ON THE MEANING OF OUR SUB-scriptions, he here presents to the SCRIPTION TO THE ARTICLES. reader. give the forms of subscription themAnd first it may be well to selves. 66 or contained.”* As the first of these three articles refers to the Queen's supremacy it does not appear neces Ir is a matter of fact, that in the ministry of the Church of England at the present time, there are men who hold and teach doctrines diametrically be made and subscribed by all perThe following is the declaration to opposed to each other, although they sons who are to be ordained, have subscribed to the very documents as a test of their opinions, same admitted to any Curacy or Benefice: which documents were framed for the heart subscribe to the Thirty-nine I, A. B., do willingly and from my express purpose of avoiding (as far as possible) diversity of opinion. One Church of England and Ireland, and Articles of Religion of the United class of disputants contends that the to the three Articles in the thirty39 Articles are the standard of the doc-sixth canon; and to all things therein trines of the Church of England; while the other class contends with equal earnestness that the Liturgy and Offices are the standard. This state of things plainly shows, that either the true point of view from which the subject should be contemplated is overlooked, or else "I, A. B.. do willingly, and ex animo, that our Articles and Prayer-Book subscribe to the Book of Articles of Re(and the forms of subscription to them) and Bishops of both provinces of the ligion agreed upon by the Archbishops are left to us in a state of irremediable realm of England, and the whole clergy self-contradiction. It seems, however, thereof, in the Convocation holden at Lonto the writer, that in the formularies don, in the year of our Lord, 1562; and themselves is to be found a clue, which therein contained, being in number 39, I acknowledge all and every the Articles will do much to lead us out of the besides the Ratification, to be agreeable labyrinth of apparent inconsistencies to the Word of God." Also the following; in which we are involved. The view "I, A.B., do hereby solemnly promise, that thence presented to him after a careI will give all due obedience to the canons ful consideration, resulting from a per-up and enacted by the Bishops and clergy of the Episcopal Church in Scotland, drawn sonal concern in some of these sub- of that Church, in a synod holden for that tish Episcopal Church, are as follows:-*The subscriptions required in the Scot sary here to quote it; the 2nd and 3rd before the congregation there (i. e. in are as follows: "2. That the Book of Common Prayer, and of Ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the Word of God, and that it may lawfully so be used, and that he himself will use the form in the said Book prescribed, in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, and none other. “3. That he alloweth the Book of Articles of Religion, agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both provinces, and the whole clergy, in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord, one thousand five hundred sixty and two; and that he acknowledgeth all and every the Articles therein contained, being in number nine and thirty, besides the Ratification, to be agreeable to the Word of God." The following Declaration is also to be subscribed before licence to a curacy or institution to a benefice :-"I, A. B., do declare that I will conform to the Liturgy of the United Church of England and Ireland, as it is now by law established." The oath of canonical obedience is as follows:-"I, A. B., do swear that I will pay true and canonical obedience to the Lord Bishop of —, in all things lawful and honest. So help me God." Moreover, every minister on his promotion to any benefice, is obliged, by the Act of Uniformity, "upon some Lord's Day," to "openly and publicly purpose at Edinburgh, in the year of our Lord, 1838; and I, in like manner, promise that I will show, in all things, an earnest desire to promote the peace, unity and order of the said Episcopal Church, and will not appeal from any sentence to a Civil Court, but acquiesce in the decisions of the ecclesiastical authorities, in all questions falling under their spiritual jurisdiction." (See the Canons of that Church, Appendix, pp. 54, 55.) The Canons which relate to Divine Service are Nos. 8, 17, 18, 20, 21-23, 26-28, and 30 Church) assembled, declare his unfeigned assent and consent to the use of all things in the said book (i. e. the Prayer Book) contained and prescribed, in these words, and no other ;"—" I, A. B., do hereby declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all and everything contained and prescribed in and by the book entituled; 'The Book of Common Prayer, and administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church according to the use of the Church of England: together with the Psalter, or Psalms of David, printed as they are to be sung, or said in Churches; and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating Bishops, Priests, and Deacons.' (The above portion of the Act is at p. xvii. of Bp. Mant's Prayer Book.) There appears no great difficulty in understanding these forms of subscription: they are subscribed voluntarily by the candidates themselves; and because the Articles and Liturgy are declared to be agreeable to the Word of God. Of course, therefore, it is the obvious duty of every perton who does thus subscribe, previously BOTH to become acquainted with the contents of the Articles and Liturgy; and ALSO to satisfy himself that all the contents of the Articles and Liturgy ARE agreeable to the Word of God. The whole argument must now depend on the assumption that the Articles and Liturgy are thus agreeable to the Word of God; and that these forms are subscribed in honest sincerity. Since, however, the minds of men differ so much from each other that, perhaps, we cannot find any two men who think exactly alike in all things, we cannot expect our formularies to be so perfectly drawn up as to entirely exclude the possibility of various interpretations, since we know that the meaning even of the WORD OF GOD is thus disputed; and perhaps the singular agreement of our formularies with the Word of God, may be one reason why their meaning is disputed, since a leaning to any of the conflicting theories, deduced by human reason from the Word of God, would of course produce dogmatical statements, where now the matter is left comparatively open. While, therefore, opinions vary about the meaning of the Scriptures, we cannot expect that our Scriptural formularies will escape the same fate. (See an extract from a Charge of Archbishop Magee's, given in the memoir of him in "The Church Magazine" for Nov. 1843, Vol. V. p. 499.) Still it is our duty to ascertain to the best of our ability what is the real teaching of our Church and this suggests an important question, viz., in the case of any apparent discrepancies, is the final appeal to be made to the Articles, or to the Liturgy and Offices? England, agreeable to God's word :" and that " though some differences have been ill raised," (the Articles having been "agreed upon, for the avoiding of diversities of opinion, and for establishing of consent touching true religion :") yet as "all clergymen❞ have "subscribed to the Articles established," it is an argument "that they all agree in the true, usual, literal meaning of the said Articles; and that even in those curious points, in which the present differences lie, men of all sorts take the Articles of the Church of England to be for them; which is an argument again, that none of them intend any desertion of the Articles established, &c., &c." This, then, proves that the Articles are of primary authority; and in the University of Oxford, this principle is carried out in practice, for at matriculation, every one subscribes to the Articles, (which subscription is evidently considered as test of their opinions being in agreement with the "true doctrine" of the Church) while none are called upon to subscribe to the 36th canon, till they take a degree. I now come to the part of the 36th canon, which refers to the Prayer Book, viz., the Second Article. The conclusion of the 3rd paragraph of "The Preface" of the Prayer Book, cannot but think it is intended as a paraphrase of it, viz., the book "doth not contain in it anything contrary to the Word of God, or to sound On examination, it will, I think, be evident the the Articles are of primary authority, in setting forth the doctrine of the Church of England, as gathered out of the Holy Scriptures, and agreeable to the same. 1. Because in the declaration before ordination (given towards the beginning of this paper) subscription to the 36th Canon alone, would be sufficient if the Articles were intended to be subordinate to the Lit-is so similar to it in the style, that I urgy, as some contend; since the third Article of this 36th canon implies assent to the Articles, as the second does to the Prayer Book. An additional precaution is, however, taken to ensure assent to the Articles, for they are not only expressly named in connection with the 36th canon, (which in itself involves subscription to the Articles) but are named before it as of primary authority. 2. Because in the King's declaration prefixed to the Articles, it is expressly stated, "that the Articles of the Church of England, do contain the true doctrine of the Church of * As to the 36th Article, it is declared at the conclusion of the Act of Uniformity, that it is to be taken, understood, and subscribed, as referring to the Ordination Services, as altered to their present form, at the last Review, in 1662. "The Preface" was added at the last Review, and the passage in questionn, therefore, was composed since the 36th canon, and hence, may be intended as a paraphrase of it. doctrine, or which a godly man may not with a good conscience use and submit unto, or which is not fairly defensible against any that shall oppose the same; if it be allowed such just and favourable construction as in common equity ought to be allowed to all human writings, especially such as are set forth by authority, and even to the very best translations of the Holy Scripture itself." It may be asked what is here intended by "just and favourable construction?" I think the letters on the words used at the Ordination of Priests, in "the Church Magazine," for Dec., 1844, p. 312313, and January, 1845, p. 15-17, may be adduced as fair specimens of this; because not only do Dissenters (like R. M. Beverly), put a harsh construction on this, but also Mr. Waterworth, the Romish Priest, in "the Hereford Discussion," p. 58-74, compares it with the Absolution in the Visitation of the Sick, and says, that our Church claims the same power of absolution, as his own! and a minister of our own Church (!) the Rev. John Oxlee, in his Sermons on Sacerdotal Absolution, and the Christian Hierarchy, (Hatchard, 1821,) wonders how any priest of the Church of England, "can for a moment doubt of his authority to remit and retain sins, and so forth, to the utmost extent ever acknowledged or practised in any Episcopal Church in Christendom, without excepting even the Romish Church itself." (Notes to Sermon I., pp. 48, 49. See, also, pp. 33, 67, 76, 80, 87-89, 93, 94; and Sermon II., pp. 85-97*.) Since the reason given for any priest of our Church, coming to this conclusion, is his duly reflecting on the power which he has received at his ordination 66 * Such sentiments as these prove the justice of the remarks of the late Bishop Shuttleworth, in "Not Tradition, but Scrip ture," p. 174-176, he truly says there is much" natural popery within us." by the hands of the Bishop." (p. 48.) I think the words then used, afford an excellent illustration of the opinion, that when there is any apparent difference between the Liturgy or Offices, and the Articles, the Articles are of primary authority: the 22nd Article expressly condemns "the Romish doctrine concerning pardons," and the ordination service, "if it be allowed" a "just and favourable construction," is in perfect agreement with the Article. As another specimen of "just and favourable construction," I may refer to Rev. T. H. Horne's" Concise History and Analysis of the Athanasian Creed." Price 6d. (T. Cadell.) As to the declaration of conformity to the Liturgy, before being licensed, &c., it differs little from the 36th canon; and appears to refer to what the Bishop of Worcester terms sential and honest conformity," (Letter to Rev. J. Oldknow, in Jan. 1842), and a promise "to use in general that form in the administration Church Services." (Primary Charge, p. 9.) of the I now come to the declaration of "unfeigned assent and consent" made by incumbents: some think that this refers exclusively to the doctrine of the Prayer Book; but I cannot think this, because the doctrine is sometimes disputed by parties who agree as to the use of the disputed parts, e.g. the Baptismal Service. The Act of Uniformity itself, explains the meaning; for the declaration is to be made "to the end, that uniformity in the public worship of God, (which is so much desired) may be effected." (p. xvii. of Mant's Prayer Book, a little before the declaration itself.) Accordingly, when a reference is made to this declaration, a few pages on, (viz., p. xxi.) in the case of persons appointed as lecturers, it is said that everyone shall "publicly and openly declare his assent unto, and approbation of the said book [i.e. the re Prayer Book], and to the use of all The oath of canonical obedience to the Bishop is restricted to things lawful and honest." heard or seen one of the Articles, but are bound to accept the Prayer-Book, in all its parts and services as their rule of life, and a teacher of doctrine? To assert, then, that a controversial document, such as the 39 Articles, which nineteen-twentieths of the Church of England are never, throughout their lives, called upon to subscribe, to read, to study, or to listen to, is superior, in point of authority, to that book which they are directed to use twice every day, and from whose voice they learn their duties and their faith on every occasion of human life -seems to us quite nugatory." (pp. 30, 31.) I can only say of the Reviewer what he says, at p. 20, of Dr. Holloway, "We are sorry to dispel this great critic's delusion;" by referring him to the declaration prefixed to the Articles, and reminding him, that every minister on promotion to a benefice has to read aloud the 39 Articles before the congregation on some Lord's day: if they are "not Articles of faith," why are they subscribed to? A minister's practice proves his sincerity in subscribing to the Liturgy, while his doctrine must be the proof of his agreement with the Articles. Dr. Hook, in his letter to the Bishop of Ripon some years ago, while he asserted that the "vicious extreme" of low-Church principles was Socinianism, allowed that the "vicious extreme" of high-Church principles was Popery. It is somewhat remarkable that the followers of Arianism, and Tractarianism (removed respectively but one degree from the above-named vicious tremes) have both explained away our Articles on very similar principles, as Dr. Elrington shows in his sermon on ex This appears to be the true meaning of the various forms of subscription required by our Church from her ministers. The Tractarians, therefore, in rejecting the Articles which are declared to be "the true doctrine" of the Church, condemn themselves. (Titus iii. 10, 11.) In "Modern Puritanism," (reprinted, as I think, from p. 13, of "the Christian Remembrancer," and noticed at p. 13 of the January number of "the Church Magazine,") it is said," Subscription to the 39 Articles." "did it ever occur to these writers that the thirty-nine Articles are not Articles of faith,-that the laity, who are just as much the Church as the clergy, are not bound even to have (Rivington, 1842,) and thus, as Dr. Pusey observes in his letter to the Bishop of Oxford, in 1839, "Opposed errors will often meet: truth will not approximate to either, though if looked |