; and to denote
fwearing honellly and fincerely.

III. We will now come to Proof.

* Solemn oaths, taken in obedience to authority,
and from benevolent motives, are not forbidden
by theGofpel.'

Firft we will take fome diredt proofs of this
propofition.

Under the old Law, fwearing by Jehovah was
confidered as a mode of profeffing to ferve him;
in preference to Idols. As Goliak curfed David by
his Gods, fo a Jew fwore by Jehovah. In this
light we are to fee Deut. vi. 13. — Pfalm ixiii. i r.
— Did this idea want confirming, any one might
confult Ifaiah Ixv. 16. And the paffages referred
to in the margin of that text, which is introduced
into our Article.

In the New Tefiament, v/e may look at Matt.
xxvi. 63. obferving, that v/hatever was faid in
anfwer to adjiiratmi^ was faid upon Oath. And
we (hould read Mark viii. 12. for the {ake of the
:«t, (in Englilh verily) which is fometimes a particle
of fwearing, anfwering^ to CiS in Hebrew. — The
Helvetic Confeffion fays, " Chriiluset Apoftoli^ jura-
runt;

= After all, the exprefiion, " in a cauft of faith and charity "
may allude to fomething which I have not leen. Or it may be
taken from Luther, and made lefs clear by alteration. Lather
gives, to my mind, a more diilinft conception than our Article.
But Dr. Ogden is perfeflly clear.

** Jer. iv. 2.

^ See Parkhurft's Greek Lexicon under E.. Si je I'aime ! is
not an oath ; but a pretty powerful e.v-clamation. Diderot.

^ Con fcfT. Helvet, ad finera.

534 I^OOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. IV.

runtj" the inftances of Chrift we have juft men-
tioned: St. Paul feveral times ufes exprcflions,
which may with propriety be called Oaths. As in
Rom. i. 9. — I Cor. xv. 31. where the particle vn
denotes an Oath. — 2 Cor. i. 23. is too ftrong to
need any remark; and the fame may be faid of
2 Cor. xi. 31. — Gal. i, 20. is very plain; as well
as Phil. i. 8. — In the Epiftle to the Hebrews the
Deity is mentioned as fwearing. Heb. iii. 11.
(where u again occurs), and Heb. vi. 16, 17.

IV. But, as in the preceding Article fo here, it is
the indirect proof which requires the greateft atten-
tion.—The ^tnkers^ are very peremptory in objefl-
ing the two paffages already mentioned. Matt. v.
33 — 37. and James v. 12. but they do not, that
I perceive, ule Matt, xxiii. 16 — 22. thele t/ireg
paffages fliould be in view together. And from
them, taken together, 1 think the truth of our
proportion cannot be difprovcd.

I do not perceive that the Quakers, or others,
have made their fuppofed prohibition of folemn
oaths conjijleut with our direct proof: till they do
that, they cannot be allowed to have the true fenfe
of Scripture.

The paffages on which the objedion is founded,
have no relation to the a6ls of the Magi/irate^ as
Luther obferves : oaths taken in obedience to autko'
rity^ are not affefted by them. Neither do they
prohibit fwearing by the Deity himfelf : people may
indeed fwear in private by the Deity himfelf, pro-
fanely and blameably; but that was not, fecmingly,
a cvjiom amongft thofe who are reproved in the
New Tcftament ; indeed the reafoning in both the
paffages of Sr. Matthew, (lievvs, that it was care-
fully o'voided; and on that avoiding, all exatfes
were built.

All

8 Barclay's Apology, Prop. 15. Sedt. 10.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. IV. ^^^

All the oaths fpecified by Chrlft, were vain and
cldldijli, though connected with the Jewi(h religion',
for the people who ufed them, were nor, as in our
days, diflblute and licentious; but formal and pre-
cife. We have not, that I know of, any fet of
people amongft us, who have the '* form^ of God-
liftefs" and yet accuftom themfelves to a fet of
pious oaths, excufing themfelves by faying, that fuch
as they take, are no oaths. Yet this feems to have
been the cafe amongft the Jews ; the very Scribes
and Pharifees' ran into the moft frivolous and un-
meaning diftinclions, between thofe fayings v.'hich
were real oatAas, and thofe like fayings which were
no oaths. Now fayings like oaths, yet accounted
no oaths, would produce two faults; one, hypo-
critical profanenefs, the other, deceit and fraud. —
Matt. v. 33 — 37. feems to turn more upon the
former, and Matt, xxiii. 16 — 22. more upon the
latter. — If it fhould be thought, that o'pi'.Xn, " htj
is a debtor," Matt, xxiii. 16 18. means only, as
oppofed to »J"£u £o, " it is nothing," to denote a
real oath; ftill the two faults, protancnefs and falf-
hood, would, in fa6V, arife; and would both deferve
levere reprchenfion.

I remember to have heard very young and very
ignorant people, ufe words like oaths, and then
excufe themfelves, by faying, that they had not
fworn; but grave, religious people have nor, I
think, amongft us, any fuch fyftem of hypocritical
profanenefs. — That our Saviour f})oke of common
converfation^ appears from the word Aoyo<;^ fermo,
difcourfe : and (Luther thinks) from the terms
*' yea, yea; nay, nay"."

We

^ 2 Tim. in. 5. * Matt, xxiii. i 5, r6.

^ April 2 1, 1792. The accounts given nie this day, by a
Captaiuiii the Navy, of oaths in trials in the Admiralty-couit,
are curious. He fays, that people of different Nations and

Relio-ions,

530 BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. V.

We can conceive, that it might be worthy of
our Lord to check fuch folly. It was profane and
impious; and fo had a tendency to debafe and
bring contempt upon religion : it muft alfo greatly
weaken and loofen mens principles of veracity. —
But why might not the evil moft immediately in
view, be, its hurting the dignity and the obliga-
tion oi folenm oaths P and fo occafioning perjury ? at
leaft, flopping fuch foolifh oaths as the Jews made
ufe of, is rather fupporting folemn oaths, than dif-
couraging them. And is perfeftly confident with
fuch as St. Paul ufed.

V. With regard to St. James, he feem.s to have
had the fame view of the fubjedl with our Saviour
when on the Mount. He mentions tzvo of the
lame frivolous oaths, but goes no farthi^r : inftead
of going on, he fays, as a kind of et ceteray
*' neither by any other oath;*' — which muft mean,
any other fuch oath; we cannot conceive his
thoughts to leap from fuch a train of tiifling pro-
fanenefs, to a Iblemn, devout, deliberate oaih by
the Supreme Deity himfelf. — " Let your yea be

yea,'*

Religions, will fwear anything, and flatter themfelves they are
not perjured, if only the form of taking the oath differs, in any
thing, from that to which they have been accuftomed. And
metliods are ufed, by thofe belonging to the Court, to hit off
thcii' modes of fwearing : one man, while a foreigner is taking
an oath, will hold up one finger, another tno fingers, a third
prefents a Crucifix ; and fo on ; meaning to ufe that form, which
the witnefs vi'ill deem binding.

The chief cafe in which thefe oaths are taken, feems to be,
when enemy's property has been taken under neutral colours ;
then the neutral Captain fwears the property to be neutral :
there are always papers concealed fomewhere, fhewing the real
cafe: and others, counterfeits, to produce to Captors. The
real papers, had, in one cafe, been found, and the Captain, not
knowing that, fwore to the counterfeits: on the real papers
being produced, he dropped down dead. — One could not hear
fuch an account, fiom rcfpedable authority, without recoUefling
the death of Ananias, — Afls v. 5.

BOOK IV. ART. XXXIX. SECT. VI. ^37

yea," has been underftood to mean, ' fpeak the
Truth i^ and therefore to imply^ that the Jews had
run Into falQiood. He concludes with, " left ye
fall into condemnation," uVo x^»(r»y'.

Our Lord had marked the origin of fuch folly,
*>« T» 'STovrj^s'" j St. James points out the confequence.
But fuch oaths as are defcribed in our Article^
would fcarcely be faid to proceed from evil^ at leaft,
in the ipeaker : though, as before, oaths, in general ^
may imply, fome prefumed imperfeiflion in mens
general veracity °.

As the §luakers will allow of nothing but literal
conftrudion, one might afk them, in the way of
argumentum ad hominem, how they underftand*
Matt. V. 40.

I will here clofe my indirect proof, prefuming
that objedions to our propofition are now removed.

VI. If we had time^ I might make fome Appli-
cation, by offering a few remarks on Perjury, and on
profane Jwearingy fuch as fhocks our ears in modern
times; but this is at prefent imprafticable : — per-
jury I have treated in a Syftem of Morality; and
profane fwearing is attacked in a very mafterly
manner, in Dr. Ogden's Sermons on the Com-
mandments.

' For uVo xfHTiv, the MSS. Steph. ift. and Velef. read ek
uTox^tcTji', which Grotius adopts: how fuch hypocritical oaths
may make men fall into hypocrijy, is intelligible enough.

"^ The Firft Bodleian MS. has fx t» s'laf o^y.

" Alt. XXXVII. Sed. III.

*• P. ?. When I appealed to this Text I believe I was not
aware of Dr. Ogden's appeal to the fame (Serm. v. on the
Commandments, Vol. 2. page 57. duodecimo.) — He fays, "It
is written. If any man iMill/ue thee at the La-tv, and take away
thy coat, let him have thy cloak alfo. — Are they willing to deliver
up their property ahvays to the firft invader \ of thefe rights
they are fometimes, and with reafon, a little more tenacious."

Vol. IV. / M m INDEX.

INDEX.

THIS Index is not intended to fuperfcde the
life of the printed Heads of I^eftures, vvhicli
the Author imagines would be very ferviceable in
giving the Reader the true fcope and purpofe of
each part of the work ; but only to enable him to
find what the printed Heads would not readily
point out. The figures are meant to correfpond
to the running title, placed at the top of each page,
and therefore they mark Book, Chapter, and SeBion.
In fome few places a fourth number marks Sub-
fe^ion. And fometimes when a Sedion is long,
x.\iQ. page is mentioned.

In the fourth Book each Article of the Church
of England is confidered as a Chapter. The In-
trodiiEliom and Appendixes will be cafily underftood
from the Heads of Ledures.

If reference is made, in the Index, to more

Sections than one in the fame Chapter, they are

feparated only by commas. If to feveral in fiiccef-

jion, only the firil and laft are mentioned, and a

line is put between them : as in the running Title.

Where the fame fubjed occurs repeatedly, it is
fometimes mentioned both in the Index and Heads
of Ledures.

Tlrus, iii-xiii-r. means the third Book, the
thirteenth Chapter, and the firft Sedion.

1V-XVI-3. means the fourth Book, the fixteenth
Article, and the third Sedion.

111-X-15-4. means the third Book, tenth Chap-
ter,'fifteenth Sedion, and fourth Subfedion.

M M 2 III-

540 I N D E X.

iii-xv-ii, p. 192. means that Seftion 11. is fo
long, that it is worth while to note the page.

II -II 1-4, t;, 6. means the fecond Book, third
Chapter, and Secftions fourth, fifth and fixth.

ii-iv-i — 6. means fecond Book, fourth Chap-
ter, and thefirft fix Seftions.

I may here obferve, that it feemed better to refer
to texts of Scripture than to quote them ; becaufe
not quoting mull make the work much fliorter,
and may engage the Reader's attention to the
Context. Thefe reafons extend to other pafiTages,
which might have been quoted, befides thofe of
Scripture.

I beg permifiTion to mention, that whenever I
have been induced to give any part of this work a
fecond readi/ig, in what might be called one perufal,
I have feen its force and meaning more clearly than
at firfl. — A confequence, probably, of its having
been written merely as a preparation for fpeaking.
Which has alio occafioned a word to be ufed here
and there, not thoroughly adopted into the Englifh
Language.

ABBli

INDEX.

541

A

j^BBE Paris. i-xvi-10,14.
Abgarus. i-xii-5.

— xvii-6.

IV-XXII-4.
Absolution. iv-xvi-i8.

— xxv-4.
Accommodation, i-xvii-19.
Accursed, iii-ix-i.

IV-XVIII-5.

— xxxiii~3.
Acontius. IV-VII-4.
Acrimony in dispute.

i-xii-14. I

11-11-14.
iii-x-15-4..
Adam, i-xvi-8.

iv-ix introd. 16.
— ix-i, 2,4,6, 14,

15, 19, 21, 29.
— x-24,37.
Addison, i-xviii-19.
11-IV-13.
iv-xxxi-13.
Adults. IV-XXV11-14, (see

Sponsors) 17.
Agape. IV-XXVIII-5, 21.
Agency, divine and human
opposed. IV-IX introd. i.
— X-41.

— xvii-9,79,98.
Agent, (see Minister.)
iv-xxii-17.
— xxv-4.
— XXV 1-4, 6.

— XXXIII-II.

— XXXV1-18, 19.
Agriculture, ii-iv-4.

iv-ix-44, 45.
Albigenses. iv-xxiii-3.
Alderman, iv-xxxvi-i, 12.

Allegorists. i-xvi-7.

1-XV11-19.
IV-1V-5.
and page 417.
IV-VI-3.
— VI1-3.
— IX-4.
Allix. I-XVII-19,
I. App. 21.
IV-I-2, 6, 16.
— ii-i.

— VI-3, 10, II, 12.
— XXV111-4.
Altar, iv-xxxi-1,2,4, 5, 6.
Ambrose, iv-vi-12.

America, iii-v-i, 4,

IV-III-2.

— VI11-12.
— XX111-7.
— xxv-4.
^ — XXXVII-13.
Anabaptists, iv-vii-3.
— IX-12.
— X-12.

— XI-II.

~xiii-5.
• — xv-4.
— XV1-3.

XXVI-2.

— XXVIII-II.

— xxxvii-6.
Anatomist, ii-iv-7.
Angels. I. App. 8, 9, 18, 26.

IV-XXV-4.
Antilegomena. i-xii-4.

IV-V1-14.
Antinomians— see Crispe.

IV-V11-3.

— xv-6. -

— XVI-9.

Apocrypha

;42

INDEX.

Apocrypha, i-xii-2.

IV-VI-IO,II,0^.

— xxxv-4.
Apollonius. 1-XII-17.
Apology, iv-viii-8, 12.
Aquinas, iv-xni-4, 14.
— xvii-8, 71.

XXII-2.

— XXIV-I.

Archontici. iv-xxv-2.
Argumentum ad Hominem.

1-XV11-19.

11-11-13, 14.

iv-ix-Introd. 16.
Aristides. i-xiv-4,
Aristophanes, ii-iv-io.
Aristotle. 11-111-15.
Arminius, and followers.

iv-x-15.

— xvi-8.

— XVI1-4, II, 12,
19, 20, 30.
Arthur, Prince, iv-vii-5.
Articles, iii-i-i, 5, 6.

— v-i, &c. — also

Chap. IX, &c.

iv-Introd. entire.

iv-xvii-20, 23,
24. (see Lam-
beth).

iv-xviii-i, 7.

XIX-I.

Ascodrutas, iv-xxv-2.

— xxvn-28.
— yxviii-2.
Asscman. iv-ii-j).
Assembly of Divines.

IV-XVII-20, 23.
— xxiii-12.
— xxxiii-6.
Association. 111-111-6,8,10.
IV-XX-7.
—XXI 1-4,5, 19.
— xxiii-22.

Assurance, iv-xvi-io, 25,

3I' 37-
Athanasian Creed.

111-IV-4.
— IX-9.
IV-11-9.
— 11-42.
— IV-4.
— viii-8, &c.
Review of Sermon
on it, iv-viii-12.
end.
Athanasius. iv-i-ioend.

— 1-17, p.271.

— 11-21.

VIII-2, 8.

— XVI-4.

— XXVI-3, C.
Attrition, iv-xxv-4.
Augustin. 1-1-6.

I. App. 4-10.

II-V-II.

ni-x-15-end.

iv-i-i, 4, 6, 17.

—11-45.

— ix-,5,7,9, ^4.

— x-6, 20, 26.

XIII-2.

XIV-3.

—XV 1-5, 10, 30.
— XVII-5, 28.

XVIII-2.

XXII-2, 4, 5,

18.

XXIV-I.

XXV-2.

XXVI-I.

XXVII-J4.

XXIX-2.

XXXIII-3.

XXXIV-5.

XXXVI-4, 18.

XXXVII-5,

Authority.

INDEX

Authority, iii-xiv-12.

IV-XXXVI-I.

B

Balguy, Mr. John.

iv-xi-App. 9.
Balguy, Dr. Thomas.

i-xix-ii, 14.

ii-v-1,3.

111-IV-3, 4,6, 9.

— V-2.

— vi-6.

— ix-6.

— X-14.

— XI-4, 6, II.

— xiii-8.

— XIV-12, 13.

— xv-4, 9.

iv-Intiod. 2, 3.

— 11-42.

— vii-6, 13.

— VIII-II.

— ix-20, 32.
— xi-App. 9.
— xiii-1,4, 17, 22,

24. 30-
— xv-23.
— xvii-20,
— XIX-19.
— xxiii-17,22,26.
— XXV111-13, 20,

SO-
— XXIX-5.

— XXXV-I.

Baptism, iv-i-18.
— ix-32.

■ — XIII-IO.

—XV 1-5, 19.
— XXI11-5, ^4-
— xxv-2,3,5,7,8.
— xxvi-6.
— XXVII passim,
(see Heads.)

543
Baptism, iv-xxxiii-3.

— xxxiv-2, 7.
Baptist, iv-viii-ii, p. 110.
— xvii-22.
— xxv-3, 7.
—XXV 11-15,30,35.
— XXVI11-12.
— XXXI11-7.
Baptistery, iv-xxvii-4.
Barbeyrac. iv-xii-14.

— XIV-5.
Barclay, i-xi-6.

see Quakers.
iv-xxvn-29.
— xxviii-20.
— xxx-io.

— XXXIV-2.

. — XXXVI1-19.
Barnabas. iv-xi-App. i.
Baxter, iii-iv-i.

IV-X-4.

—XI 1-25.

— XI11-5.

— XIV-7.

— XV-23.

—xvi-5,10, 15,29,
SO. SI-

XXI-I,

— XX II 1-4, 16, 25.

— XXXVI-4.
Bclsham. i-xvi-8.

IV-XVI1-21.
Bennet. iv Introd. 6.

— xx-i.

XXV-2.

XXVII-29.

XXIX-I.

— xxxvi'-5.
Bentley. i-ix-8.

iv-i-Append.
Berquin. ii-iv-13.
Berriman, John, iv-11-^7.
Bcza. 1-VII-5.

iv-xvii-15,

Bible

Bullet.

Burn.

544 INDEX,

Bible, our present.

I-IX-II.
III-IX-I.

iv-iii-6'.
Bigotry. 11-11-8.

in-xv-6,
Bilson, Bishop. Hi-iv-3.
Bingham, passim.

IlI-XI-IO.

— xiii-i, 8.
iv-Introd. 3, 6.
—1-4. p. 232.
— IV- 17.

— V-I.

— VI-I6.

XXIII-1.

XXIV-2.

■ — XXV-4.

— XXVII-5, 15-

XXVIII-5.

— xxxvi-passim.
Bishop, iv-xxxvi-i, 2, 3,

5,11, 12, 13.
Blasphemy, iv-v-ii.

— xvi-11,34.

— xxxi-8, 10.

Blood. iv-xi-App. 2, 27.

iv-xxxiv-27,
Bshmcn, Jacob, iii-xv-ii

p. 188, &c.
Bona, Cardinal, iii-xv-ii
p. 192, &c.
IV-XXV-5.
— XXVI-3.
' — xxxi-i, 4.
Boys, on the Articles.

IV-XI11-14.
Bradford, iv-xvii-17.
Bramhall, Archbishop.

III-XIII-I.

lv-xxin-4, 12.
— xxv-2.
Brerewood. iv-xxiv-i.

XXXII -10.

Blown, Dr. John.

ii-iii-io, 15.

— IV-14.
Brownists. iv-vii-t).
— XVI-3. ^

XXIII-(J.

I-XIV-I2.
I-XVI-IO.
I-XVIII-II.

et passim.
Burges, Dr. John.

II-V-II.

111-VII-4.

iv-Introd. 6.

— xix-i.

— xxxv-i.

— x::xvi-7.
IV-XV1-3.
— XXVI 1-15.
— xxxiii-8.

XXXV-I.

— xxxvii-6, 10.
Burnet, Bishop.
111-IV-5.

— XII-I.

— xiii-8.
iv-Introd. i, 2, 6.
—1-4, p. 230.
— 1-18.
~i-App.
— ii-i.
— iii-i, 6.
~iv-7.

~vii-3, 5-
•^xiii-14.

— XIV-4.

— xvii-io, 14.

XVIII-2, IQ.

XIX-I.

XXIV-2.

XXVI-5.

— xxviii-ii, 20.

XXX-I, 2.

XXXIV-I7.

Burnet,

INDEX.

545

Burnet, Bishop.

lV-XXXV-2.

— XXXVI-5.
— XXXVII-I9.
Butler, Joseph, Bishop.

I-XII-I.

— xv-6.

— XVI-12.

— xix-r, 15, 19.

iv-ix-34.

— xi-App. 9, 29.

P- 3H-
— XV1-31.

— xvii-86.

Butler, Samuel, ii-iv-13.

Cajetan, Cardinal.
IV-XII1-5.

— XXIV-I.

Called, iv-xvii-44.

— XXIII-15, 16.
— XXXVI-18.
Calmet. i-ix-6, 10.
— x-8.
IV-X-9.
Calvin, and followers, (see
Predestination).
iv-Introd.4.
— 111-2.
— VI 1-4.
— IX-13.
— X-15, 20, 39.
— xvi-7, 8, 37.
—XV 1 1-9, 11,12,15,

17, 18, 86.
■ — ^xix-9.
— xxii-19.

— XXVI-II.

Campbell, i-ix-il.

IV-II-I.

Candid disquisitions.

iv-viii-ii, 12.
Vol. IV,

Candor. 1-1-5.

— App. 30.
111-V-3.
Canonical, i-xii-2,

iv-vi-ii, 14.
Carless. iv-xvii-17.
Catalogues, iv-vi-ii:, 19.
Catechism, (see Racovian,
and Trent).

III-X-II.

iv-ii-42.

— VI 1-7.

■ XVII-20.

XIX-II.

— xxv-4, 8.
— XXVI11-3.
tDathari. i-App. 4, 12.

IV-VI-2.

Catholicus consensus.

iv-xi-App. 2.

— XXlX-2.

Cave, iv-xxv-2, 4, 5, 7.

— XXVI1-5.
Ceremonies, iii-iv-2.

— xv-12.

iv-xx-i, 2, 7.

— xxv-3,5,id.

— XXVI11-4.

— XXXI11-4.

XXXIV-2, 3J

14.
Cerinthus. i-App. 22, 25;
28.
lv-ii-5, 15.

— IV-I.

Cervantes, ii-iv-13.
Chambers, i-xv-22.
Chances, calculatio'n of.

i-xvi-6.
Chandler, Bishop.

i-xvn-9, 15,18,19.

IV-VI-12.
Chara6ter, indelible.

iv-xxv-2, 3, 5, 6.
N N Gharlemagns.

546

1 N D

E X.

Cliajlem

agne, iv-xiii-4.

Cicero, iv-xvii-5.

— XXI1-4.

— XX 1 1-2, 6.

— yxxv-i.

Circumcelhones.

Cliarms.

rv-xxv-7, 8.

IV-XXVI-I.

XXIK-I.

Circumstances, as helping

Chatham, Earl of.

interpretation.

iv-xvii-21.

I-X-J.

Cheynel

. iv-iv-App.

111-1-7.

— vn-3.

— VII-5.

— xxxvii-6.

iv-Introd. 7.

Chillingworth. iv-vii-y. |

—x-42.

Chivahy

. iv-xiii-22.

Clarke. 1-111-3.

Chosen.

(see Elea).

— XIX-19.

Chrism.

IV-XXV-3.

IV-1-4, p. 22C.

— xxvii-6.

—1-8, 18.

Churcli.

111-VI1-4.

— i-Appendix.

— XI-4.

— iii-G.

iv-in-6.

— viii-il.

— XVI11-7, 14.

Cleaver, Bishop.

— XIX-2, 4, 3, 7,

iv-xi, App. 27.

I5» 17-

— xxviii-1,13, 20,

— xxi-i, 17.

30> 33-

— XXIII-I3, 14,

XXXI-IO.

17-

Clemens Romanus.

— xxx-4.

IV-XXIII-2,

— xxxiv-19.

— XXXVI-3.

Church,

attendance on.

Clinical, iv-xxv-4, 12.

11-IV-3, 7.

XXVII-IO.

Church;

eastern & western.

Cole. 11-111-4, II.

.IV-V-3.

— IV-II,

— vi-23.

Colleges, iii-viii-2.

— xxiv-i, 4.

IV-XXIV-5.

— XXVII-10.

Collins, i-xvii-io, 14.

— XXXIV-5,

iv-Introd. 0".

XXXVIl-2.

— VI-9.

Cicero.

I-XIV-5, 7.

Collyridians. iv.xxii-4.

XIX- 1 2, 19.

Comber, iv-xxiv-i.

II-III-3, 12.

— xxv-4. .

III-VII-2.

Commination. iv-viii-ii.

— X-2, 4.

p. 112.

IV-I-I.

Communion, for families.

— 1II-8.

IV-XXV111-5.

— IX-3.

for funerals.

— x-2.

— xxviii-i I.

Conununion

I N D

EX. 547

Communion of Saints.
IV-VI11-4.

Councils including

Nicene ; but see Trent.

— xxii-G.

IV-XXII-4.

— xxv-4..

XXV-2, 3.

— XXXI-4.

— XXX-I.

Comprehension, iii-xiv-15.

— XXXII-3, 4.

Concubinage, iv-xxv-6.

— XXXII1-3.

Concupiscence, iv-ix-2, ^,

12, 26, 32.
Confession, iv-xxv-4.

XXXVII-2, 13.

Cranmer. i-xviii-13.
iv-Introd. 4.

— XXXI11-5.
Confirmation, iv-xxv-3, 9.

— XIII-5.
' — XVII-16.

Constantine. i-xviii-15.

XXVIII-II.

111-V-3.

■ — xxx-6.

IV-1-15.

— XXX 1-4.

XVI-2.

— XXXI1-12.

XXXIV-7.

Constitution. iv-ix-i8, 28.

XXXVI-I.

Consubstantiation .

— xxxv-i, 4.

XXXVII-2.

Crellius, Paul, iv-vii-3.
Crispe. iv-xi-io.

IV-XXVIII-IO.

Contrition, iv-xxv-4.
Conversion, iv-x-26, 50.

—XI, App. .9.
— XII1-5.
Criticism and taste.

— xii-8.

1-XII-13.

—XVI 1-45.
Convocation, iii-vii-4.
Cooke, Dr. William, Dean
of Ely. i-xvii-10,

(P-239)>i5'20.
i-xix-12.
jpopts. 1-V-7.

— IX-5.

Cromwell, iv-xvi-8.
Cupid and Psyche.

111-X-15.
Ciistoms. IV-VI-5. (see
Habits).

iv-xxxiv-2, 17,

24.

XXXVI-I.

iii-x-8.

Cyrus, iv-xiii-17.

IV-XXIV-I.

Corpus Christi.

IV-XXVIII-IO.

Corpus et Syntagma, (see
Syntagma).

D

Dacier. iv-i-1,3. '

^Councils, including
Nicene; but see Trent.
IV-1-4.

X-2.

Daille. 1-XII-16.

— VII 1-5.
— xxi-i, 2,3,4,
10.

IV-XXV-4.
D'Alembert. iv-x-13.
Damascene, iv-xxii-4, k.

^48 INDEX.

Deacon, iv-xxxvi-1-2, 3,

15. 17.

Deaconess, iv-xxv-5.

— XXXII-19.
Death, iv-ix-14, 29.
Deceased Christians.
iv-xxii-6.
Defender of the Faith.

III-IX-I.
IV-XXXVII-2.

Deformity. 11-111-7.
Deluge, i-xvi-8, (see de

Luc).
Demoniacs, i-xiii-io.

iv-ix-Introd. .

16.
— xxv-5.
Dickinson, iv-xv-6.
Diderot, iv-xiii-22.
Digby, Lord, in-xiv-io.

— xv-6.
Dionysius. in-x-9.
IV-IV-5.
— viii-6.

— XXXVII-2.

Diptychs. — XXXIII-4.
Direftory. ■ — xxv-3, 4, 6.

— xxvn-15.

— xxviii-12.
Discipline, iii-xv-12.

iv-xxxin-i, 7.

— xxxvi-16.
Dissenter, iii-iv-4, 5.

— xiv-2, 8, 15.

— xv-6.

IV-1-3, p. 224.

— 1-15.

— n-43.

— viii-i I, page
109.

~xvi-3.

— XV11-21.

— xx-4, 7.

• — xxiii-26.

Dissenter, iv-xxv-?.
— xxvi-6.
— xxviii-12.
— XXXI-5.
— XXXI11-7.
(see Puritans
and Presbyte-
rians).
Dissertation on the 17th
Article, Oxf 1772.
111-IV-9.
— ix-i.
iv-Introd. 4.
— XVI1-7, 9, 16,
29.
Divorce, iv-vii-13,
— XXV- 2, 6.

XXXVII-2.

Docetae. i-App. 19, 20, 24.
iv-ii-z(, 15.
— vi-29.
— xi-App. 2.
Do6lrina, &c. Ecclesi^e
Anglicanae. iv-Introd. 4
—1 1-3.
— VII-3.
Donatists. iv-viii-4.

— XVI-2.
— XXV-2.
— XXVI-I.

Dort, Synod of. iv-x-15.

— XVII-II,

19-
Doxologies. iv-1-4.
— v-i.
Duelling, iv-xiii-22.
— XXXVI1-3.

E

Eachard. ii-jv-13.
Easter, iv-xxxiv-5.

— XXXVIl-2.

Ebionites. iv-11-5.

Edwardsj

Edwards, Jonathan.

II-V-IO.

iv-x-19, S3-
— XI, A pp. a-
— xii-25.
— X111-5.
~xvi-8.
— xvii-22.
Ele6lion. iv-xvi-5, 20.

— XVI1-5, 14, 30,

44, 6g, 92.
— XIX-12.
— XXI11-15. (see
Chosen).
Enthusiasm, iii-xv-ii,
p. 181.
iv-intiod. 3.
— X-19, 49.
— xvi-31, page

470.
— XV 11-56.

' — XXV-2.
XXXVI-I7.

Epi6letus, including Carter.
IV-111-4.
— xvii-89.
Epiphanius. iv-i-i.
• — IV-17.
— iv-App,
Episcopius. iv-ii-42.

— X-15.
Erasmus. iv-Introd. 4.
—1-4.
— i-App.

■ X-2.

XVII-16.

XVIII-5.

Erastus. —XXXII 1-6.
Evangelist, iv-xxi 11-24.
Eucharist. — xxviii-4.
E'-ichitae. iv-xxv-2.
Evil, referred to God.

iv-x-50.

— xvii-92,93.

INDEX. ^4c>

Evil, referred to God.

iv-xxv-io.
Excision, iv-xxxiii-2, 9.
Excommunication.

III-XIV-I. ,

IV-XXV-4.
— XXXIII, passim.
Execrations, iv-xxxiii-2.

Exorcism, fsee Demoniacs),
IV-XXV11-4, 7.

Faith, iv-x-29.

— xi-2. and passim.
— XI-17.
— XI1-12, 14, 25.
— XVI-3.
Fall, i-xvi-8. (see Adam).
iv-ix-19, 20.
— xvi-22.
Famihsts. iv-vii-g, 7.
— xv-5.
— XVI1-18.

XXII 1-6.

XXV-2.

XXVIII-II.

XXXIV-I7.

XXXVII-IO.

Fanaticism. II i-xv- 1 i,p.i8r.

IV-VII-2.

— xxiii-6.
— xxvi-i.
Fate. IV-IV-4.

— ix-Introd. 8.
— x-9.

— XVI 1-2, 20, 25, 62.
Fenelon. i-xvii-14.

II-V-IO, II.

iii-xv-ii, p. 187,
&c.

(see Maxims of
the Saints).

Fielding.

55^

Fielding, r-xiii-7.

11-111-4, ^4-
— IV-14.
IV-XXXVII-3.
Filioque, iv-v-3.
Fisher, Bishop, iv-xxii-21
Fitzjames, Duke of.

iv-ix-36.
Five points, iv-x-15, 26.

—XVII -5, 19.
Flesh, iv-xxxin-13. (see

Docetae. )
Foote. ii-iii-i.
— iv-13.

V-IO.

Forbes, passim.

IV-1-4, p. 228,
— x-5.

— xxii-passim ;
partic. Se6l. 6.

— XXV-2.
— XXVI-2.

pox, John. iv-Introd. 4.

— VII-2.

XXV-2.

XXVIII-26.

XXXII-6, 12.

Fulke. IV-XVI-3, 8, 10.
— XVII-9, 29.

XXII-2, 6.

XXIV-I.

—XXV-2, 7.

XXVIII-II.

XXIX-I.

— xxx-4.

XXXI-2, 12.

XXXIl-17.

XXXIII-3.

Fuller. iv-Introd. 4.

— vn-3. 5-
Fulness of time.

1-XV1-7, p. 191.
— xix-18.
Furpr,3cdestinatus.iv-xv-i2.

INDEX.

Fur praedestinatus.
iv-xvr-8.
— xvii-15,

G

Galileo, ii-v-i i.
Geneva, (see Switzerland).
Genlis. ii-iv-13.
Gerizim. i-v-4.
Gibbon, iv-i-i, 3, 4, 6,
17, end.

i-App.

— V II 1-8.
Gibson, Bishop.

i-xvii-18.

i-xix-i, 7,9.

111-XIV-15.

— xv-ii. p. 183,

195-
iv-vi-22, 26.
— IX-3.

XXXVII-2.

Gift of God. iv-xvi-30-5.
— xvii-83,

p. 32.
— XXXII-18.
God, his Nature how con-
ceived, i-iii-i, 3.

iv-i-io, p. 247.
Golden Age. iv-ix-20, 41.
Good, hereditary, iv-i x-36.
Gordon, Lord George.
i-xvii-16.
iii-vi-S.
Gospellers, iv-x-12.

— XII-I.

Gotescalc. iv-x-i r.

— XV11-7.
Grace. iv-X-i8, (end), 42,

43^ 45y 49-
— XI-4.
— xii-8.
-^xiii-9.

Grace.

I N r>

Crrace. iv-xvi-/;, 20, 21.
Gratian. iv-xxxi-2.
Greeks, passim, (see in
Heads of Le6lures.)

iv-xxv-2,3,4,5, 7.

— XXVII-5.

— xxviir-4.

— xxx-3.

XXXII-IO.

— XXXIV-7.
~xxxvi-i8.
Green, Bishop, iv-xi-8.

— XXV-2.

(see Me-
thodist).
Grey, on Hudibras.

IV. Introd. 6.
— xxiii-6, II.
— xxv-6.
— xxviii-12.
Grotius. i-xvi-13.
— xvii-8.
IV-VI-9, 10, 13,27.
— VII-14.
— X-1./5, 41.
— xi-App. 8.
— XIV-5.
—XV 1-5.
— xxvii-35.
Gulliver's Travels. 111-11-4.
Gurtler. iv-xvi-5.
Guy Faux, iv-ix-30,
p. 172.

H

Habits (customs).

iv-x-50, p. 250.
— xvi-33-7.

— XXXVI-I.

Habits (dresses), iv-xx-i, 7.
Hales. IV-XV1-4.

— xxv-iii.

— xxxvii-iS.

55^

E X;

Hallifax, Bishop.
1-X11-9.

— XVI-II,
XVII-IO.

— App.5.
III-II-5.
IV-VI-3I, 32.

— viii-8.
— xxii-20.
Hampton-Court Conference.
11-1-9.
iv-xvi-8.
— xvii-19, 80.

— XIX-I.

— XX111-13.
— xxv-3, 8.
— xxvii-15.

— XXXV-I.

Hardouin. i-xii-16.
Hartley, ii-iii-i^ 9.

III-XV-II.

IV-IV-4.

—^-^9, 49-
— XV111-5.

XXII-2.

Heads of Le6lures. Vol. r.
Advertisement.
11-IV-12.
IV-VI1-9.
— VI11-9.
Healing, bodily and spiri-
tual joined.

IV-XVIII-II.

— xxv-io,
Heatliens. iv-viii-ii, page
107.
— xiii-i,s,5,8,

I7,2'l,24,29.

— XV111-9.
Hebrew. 1-1-4.

— v-8.

— XV11-9.

iv-xxiv-3.
Hell. IV-111-3.

Hell.

552- INDEX.

Hell. IV-1V-4,

XXII-I.

Helmstadt. 11-11-5.
— v-10.
Herbert, Lord of Clierbury.
1-XIX-19.

IV-X-2.

Hervey. i-iv-end.
IV-XI-15.
^i-App. 9, 20.
Hey, William, his Short
Defences, iv-i-18.

—11-16, 37.
— V-13.

— x-37. 41-
— xi-App. 22,

30.
— xiii-6.
Hey, Samuel, iv-xvi-33.
Hey, Richard. — x-22.
Heylin. iv-Introd. 4.
— vn-13.
— X-15, 16, 20.
— XVI1-16, 27.
— XIX-12.
— xx-i.
— XXIV-5.

XXV-2.

XXVI-2.

XXXV-I, 2.

Hierocles. i-xii-17.
Hints, &c. a pamphlet.

iv-viii-8, II, 12.
Hoadley, Bishop.

IV-XXVII1-13.
Hobbes. iv-xviii-6.
Holmes. 1-VI-3.
Holy Ghost, iv-v-passim.
— x-39.
— XV 1-4, 17,

34. 37. end.
— XX XII 1-3.
— xxxv-4.
— XXXVI-I7,

18, 19.

Homer. 11-11-14.

IV-X-2.

—XVI 1-2,25,79,85.
Homilies, iii-v-3, 6.
— ix-6".
iv-Introd. 4.
— ix-34.

— xi-17, 19, 21,

23.
— xi-App. 2.
— X11-12, 20.
— XI11-5.

XIV- 1.

~xv-i5.

— XVI-3, 8, 10,

27-
— xvii-92.
— XXI-13.

— XXIV-I, 2.

— XXV-2, 4, 6, 8,
9-

XXVIII-I 1,20,

24.

XXXI-4.

XXXII-I9.

— xxxv-passint.
Honorius. iv-ii-io.
Hooper. iv-Introd. 4.

— XV 1 1- 16, 62,67,
71-

— XX- I.

— XXXIV-17.
Horace, iii-ix-i.
IV-IX-3.
— XV-21.
Horsley, Bishop.
1-XI-3.
—XV 1 1-3.

IV-I-I.

— i-App.

— xxxv-4.
Hospitality, i-x-io.

— XI-7.

Huet.

Huet. i-xii-i.

iv-iv-App.
Hume. 1-IV-3, 4.

— xiii-8.

— XV- and

— xvi-passim.

XVIil-II.

• — xix-19.
11-1-3-

— IV-II.
V-IO, II.

IJI-III-4.
— vi-6.

XI V-IO.

XV-II.

IV-I-I7, p. 268.

VII- 1 4.

— X-I9.
— XI1I-5.

XVII-2, 20.

— XVIII-5.

Hurd, Bishop.

I-XIII-I3.
— XV 1-7.
— xvii-passim.
iv-Introd. 2, 3. 4
— xxii-8, 20.
Hypothesis. 11-111-4.
iv-ii-46.
— XI.-34.
— xxviii-6
Hypsistarii. iv-i-13.

I

James, iv-vi-25.
— xi-27.
Jansen. iii-x-5.
IV— X-17.
— xvii-28.
Iconoclastae. iv-xxii-4
Idol, iv-xxn-13, 18.
Vol. IV.

I N D E X. 553

Idolatry, its attra6lions.

i-xviii-6, 21.

IV-VI1-14.
Ignatius, iv-xxiii-2.

— XXXV1-3.
Jerom. iv-vi-io, 13.

XIII-2.

— XV-3, 12.

—XV 1-9.

— XXII-5.

XXIV- 1.

— xxv-3.
— XXXII-4.
Jews, modern.

1-XV11-9, 1^-
iv-vn-13, 14.
— xvii-95.
— XXI1-19.
Jewel, Bishop, i-xii-16.

iv-Introd 4.
— xvii-18.
• — XXXI1-12.
— xxxv-i.
Immersion, iv-xxvii-4, 26.
Impossibility, iv-x-25.
— xv-3, 4,
18, 23.
Imprecations.

iv-xxxiii-2, 4.
Imputation, iv-xi-15.

XI-App. £0.

Independents.

iv-xxni-6, 13.
Indifferent, iv-xx-7.

— xxxiv-r7.
Indulgences, iv-xiv-i.
Infants, iv-ix-37.
— xvii-6.
— xKV-3.
• — xxvii-ii, 18,

27,31-
— XXVI11-9.

~xxx-4.

O o Infinity.

K

Kennicott. i-viii-2.
King, Lord, iv-1-4, p. 23G.
—II 1-3, 6.

' — IV-4.

554 INDEX.

Infinity, iv-r-io, p. 246.

—1-17.

— 11-21.

— v-ii.
Injunftions. iii-iv-9.
— VI1-5.

— IX-I.

iv-Introd. 5.
Insanity, iv-x-28, 44.
Inspiration, i-xii-3.
— XVI-9.

IV-XIII-IO.

— xxiii-i5,'i7.
Intention, iv-xxvi-3, &c.

— xxvii-6".
Interest of Money.
IV-VII-14.
Jortin. 1-XV1-7.

II-V-IO.

iv-ix-8.

~x-5, 39, 54.
— XV 1 1-2 1.

— XXI-9.

Josephus. i-vi-i.

— xiv-ii, 12.
IV-VI-9, 12.
Judgment, general.
iv-xi-28.
— xii-25.
Julian. 1-XII-16.

— XVI11-15.
Juliana, iv-xxvm-io.
Justification, iv-xi-14, 21.
— xii-8.
— xiii-7-
— XV 1-8, 19.
Justinian, iv-xxiv-i.

King, Lord. iv-iv-App.

— VIII-I.

— xvi-2, 4, 27.
King, Archbishop.

iv-ix-22.

— xvii-24.
King's College Chapel.

III-XV-IO.

Kneeling, iv-xxxi-5.
Knowledge, yyua-ic, and Wis-
dom, a-o(pix. I-XI-3, 7.

— A pp. 20,
24.
Knox, John, iv-xvii-23.
— XXII1-4.

Labour, iv-ix-14, 44.
La6lantius. i-xix-5.
iv-1-4.
— XXXVII-5.
Lambeth Articles.

iv-xvi-8, 10, 31.

— xvii-18,24, 29.
Lancaster, i-xvii-6'.
Language, popular.

I-X-2, &c.

iv-i-17.

— ix-Introd. 3.

— ix-34.

—x-39, 41, 42, 48.

— XI1-13, 23.

— xvi-30, p. 469.

— xvii-77.
Lardner. passim.

1-XII-4, 9.

— xvi-3, 7.

— XVI11-12, 14.

iii-xv-6.

iv-ii-6, 22.

— vi-12, 21, 22,
23, 24, 26.

— VII-II,

Lardner.

INDEX,

Lardner. passim.
iv-xvr-2.
— xvii-2, 25.
— XXXI-5.

— XXXII-2.

— xxxiv-24, 27.

XXXVI-2.

Latimer. iv-Introd. 4.

— xvii-16,67,80.
— xxiii-iO\

XXVIII-II.

XX XV- 1.

Latitudinarian. iv-xi-12.
Laud, Archbishop.

iv-xvii-20, 24.

— xix-8.

XX- 1.

• — xxvii-18.
Law, Edmund, Bishop.

i-xix-18.

111-11-5.

— vi-6.

— xiii-8.

iv-Introd. 2, 3.
Law, William, iv-xvi-io.
Leclerc. iv-x-39.
Le6lures, things incidental
to them, i-xviii-12.

III-V-2.

IV-XVI-4.

XVII-IOO.

■ — XIX-1.

• — XXII-I5.

XXV-I2.

■ — xxxf, end.
— xxxiii, end.
— xxxv-i.
Legends, iv-vi-2.
Leland. i-xii-4.

— XV- 1, 6.

— xvi-io, 1 1, 16.

— XV 1 1 1-27.

— xix-13, 19.

ii-iii-i.

IV-V1-15.

555

Leporius. iv-xv-3, 7.
Leslie, iv-xxvi-6.

— XXV 1 1-8, 29.
— xxxvii-20.
Liberty, or Freedom.
iii-iv-6.
— VI-5.

— XII-I.

IV-V11-3.
— ix-Introd. 5.
— IX-5.

— x-9, 19, 22, 42,
46, 49.

— XII-I.

— xvii-i, 86, 91.
Limborch. iv-xvii-ii.

— xxv-7.

— xxvii-35.

— xxxvii-18.
Liturgy, iv-x-39.

XX-2.

XXIV-I — 5.

XXV-7.

XXXIV-2.

— XXXV1-7, 8.
Locke, i-xii-13, end.
— XV-15.
— XVII-19.
ii-n-13.
— IV-5.
111-111-6.
— xii-5, 6.
IV-1-17, p. 268,
— VI 1-4, end.
— vii-i2, end^
— ix-Introd. 7.
— IX -40.
— x-29.

—xi-App. 9, 25.
— xvi-si.
— xvii-81, 92.
— XXIV-3.
— xxvii-27.
— XXXI- 13.
0 0 2 Locke.

55^

INDEX.

Locke, iv-xxxii-17.
Logos. i-App. 25.

JI1-IV-5.

iv-i-6, p. 240.

— ii-i, 15.

— iii-i.

VI-IO.

Longinus. 111-111-2.
Lord's Supper, i-xi-7.

IV-XX111-5.

— XXV-2.
XXVIII-

II.
De Luc. i-xvi-8-subs.5.
Lucian. i-xii-16.
—XV 1-3.

II-IV-IO, I*^.

iv-xxxviii-8.
Ludlam. i-iv,end.
iv-ix-28.
— x-5, 37.
— XI-15.
— xi-App. 7, 9,
16, 20.

• — XIII-2, 22, 27.

Luther, and followers-
1-XII-7.
iv-i-App,.

Vl-2(j.

— vH-3, 4, 7, 14.

IX-J2.

X-16.

— xi-6.
— X111-5.
~xv-3.
— XVI1-12.
— xxiii-G.
— XXVI1-7.

— XXVIII-IO.
XXIX-I.

— xxx-5.

— XXX 1-4.

XXXVII-2, G.

r — XXXlX-2j 4.

M

Macedonius. iv-v-2.

— V111-5.
Macknight. i-xiii-ii.

IV-XV1-4, and
elsewhere.
Maclaurin, John, iv-vii-3.
Magistrate, iii-xiv, accord-
ing to Heads of Lectures.

IV-XX-I.

— XXXIV-I5, 17.
— XXXVI-I4, 16.
— xxxvii-passim.
part. Sc(5t. 3, 15.
Maimonides. i-xvii-19.

IV-VI-3, end.

• — IX-4.

— x-3.

— XVII-3.
Manicheans. i-xii-7.

— App. 3, 4.

IV-1-4, 10.

—1 1-4.

■ — IV -4.

— IX-5, 7.

— x-20.

— XXI 1-2.

XXX-2.

XXXII-2.

— XX XV 1 1-5.
Marcellinus. — xv-3.
Mannontel. — xvii-85.
Marriage, iv-xxiii-12.
— xxv-6, 9.
— XXX 1 1, accord-
ing to Heads
of Le flu res.
— XXXII1-3.
Marsh. i-:;vi-8,

— App. 26,
iv-i-App. end.
Mass. iv-xxiv-2.

including ^Tissa.
Mass.

Mass. lv-xxviii-2.

— XXXI according to
Heads of Le6t.
Matlicmatics. 11-1-4.
Matthew, i-vi-i.

— XI 11-9.
Maty. 1V-V-4.
Maxims of tlie Saints.

ni-xv-j I, p. 187,
&c.

(see Fenelon.)
Mede. 1-XVII-15.
iv-vi-32.
Melan6lhon. iv-Introd. 4.
— x-16.
— XV1-15.
—XVI 1-9, 16,

99-
• — xxviii-io,

32.

— XXXIV-17.
Memories, iv-xxii-5.
Merit. iv-ix-Introd. 8.

— xi-i6".

— XIV-4.
Messaliani. iv-xxv-2.

— XXVI-2.

Metaphor, i-xvii-b, 18.
iv-v-6.

■ — ix-Introd. 6.
■ — xi-App. 27.
— xxviii-6, 19,
20, 26, 31.

— XXXI-2, 4.

Metropohtan. iv-xxi-io.
Methodism, i-xvi 11-27.

iii-vin-4.

■ — XV- 10, page
191.

iv-x-39.

---XI-IO.

— xi-A]5p. 9.
— XI1-3, ^•
,' — XVI- 10, 31.

INDEX. 557

Methodism, iv-xvii-21.

— xxiii-6, 8,
26.
Michaelis. i-App. 26. and
otten elsewhere-
111-IV-5.
iv-i-App,
— xi-App. 9.
(see Marsh.)
Middleton. i-ix-8.

— xii-o, 16.

• — XIII-IO.

— xxii-passim,

and Se6t. 6.
— xxviii-28.

— XXIX-I.

— xxx-1,8.
Mill, i-viii-2.
Millenarians. i-xi-2.

111-IX-7.
iv-rv-5, 12.
Milton, iv-xvii-2, 100.

— xviir-^.
Ministers, religious.
iii-i-C,
— v~6.
— IX-12.
iv-xxni-i, 15,16.

XXV -4.

XXVI-I, 2, 6.

— xxvn-8. (see
Priests. )

— XXXV-2.

— xxxvi-i, 8.
Miracles, i-xiii-io.

-^xv. and xvi.
according to
Heads of Le6t.
— xviii-25.
iv-xxiii-5, 17.
Misna, ot Talmud.
1-V-3.
— VII 1-9.
— n-iv-5.

Misna.

5iS

Misna, or Talmud.
IV-VI-3.

XXVII-2.

XXXIV-4, 24.

Moderation, iv-xxxv-i.

(see Puller )
Monk. i-App. 5— 9.

IV-XXXII-I.

Monophysitcs. iv-11-9.
Montague, Bishop.

iv-xvi-22.
Montanus. iv-v-2.

— XVI-2.
— XXII-2.

— XXV11-14.
IMontesquiep. iii-vi-3.

XV-II-2.

iv-ix-28,
— XXXIV-7.
Montfaucon. i-vi-7.
Morality, i-xii-i.

— XV11-18.
— XIX-3, 4.
ii-rv-4.
111-1-4.

— IX-IO,
XI-II,

— xv-4.

iv-Introd. 3.

— VI-5. i3> end.
—vii-y, 13, 14.
— xii-23.
— XIV-4.
— XV1-15, 3O'
— xvii-i, 79.

— XIX-4, 7.

— XXI-I5.
— XXIl-20.
— xxv-6, 10.

XXVII-2, I I.

— xxxii-i, 14.
— xxxvi-i.
— XXXVII-18, 19.
— xxxix-6.

INDEX.

Moravians

Mosh

eim.

iii-xv-ii, page

188, &c.
— xv-12.
iv-i- 6, end.
— V11-13.
— xi-App. 9.
— xv-6.
— xxiv-i.

XXXVII-IO.

I-XII-15.
i-App.
iv-subs. 12.

II-II-IO.

— v-io.

IV-XIV-I.

— XV 1-4. passim.
— xxxvi-6.
— xxxvii-6.

— XVII-2.

-XV- 10.
xx-i.

IV-XXV-2,IO, II.

. III-XV-II, p. 187.
IV-VI-3.

— VII-3.

— xv-5.

— XVI-9.

— xxiii-6, 15.

XXVIII-I I.

N
Names, their effefts.

IV-XVIII-II.

Nares. i-xii-16.

Nature. iv-ix-Introd. 8, 9.

— IX-18, 26, 30.
Neal. (see Puritans.)

iii-iv-6.

— XIV-15.

iv-xvi-8.

— XVI1-18.

— xxv-3.

— XXVII-15.

Nc;il.

Musgrave.
Music. Ill

IV-

Mysteries.
Mysticism

INDEX

Neal. (see Puritans.)

IV-XXXVI-5.
Necker. iv-xxiv-i.
Necessary Do6lrine.
passim. iv-Introd. 4.
— v-4.
— VI11-4.

IX-2.

X-II.

— xi-8.

— XI 1-6, 25,

— XIII-5.

XIV-I.

— XVI-3,8, 10, 14
— XVII-I6, 80.
• — xxn-4.

— XXV-2, 4, 7.

XXVI-2.

XXVIII-II.

— xxx-6.
— XXXI-4.

XXXVII-2.

Necessity, (see Liberty.)

iv-ix-Introd. 5.

— X-19, 49.

— XVII-5.
Necessity, cases of.

IV-XXI11-9, 20,

29-
— xxv-3.

— xxvii-6, 10,

XXXV-I, 2.

Nestorius. iv-i-18.

—1 1-8, 9.

— XXI-16.
Newton, Sir Isaac.

I-VI-I.

— XVII-15.
11-IV-5.
111-IV-7.
iv-i-App.
— XXX1-13.
Nicholls. iv-Introd. 6.

Nicholls. 1V-X-4.

— xi-App. 2, 6.
—XII 1-2.

JNorns. iv-lntrod. i,
— x XV 1 1-29.
Not at home. 111-11-4.

— VIII-I.

Novatians. iv-1-4, p. 227.

— xvi-2, 27'
Numenius. iv-1-3.

o

Oaths, iv-xxxvii-o, g^ 5.
&c.
— XXXIX passim-
Ogden. iv-viii-ii.
— ix-36.
— xi-App.9, 27.
— xxii-20.

XXXIX-2, 5, 6.

Offering. iv-xi-App. 14.
Old Maids, Essay on,

iv-ix-30.
Omissions, in each S}'stem.

i-xvii-i.

iv-ii-i.
Onkelos. i-vi-7.

- — ix-3-
Opinions, seeming incon-
sistent, to be retained till
reconciled, iv-xvi-5.

Oracles, i-xvii-12.
Ordinances, ordinary bulk
upon extraordinary.
iv-xxiii-25.
— xxv-3, 10, end.
— xxxvi-18, 19.
Ordination, iv-xxiii-4, 6,
II, 22.
— xxv-5, 9.
— xxvi-6.
Ordination.

^6o INDEX.

Ordination, iv-xxxiv-y.
— XXXVI,
according ta Heads of
Le6lures ; particularly
Seft. 2, 5.
Origen. i-viii-6, p. 50.
— XI1-17.

— XV1-7.
— XIX-5.
— App. I.
ii-iv-10.
IV- 1 -4.
— IV-4, 17, and

Appendix,

— V-2.

—VI-21, 23,25,^8
— XV 1-4.

— XXU-2.
■ — XXI 1 1-9.

XXIY-I, 2.

XXVH-I4.

Ormerod. i-xii-3.

iv-iii-6, 8.
— v-5.
Orobio. i-viii-i.
Overal, Bishop, iv-xv-12.
— xvi-8,22
— xvii-f;.

Painting, iii-xv-io.

IV-XX-T.

— xxvii-27.
Paley. iv-xiii-i, 2.
— XXVII-14.
Paphnutius. iv-xxxii-3.
— XXXV 1-4.
Paraclete, iv-v-i.
Parkliurst. i-xv-16.

— App. 24.
II-IV-I5.

lV-I-2.

— 1 1 1-6.
— x-2,30.

Parklmrst. iv-xi-App. 12.
— xni-17.
— xvii-2, 83.

XXVHI-24.

and elsewhere.
Parturition, iv-ix-44.
Pascal, ii-iii-j.
■ — v-io.
Patronage. iv-xxiii-iO'.
— XX XI 11- 1 7.

Paulus Jovius. IV-XVI11-5.
Pax. IV-XXV-3
Pearson, John, Bishop.
1-V1-3, 6.

— V111-3.

— xvii-15.
IV-1-4, p. 238.
■ — 1-12, 17, 18.
— 11-4, 8,28.

— II 1-6.

— VI I- 10.

— xi-App. 22.

— XIX-I.

Pearson, Edward.

IV-VIII-i2.

Pedantry. 1-1-5.

IV-XXIV-5.
Pelagius, and followers.

iv-viii-y, li, p.
110.

— ix-6, 7.

— x-5.
— xiit-3.
— xv-3, 18.

— xvi-6.

— XV11-5, S3.

— XV 1 1 1-3.

— XXXVI 1-5.
Perfe6lion iv-xi-i.

— xv-5.
— XV1-9.
— XV 1 1-9 1.
— XX XV 1 1-3.
Perfection.

INDEX.

56.

Perfeaion. vi-xxxviii-6. I Pleasure, in studying reli
Perseverance, iii-iv-i. | gion, 1-1-9

IV-X-15.
— xvi-5,8,9,
22, 29, 30,

. 37-
Peter Lombard,
iv-v-r.
— x-26.
— XI I 1-4.
■ — xvii-29.
— XXII-13.
— xxv-2, 4.
Pews, iii-iv-2.
Pharaoh, i-x-9.

iv-ix-Introd. 16.
— x-3.

— x-50, p. 254.
~xvii-29, 95.
Pharisees. iv-iv-App.
page 415.
Philo. I -VI- 1.

iv-i-i, 2, 3.
Philosophers, opposed to
People, ii-iv-passim.
111-XV-5.
IV-VI-5.
— XIX, end.
— xx-5.
— xxxiii-14.
Phllostratus. i-xii-17.

■ — XI11-13.
Pilate, i-xiii-ir.
Pindar, iv-x-2.
Pious frauds, i-viii-9.
— XII-15.

XV-I.

Plaifere. iv-x-5, 15, 19.
— xvii-71,73.
Platonists. i-xii-15.

— App- 12.

iv-i-i, 3.

—I x-3, 5-

Vol. IV.

Phny. 1-XII-16, 17.

— XVI-II.

— xviii-13, 19.

IV-11-4T.
Plutarch, i-xii-16.
Polycarp. iv-xxiii-2.
— XXXVI-3.
Pope, Alexander.

iv-xvii-79.

■ — xviii-6, 17.
Popes, of Rome.

111-XIV-7.

IV-XXXVII-2, 13, 18.

Porson. IV- 1 -App.

— XXIX-2.

Porteus, Bishop,
i-x-ii.
— XI-5.
— XVII-15, 18.
111-11-5.
iv-iii-8.
■ — iv-App.
— xiv-i.

XX 1 1-6, 2Q.

XXV-4.

— XXX- 1 6.
Postlethwaite.

i-xvii-8,i2, 14,19.
Potter, (in various places).
iv-xi-App. 2.
— xxvii-2, 4.
— xxvi 11-24, 30.
— xxix-i.
Powell. 1-XI1-5, 8.
— XVI-9.
— XV11-16, 19.
— XVI11-4, 7, 10,

XIX-I, ID.

— App.xi-subs.-6.
n-i-2.

P p Powell

562

Powell

INDEX.

II-II-IO.
— IV -2.
III-IV-4.

V-2.

— VI-4.
— IX-5.
XI-IO.

iv-xi-App. g.
—XX XV 1-5, 7.
Pra6tice, aimed at in Spe-
culation. iv-ix-Introd. 4
— x-39.
— XVI 1-77.
— xxvi-6.
Preaching, (see Homilies)
1-XII-12.
111-V-5.
— ix-6.

IV-XXII1-9, 524.
— XXV 1 1-3.
— XXXV-), 2,5.
Precepts and Counsels.
iv-xiv-2, 4, 5.
Predestinarians.

iv-xvii-28.
Predestination.

III-IX-I.

• — xv-9.
iv-Introd. 4.
— 11-42.

— ix-Introd. 11.
— x-26.

— XV 1 1-5, et passim.
That it is no
Dodrine of the
Church of Eng-
land.
iv-xvii-16.
See also iv-xvii-
30. 62, 73, 74,

Presbyters, or Elders, and
Presbyterians.

iv-xxni-4,6,11,17.

Presbyters, or Elders, and
Presbyterians.

IV-XXV-3, 6, 10.
— xxxvi-i, 2, 3,
5, 12, 14.
Prescience. iv-ix-Introd. 8.
— xvi-3i,p.47i.
—XV 11-7,14, 29,
90.
Priest. IV-XXV-4.

-*-XXX-I, 9, II.

— XXXI-3, 10.
— xxxii-i, 14.
— xxxv-i.
Priestley, Do6tor.
1-XII-3.
— App. 5.
11-IV-7.
— v-io.
IV-1-4, 14, 16.
—I I- 1, 6, 12, 42y

46.
— x-18, 24.
— xi-App. 1,2,11,
24> 25, 26", 27,

29. 30-
— xii-24.
• — XV 1 1-2 1.
— xxiii-8, 22, 26.
— xxvii-18, 35.
— xxviii-12.
Primate, iv-xxi-io.
Priscillianists. iv-1-4.
— v-2.
Promises, opposed to

Decrees, iv-xvii-69, 97.
Prophesying, the Gift of.

IV-XXIV-3.
Protesting Catholics.

IV-XXXVII-2.

Proselytes, i-xvi-3.
Prudence, iii-xv-8.
Puller. iv-Introd. 3.
— XXIII-12.

Puller.

INDEX.

5^3

Puller, iv-xxv-2.
f'unishment. iv-xxxvii-i8,

and elsewhere.
Puritan. iv-Introd. 2.

— 11-21.

— vi-io.

XI-I2.

— xvi-2, 3, 8.

— xvii-iB, 19,

— xx-i, 2, 4, 7.

— xxni-i6.

■ — xxv-3, 8.

— xxvn-14.

— XXX1-5.

— xxxiii-6, 8.

— xxxiv-8, 17.

— xxxv-i.

• — XXXVI-4, 7, 16.

— xxxvii-8, II.
Purity, iv-xxvii-2.
Pythagoras. i-App. 12.
IV-IX-3.

— X-2.

— XXXVII-4.

Q.

Quakers, iii-iii-io.
— XI-9.

XIV-IO,

— xv-ii, p. 191.
IV-II-46.

— VII,^.

XVII-2I.

— xxiii-6.

XXV-2, II.

XXVI- 2, 6.

— XXVII-8,17,29,

34-
— xxviii-ii, 29.

XXX-IO.

— XXXVII-IO,

20.
— XXXIX-4, 5.
Quietism, (see Mysticism).

R

Racovian Catechism,
passim, iv-x-20.

— xi-App.8, 24.

— XIH-6.

— XVII-14.
— rXviii-5.
— XXI II -5.

XXV-2.

— XXXIII-5.
Randall, iv-xxv-2, lo.
Ransom. iv-xi-App. 2.
Re-baptizing, re-ordaining,

&c. (see Repeating).
Redemption. iv-xi-App. 2,
17. 29, p. 324.

IV-XVI1-13, 22.

— XVIII-3.
Redman, iv-xxxii-io.
Redu6tio ad absurdum.

11-11-13.

— v-6.

IV-X-5.

— XXVI-5.

XXIX-I.

Reformatio Legum.

iv-Introd. 4.
— vn-3.
— IX-12, 17.
— x-ii, 15.
— xi-8.
~xiii-5.
—XV 1-3, 8.
• — XV11-16, 18,32,

61, 66.
— XVI11-5.
— xxi-r3.
— xxiii-6,

XXV-2, 8.

XXVI-2.

— XXV11-17. -
■ — xxviii-ii, 20.
— XXXI-4.
p p 2 Reformatio

564 INDEX.

Reformatio Legum.

iv-xxxni-5.
Reformed Churches, (see
Syntagma).

IV-XXVIIl-IO.

— XXXI-4, 8.
— xxxii-12.
— XXX 1 1 1-5.

XXXIV-2,

— XXXV11-7.
Reformers, iii-xv-5.

iv-Introd. 2, 3,
4-

— XII-I.

— xvii-9,16, 17

XX-l.

• — XXI-2.

XXII-2I.

XXV-2, 8.

XXXVI-I7.

Regeneration, iv-ix-24.
— xii-8.
— XV 1-20.

XXVII-2,

14, 17.
Reland. i-v-8.
Relics, i-xiii-io.

iv-xxii-5, 19.
Remonstrants. iii-v»-i.
iv-x-15.
Repeating, Baptism, &c.
iv-v-i.
— xxin-i2.
— xxv-2, 3,
— xxvi-i, 3.
— xxvn-15,
— XXXH1-3.
Repentance, i-xix-8, 13.
iv-xvi-2,5,18,

34-
— xvii-91.

— xxv-4.

— XXV11-3.

Repentance. iv-x XX 1 1 1- 1, 5,

including Penance.
Reprobation, iv-x-50.

— XV 11-29,30,

32, 73>92.
Republication of the Law

of Nature, iv-xi-12.
Retracing. 1-1-6.

111-11-5.

IV-I-I.

Revelation, Book of.

I-XVII-I5.

111-X-9.

IV-IV-5.

—VI- 1.5, 31.
Review, Monthly.

IV-XXXV-2.

Reynolds, Sir Joshua.

IV-XV-19.
Rhemish Testament.

iv-xi-App. 6.

— XI11-5.

XIV-l.

— XVI-3, 4, 8.
— xvii-7, 9, 29,

66.
— XIX-9.
— xxi-12.

— XXII-2, 3, 4.

XXIV-I.

XXV-2.

XXVIII-32.

XXIX-I.

—xxx-4, 13.

— XXXI-2, 3, 10,
12.

Rheforians. iv-xviii-2.
Ricaut. iv-xxiv-i.

— XXVII-5,

— xxx-3.
Ridley. iv-Introd. 4.

— xn-i.

— XIU-5.
— XVI1-16.

Ridley.

>/

Ridley, iv-xxv-e.

— XXV 1 11-26.
Rimius. (see Moravians).
Rite, iv-xxxiv-3, 25.
Robinson, iii-xiv-14.

iv-xxvii-16.
Rogers. iv-Intiod. 6.

— XXV-2.

— XXXIV-17.

— XXXVII-IO.

Rome, (see, in the Heads
of LecHires, Romanists —
and. Age of the Refor-
mation.) iv-xix-2, 8.

XX- I.

— XXII-13.

XXIX- I.

— XXXI-12, 13.
Rosenberg, Countess of.

I-VI-2.

Rutherforth. i-ix-ii.

II-V-IO.

iv-ii-42.
• — iv-App.
— V111-5.
— X-41.

Sabbatli. i-xi-5.

IV-V11-5, 7, 13.

— XX XIV -2, 7, 15.
Sacramental Justification.

iv-xi-6.

— XXV-2.

Sacramentarian.

IV-XVII-18.

XXVIII-IO.

Sacraments, iv-xxv-passim.

Definition, iv-xxv-8, 9.

iv-xxvi-i, 2,

4> 6.
— xxviii-17

INDEX. 56^

I Sacramentum. iv-xxv-2.
and Sacrament, p. 204.
iv-xxv-6', II.
— XXXVII-5-
Sacred Language.

IV-XXIV-5.
Sacrifice. iv-xi-App. i, 2,
14' 27.

—XXV -5.

XXVIII-I, TO,

13, 17, 20, 24,

30.

— xxxi-2,3,G,io.
Sadducees. iv-iv-App.

p. 415.
Salvation. iv-xi-App. 17.

— xviii-12.
Salvian. i-xii-4.
Samaritan, i-ix-2,

XIII-II.

Sandys, Sir Edwin.
iii-xv-12.

IV-XXIV-2.

— xxv-4.

— xxx-3.
Satan, events referred to.

iv-x-50.

— XV 11-64.

— XXXII1-13.
Satisfa6lion. iv-xxv-4.
Schism. 111-IV-4.

— XI-2.
— XII-I.

Schoolmaster, how the Law
of Moses was one.
IV-VI1-14.
Sclioolmen. iv-xiii-4.

— XXII-4, ^»

end.
also Se6l. 8.

IV-XXIV-I.

— xxv-3.
— XXVI-3.
— XXXI11-4.

Schwenkfeld.

^bo r N D

Schwenkfeld. iv-vr-i, 17.

— XXV-2.

Sclavonian. iv-xxiv-i.
Seeker, Archbishop.

IV-XIV-I.

— XV 1-4.

XIX- 1.

— xxv-3.

— xxvii-8, 18, 2G.

— XXVIII-II,

— XXXI-5.
Seftaries. (see Dissenters).
Selt-deceit. iv-xvi-31,

p. 471.
Seminaries, ii-iv-7.
Sent. IV-XXIII-15.
Sephiroths. i-App. 15, 20,

24, 26
Sermo de Tempore.

iv-i-io, p. 250.

— 1 1-6, 19.
Sermon on the Mount.

IV-XXXVII-3, 6, 19.

— VI-4.

— xxxvni-3.
Servant, in forms of civility.

III-VIII-2.

Servetus. iv-i-6.
— 11-14.
— xxvii-r4.
Shaftesbury, ri-iv-15.
Shakspcare, iv-ix-3, 30,37.
— X-41.
— XV 1 1-66.
— XXVII-14.
Sharp, Archbisliop.
11-V-4, b.
111-IV-4.
— xi-10.
— XV 1-4.
— xvii-83.
Sliarp, Granville.

IV-XXXVI-7.
Sheridan, ii-iv-13.

E X.

Sherlock, Bishop;

iv-iv-13, 16.
— iv-App.
— x-32.

— XI-2.

— XXXVII-I5.

Siam, King of. i-xv-15, 16.
Sick. IV-XXV-4, 7, 10-
— xxviii-10, 21.
Simeon Stilites. iv-xiv-4.
Sins, mortal, venial, &c.
iv-xvi-2, 13, 15.
Sleidan. iv-vn-3.
— XVI-3.
— xxxvii-6.
Society, for propagating t!)e

GospcL i-xix-18.
Society, religious.

l-xix-15 — 17.
IV-XXXVI-7.
Socinus, and followers, (see
Dr. Priestley).

iv-Introd. 2.
— 1-14, 16.
— 11-12, 21.

— IV-2.

— v-4.

— IX-14.

— x-18.

— xi-App. 1,8,33.

— xvii-14, 21.

— XX111-5, 22, 24.

XXV-2.

—XXV 1 1-9, 27, 35.

XXVIII-I3.

XXXIII-5.

— xxxvi-6.
Soul, iv-iii-8.

— ix-Introd. 6, 7.
Socrates, i-xii-16.

ii-iv-io, 13, 14.
iv-xiii-24.
Sparrow, Bishop.

III-IV-I.

Sparro^v^

I N D

EX. 567

Sparrow, Bishop.

Swift. 11-IV-13.

IV-XXIV-5.

Switzerland, i-viii-i.

— -xxv-4.

iii-vi-6.

— xxxiv-5, 7.

— v^ii-6.

— xxxv-i.

iv-iii-i, 2.

Spirits, i-i-g.

— xvii-15,18.

— App. 8.

XX- 1.

Sponsors. IV-XXV-3.

XXIII-I2.

— XXVI1-14.

Synesius. iv-iv-i.

Sprinkling, iv-xxvii-io.

— XXXI11-3.

Sterne. i-App. 14.

Synod, iv-xxi-io.

11-1-9.

Syntagma, or Corpus et

--IV-13.

Syntagma, (see Reformed

III-IV-I.

Churches.)

iv-xxx-6.

iv-xi-App. 2, 5.
— xvi-19.

Stillingfleet. iv-vir-14.

— XX XV 1-5.

— xvii-14.
— XIX-7.

Stoics. IV-XVI-5.

XVII-2.

XXV-2.

Strype. iv-Introd. 4.

XXVI-2.

— 111-2.

XXVIII-IO.

— VI 1-7.

XXXIV-20.

■ — IX-12.

— XVI-3.

T

— XVII-18.

XXV-2.

iTareum. i-ix-9.

— xxxv-4.
Suarez. iv-xiii-4.
Subintroduced women.

IV-XXXII-2.

Succession of Bishops.

IV-XXII1-4, 7, 18.

— XXXVI-7.
Supererogation, iv-xiv-2.
Superstition. 1-1-9.

III-XV-II.

iv-Introd. 3.
Supralapsarians and Sublap-

sarians. iv-xvii-29.
Swedenborg. i-xvi-7.

III-XV-II, p.

187, &c.
iv-i-6,p.24i.
Swift, ii-iii-i, 4.

Taylor, Jeremy, iii-iv-8,
— vi-6.
Taylor, John, iv-ix-13, i^,

29, SO, 34. 35, 3^'
iv-x-i8, 19.
— XI-14, 27, 28.
— XT-App. 9, 12,22,

2.9, p- 3H-
— xii-20.
— xin-io.
— xvii-8,r, 92.
Temptations.

iv-ix-Introd.i2, 16,
■— x-3.
TertuUian. iv-1-4, P- 227,
— V11-5. '
— XI- App. 2.

■ — XV-2.

TertuUian.

ct6-8:

INDEX.

Tcrtullian. iv-xxvii-2, 14

— XXXIV-5.
Test and Corporation A6ls

111-XIV-15.
Testament, iv-xxviii-24.
Testament, Old.

i-v.

— VI-3.

— vni-i.

— ix-i, 2.

— xii-Introd.

—XV 1-8.

—XV 1 1- I, &c.

— A pp. 4-sub8. 8.
iv-iv-6 — 9.

VII-2.

— XI- A pp. 24.

— xxiii-22.
Theodoret. iv-xxv-2.

— xxvii-14.
Thomas, Bishop.

IV-XXXII-IO.

Tillotson. 1-XVI-14.
iv-i-9, 16.
— ii-i.
Tindal. iv-xi-12.

— XXXIV-21.
Toland. 1-XII-4.

IV-VI-15.
Toleration, iii-xiv-4, 15.
— xv-5.
iv-xix-r.
■ — xxxm-8.
— xxxiv-17,19,

24.
— xxxvii-13.
Tombs. IV-XXVII-14, 35.
Tradition, iv-vi-2, tec.
• — xxxiv-i, 4,
and accordinc;
to Heads of
Leflurcs.
Traitor, iv-xxvi-i.

Transubstantiatiorj.

i-xvi-14.

iv-xxviit, accord-
ing to Heads of
Le^ures.

— xxix and xxx.

— xxxr-2, 10.
Travis, ni-xv-6.

iv-i-Appendix.
Trent Catechism.

iv-xxv-2, 3,4,5,7.9.

— xxvr-2, 3.

— xxvii-6.

— XXVI 11-10,20,33.

— xxix-i, 4.

— xxx-4.

—XX XI-?.

Trent, Council of.

iv-vi-2, 10.

• — IX-12.

— x-20.

— xr-7.

— xi-App. 6.

— xiii-6.

— xiv-i.

■ XV -4.

— XVI-3.

-— XVI 1-9, 29. (Sec,
in Heads of Lec-
tures, Romanists,
and Age of the
Reformation.)

— XXI- 2 — 4.

■ — XXII-2 — 6.

— xxiv-i, 2.

XXV-2 — 7.

XXVI-2, 3.

— XXVII-6.

XXVIII-IO, 20.

XXIX-I.

— xxx-4.
— XXX1-3, 8.

— XXXIl-II.

Treat,

Trent, Council of.
1V-XXXI11-5.
• — XXXV1-7.
Trent .Creed, iv-xix-2.
Tribes, i-ix-i.
Trinity, i-xii-12.
— XVI-7.
111-XV-9.
iv-Introd. i.
— I- 1, 8.'c. accord-
ing to Heads of
Le6tures.
^ — ix-6.
Trisagium. iv-xxviii-4.
Tucker, iv-x-15.
— XIX-7.
Turretin. iv-x-50.

— xvii-29.
Twining. iv-iv-Appendix.

. — x-44.

Twisse. iv-xvii-29.

U & V

Ubiquity, iv-iv-3.

• — XXVIII-IO, II.

Veneer. iv-Introd. 6.

■ — XIII-2.

XXI 1-2.

XXIV-I.

Vespasian, i-xvi-io.
Ugolino. i-x-8.
Vigilantius. iv-xxii-5, 6.

— xxxn-4.
Virgin Mary.

IV-XV-4, 24.
— XXII-4, 6, 13, 20.
Virtue, iv-xi-28, .29.
~xii-23, 25.
— xvii-87.
Virtue, what may be called

original, iv-ix-36.
Visitation, iv-xxxv-i.

INDEX. 569

Unaion. iv-xxv-3, 5, 7, 9,
10, includinor
Extreme unc-
tion.
— XXVII-4.
Uniformity, Aft ot."
111-XIV-15.
IV-XXXIV-17,
— XX XV 1-5.
Unitarians, iv-1-5, 13.
Vocation. (See Called.)
IV-XVI1-14.
— XXI11-16.
Voltaire. i-App. 26.

II-V-IO, 11.

111-IV-5, 9.
— xv-ii, p. 187,
IV-1-4, p. 241.
— i-Appendix.
— iv-Appendix,

end.
— IX-4, 40.
— -x-9, 17, 19.
— XXI-9.
— XXI1-3.
— xxx-4.
IV-X-4, 5, 9.
— XII-3.
— XVI-5,
• — xvii-28.
Usher, IV-VI11-5.
— x-9.

—XVII- 24, so, 37,
7 1.- 75. 95. 98.

XXIV-I, 2.

Vossius.

Vol.

IV.

w ^

Wafer, iv-xxviii-3, ir,
Wakefield, i-ix-ii, page
62.
— xvii-6.
Waldenses. iv-xxiii-3.

Qs

Waldenses.

570 I N D

Wal.denses. iv-xxviii-io.
— XXXV1-4.
— xxxvii-6.
Wall, iv-ix-8.

— xi-App. 2.
— xv-3.

XXV-2.

— XXVII-4, 12, 13,
14, 27.

Walton, i-ix-3, 10.
IV -XV 11-24.
— xxii-20.
Warburton.
1-XI-3.
— XI1-3, 15.
—XV 1 1-3, 7, 10, 14,

15, p. 246, 18.

ii-iii-i, 6, 14.

— IV-I3, 16.

— v-io.

111-XIV-5.

iv-vii-8.

— IX-21, 34, 38.

— xi-App.9, 19,21.

— XII-2, IQ.

XX-7.

XXVIII-I3,

— xxxiii-8.
Washing of feet.
i-xi-6.

lV-XXV-2.
XXVIII-29.

Wateiland. iv-i-12.

— 1,-App.

— VII 1-8, 9, 12.

— XI11-4, end.

— xvi-8.

— xvii-24.
Wesley, ii-iv-16.
111-V111-4.
— xv-ii, p. 191.
iv-x-39.
~xi-App. 9.

E X.

Wesley, rv-xv-5.

— :Xvi-io. (See
Methodism. )
— xxiii-8.
— XXV11-17.
— xxviii-ii.
Wheatly. passim.
IV-XXV-3.

— XXVIII-I I.

Whiston. IV- 1-6.

— 11-14.
Whitby. 1-XVU-19.

iv-vi-32.

— X-15.

— XVI-5.

— xvii-5, 71.
Whitehead, Wilham.

iv-xvii-85.
Whitfield, iv-x-39.

— xvi-io.
Whitgift, iv-iii-2.

— XV11-18. "

— XXV-2.

— XXV11-15, 18.
Wicklift'e. IV-XVI1-9.

— XXl-2.

XXV-2.

XXVI-2.

XXVIII-IO.

• — XXXI-4.

— XXXIII-5, ^}

13-

— XX XV 1-5.
— xxxvii-G.
Will-worship, iv-xiv-3.

— XXII-15.
Wisdom. (See Know-

ledg«. )
Witches, i-xiii-io.

iii-vi-G.
Woolston. 1-XVI-7.

iv-iv-i, 7, 13.
— VII-3.

Works.

INDEX.

Works. iv-xr-i8, 27,
28.
— XI 1-6, 23.
— xiii-8.
"Worship. iv-ii-i6.
— XX 1 1-9.
— xxv-6\
Wotton. (SeeMisna.)
IV-VI-3,
— XXXIV-4, 24.

Sli

Ximenes. i-rx-io.

z

Zuingle, and followers.

IV-XVI-7, lo-

— XV11-9, io«

XXVIII-IO.

S Q

INDEX

INDEX

OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE.

GENESIS xxxvii. lo.
Exodus vii. 13.
Deuteronomy iv. 2.

xii. 32.

I Sam. xiii. 14.
Proverbs xvi. 4.
Isaiah vii. 14 — 16.

ix. 6.

— — xi. 6.

liii. —

Ezekiel xviii.
Daniel v. 'i8.
Joel i. 7, &c.

ii. I — 10.

Matthew ii. 15.

23.

iii. 2.

. V. and vi.

■ V. 29, 30.

V- 33—37-
V. 38—41.

i-xvii-6.
— x-9.
IV-V1-4.
Ibidem.

I-X-IO.

iv-xvii-g5.
1-XVII-14.

XVII-IO.

Ibidem.
1-XVII-15,
iv-ix-38.
1-XVI1-19.

?I-XVII-IC.

i-x\ii-i9.

Ibidem.

IV-XXV11-3.

— V 1-4.

— xxxviii-g.

— XXXIX-4.

— XXXVI1-19.

— ix-Introd. 12.

— XXXII1-7, 9, II.

— xxxii-iS.

— xxxviii-6.

— xv-iO".

— XIV-5.

1-XVI1-19.

IV-XXXIX-4.

I-XVII-JO.

Matthew

I N D E

573

Matthew xxiv. 24.

XXV. 34.

Markx. 14.

. xii. 29. 32.

. xiii. 24 — 26.

xvi. 16.

■ 17.

Aas

I Cor. i. 8,

30.

V.

iv-xvi-30,
— XV 11-80.
— XXVII-27.

—1-17.

I-XVII-IO.

iv-viii-ii, 12,32.
I-XVI-I3.

IV-XV-I7.

I-XVI-I I.

Ibidem.
Ibidem.

I-X-IO.

IV-XXXVIII-7.
— ix-Introd. 12.
— XIV-5.
iv-u-37.

XXVII-II.

— XVII-83.

— 1-17.
— xvi-30.
— xvii-79.
— xxxvni-8.
Ibidem.
iv-xxiii-24.

I-X-II.

IV-XXIII-24.
— xxiii-22.
— xvii-83.
— xxi-i.
— 1-18.
— xiii-24.
— ix-29.
— xv-20.
— ix-18, 25.
— xvii-49,77.
— xv-20.
—x VI 1-95.
— XVI-30.

XXXIII-I3.

XVI-30.

XV-20.

XXXIII-I^.

Cor.

574

1 Cor, vii.

viii. 6.

ix. 5.

xi. 2.

XV. 10.

— 24.

2 Cor. i. 22.

ii. 10.

xiii. 14.

Gal. iv. 5.
Eph. i. 13.

iv. 30.

. V. 27.

Phil. i. I— 10.

— — ' ii. 5 — II.

— 12, 13.

Col. i. 16 — 20.
ii. 20 — 23.

1 Thess. V. 9.

2 Thess. ii. 15.
; — iii. 3.

I Tim. vi. 20.
iii. 16.

INDEX.

2 Tim. i. 9.

ii. 19.

iii. 14, 15, .&c.

Hebrews i.

VI. 1 — 9.
— II.
X. 22.
— 2G.

James ii. 10.

V. 12.

14, 15.

1 Peter i. 5.

10 — 12.

ii.8.

iv. 8.

2 Peter i. 20.

1-XII-3.

IV-XXVII-27,

— XXXII-I7.

— XXXIn-15.
IV-I-I7.
— XXXII-I7. •

— VI-5.

— X-4I.

— IV-20.

— xvi-30.

— XXXIII-14, 15.

— I-I7.

— XVI-30.

Ibidem.

Ibidem.

iv-xv-20.
— xiii-30.
— XVI-30.
— 11-31.
— x-41.
—n-3Jy 25-
— XV1-3.
— xvii-83.
— V1-5.
— xvi-30.
i-App. 24.
liv-ii-37.
— xvii-83.
|— XV 1-30.
— v 1-4,

— II-3I.

—XV 1-33.
— XVI-3I.
Ibidem.
iv-xvi-03.
Ibidem.
IV-XXXIX-5.
— xxv-io.
— XVI-30.
1-XVII-13.
jiv-xvii-95.
— xiv-6.

I-XVII-I^.

I Jolm

INDEX.

1 John iii. 9.

V. 16,

2 John 10, II.
Jude 4.

Revelation xxii. 18, 19.

r IV-XV-19,
I— XV 1-33.

iv-xvi-33.

— XXXII1-14.

— xvii-95.

— VI-4.

575

END OF THE FOURTH VOLUME.

ERRATA.

Page

3. 1. 32. for " this writer of"

r. the luriter on,
8. I. 13. for Simplicus, r. Sim-

plicius,
13. 1. 4. for confent, x.counfel.
14. 1. 3 from bottom, dele is.
18. 1 23. r. Rom. viii. 13.

20. 1. 25. for LI V, r. Lxi V.

21. I. 12. r. quandam.
26. I. 29. r. forefee.

27. 1. 7. for talccn, r. crucified.

35. 1. 20. before iw/Zinfert /^'i-.

37. 1. 18. for a fitch, r. finch a.

59. 1. 20. for knoivUcige, r.fiore-
knouvledge.

51.1. II. for it, r. ///«/ // had
not,

59. I. 1^1. for objea, r. cbjeSls.

96. running title, for xx,r. xxi.

1 13. 1. 13, r. to have.

136. 1.27. dele ///If.

138. I. 13. for degree, r. de-
grees.

146. I. 4. for indirefl, r. dire^.

181. 1. 5 from bottom, r. bcla-
vonians.

jgg. 1. 5. for divided, r. dcvificd.

213, I. 10. r. AxoXa^iot.

Page

227. lowefl line, for xr, r. ii.

243. 1. 21. r, cca-^ivu.

280. 1. 28. r. yield.

286. 1. 17. r. the Romifh

Church.
305. running title, r. Sefl.

XXVIl.

3 1 7. 1. 14. for fort, r.fiorts.
322. 1. 20 & 2 1 . r. fuppofition.
327. 1. 15. r. Liege.
341;. 1. 15. r. the Bread.
358. 1. 26. r. and we alfio ufe.

1. 33. r. Corollary.

363. 1. 30. r. effefts.

373. 1. 23. dele^/;^.

422. ]. 9. r. information on.

432. 1. 13. ior him z.nd.his, r.

them and their.
433. 1. 32. for It, r. Their e.x-

clufion.
446. 1.32. for privately, r.

purpofiely.

458. 1. 4. for Papift, r. Papifis.
465. 1. 6 from bottom, for thafe

times, r. thefie times.
497. 1. 27. dele a.
523. 1. 19. r, Zacchaeus.
532. 1. 3. for ^, r. the.

Some names and words are fpelt differently in different places,
according to the authors fi-om which they were taken, or the
cufloms of different writers.