תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

His observation on the XIXth is, that to the definition of the church, the words, under lawful pastors, ought to be added; and that though all particular churches, even that of Rome, may err, it is needless to say this in a confession of faith.

He consents to the decision of the XXth article, which refuses to the church the power of ordaining any thing that is contrary to the word of God; but he says, it must be taken for granted, that the church will never do this in matters which overturn essential points of faith, or, to use his own words, quæ fidei substantiam evertant.'

[ocr errors]

It is in consequence of this notion that he remarks on the XXIst article, that general councils, received by the universal church, cannot err; and that, though particular councils may, yet every private man has not a right to reject what he thinks contrary to Scripture.

As to the important points of controversy contained in the XXIId article, he endeavours to mince matters as nicely as he can, to see if he can make the cable pass through the eye of the needle; and for this purpose observes, that souls must be purged, i. e. purified from all defilement of sin, before they are admitted to celestial bliss; that the church of Rome does not affirm this to be done by fire; that indulgences are only relaxations or remissions of temporal penalties in this life; that the Roman catholics do not worship the cross, or relics, or images, or even saints before their images, but only pay them an external respect, which is not of a religious nature; and that even the external demonstration of respect is a matter of indifference, which may be laid aside or retained without harm.

He approves the XXIIId article; and does not pretend to dispute about the XXIVth, which ordains the celebration of divine worship in the vulgar tongue. He, indeed, excuses the Latin and Greek churches for preserving their ancient languages; but, as great care has been taken that every thing

be understood by translations, he allows, that divine service may be performed in the vulgar tongue, where that is customary.

Under the XXVth article he insists that the five Romish sacraments be acknowleged as such, whether instituted immediately by Christ or not.

He approves the XXVIth and XXVIIth articles; and he proposes expressing the part of the XXVIIIth that relates to Transubstantiation (which term he is willing to omit entirely), in the following manner: "That the bread and wine are really changed into "the body and blood of Christ, which last are truly "and really received by all, though none but the "faithful partake of any benefit from them." This extends also to the XXIXth article.

With regard to the XXXth, he is for mutual toleration, and would have the receiving of the communion in both kinds held indifferent, and liberty left to each church to preserve, or change, or dispense with its customs on certain occasions.

He is less inclined to concessions on the XXXIst article, and maintains that the sacrifice of Christ is not only commemorated, but continued, in the eucharist, and that every communicant offers him along with, the priest.

He is not a warm stickler for the celibacy of the clergy, but consents so far to the XXXIId article, as to allow that priests may marry, where the laws of the church do not prohibit it.

In the XXXIIId and XXXIVth articles, he acquiesces without exception.

He suspends his judgement with respect to the XXXVth, as he never perused the homilies mentioned therein.

As to the XXXVIth, he would not have the English ordinations pronounced null, though some of them, perhaps, are so; but thinks that, if an union be made, the English clergy ought to be continued in their offices and benefices, either by right or indulgence, 'sive ex jure, sive ex indulgentiâ ecclesiæ.'

He admits the XXXVIIth, so far as relates to the authority of the civil power; denies all temporal and all immediate spiritual jurisdiction of the pope; but alleges, that, by virtue of his primacy, which moderate (he ought to have said immoderate) Churchof-England-men do not deny, he is bound to see that the true faith be maintained; that the canons be observed every where; and, when any thing is done in violation of either, to provide the remedies prescribed for such disorders by the canon laws, se cundum leges canonicas, ut malum resarciatur, pro'curare.' As to the rest, he is of opinion, that every church ought to enjoy its own liberties and privileges, which the pope has no right to infringe. He declares against going too far (the expression is vague, but the man probably meant well) in the punishment of heretics, against admitting the inquisition into France, and against war without a just

cause.

The XXXVIIIth and XXXIXth articles he approves. Moreover, in the discipline and worship of the church of England, he sees nothing amiss and thinks no attempts should be made to discover or prove by whose fault the schism was begun. He farther observes, "that an union between the "English and French bishops and clergy may be "completed, or at least advanced, without consult"ing the Roman pontiff, who may be informed of "the union as soon as it is accomplished, and may "be desired to consent to it; that, if he consents to "it, the affair will then be finished; and that, even "without his consent, the union shall be valid; that, "in case he attempts to terrify by his threats, it will "then be expedient to appeal to a general council i." He concludes by observing, "that this arduous mat

[ocr errors]

Unio fieri potest aut saltem promoveri, inconsulto pontifice, qui, factâ unione, de eâ admonebitur, ac suppliciter rogabitur, ' ut velit ei consentire. Si consentiat, jam peracta res erit: sin abnuat, nihilominus valebit hæc unio. Et si minas intentet, ád concilium generale appellabitur.?

"ter must first be discussed between a few; and, if "there be reason to hope that the bishops, on both "sides, will agree about the terms of the designed "union, that then application must be made to the "civil power, to advance and confirm the work," to which he wishes all success.

It is from the effect which these proposals and terms made upon archbishop Wake, that it will be most natural to form a notion of his sentiments with respect to the church of Rome. It appears evident, from several passages in the writings and letters of this eminent prelate, that he was persuaded that a reformation in the church of Rome could only, be made gradually; that it was not probable that they would renounce all their follies at once; but that, if they should once begin to make concessions, this would set in motion the work of reformation, which, in all likelihood, would receive new accessions of vigor, and go on until a happy change should be effected. This way of thinking might have led the archbishop to give an indulgent reception to these proposals of Du-Pin, which contained some concessions, and might be an introduction to more. And yet we find that he rejected this piece, as insufficient to serve as a basis, or ground-work, to the desired union. On receiving the piece, he immediately perceived that he had not sufficient ground for carrying on this negotiation, without previously consulting his brethren, and obtaining a permission from the king for this purpose. Beside this, he was resolved not to submit either to the direction of Dr. Du-Pin, or to that of the Sorbonne, in relation to what was to be retained, or what was to be given up, in the doctrine and discipline of the two churches; nor to treat with the church of Rome upon any other footing, than that of a perfect equality in point of authority and power. He declared more especially, that he would never comply with the proposals made in Du-Pin's Commonitorium, of which I have now given the contents; observing that, though he was

a friend to peace, he was still more a friend to truth: and that, "unless the Roman Catholics gave up "some of their doctrines and rites," an union with them could never be effected. All this is contained in a letter written by the archbishop to Mr. Beauvoir, on receiving the Commonitorium. This letter is dated August 30, 1718; and the reader will find a copy of it subjoined to this appendix. About a month after, his grace wrote a letter to Dr. Du-Pin, dated October 1, 1718, in which he complains of the tyranny of the pope, exhorts the Gallican doctors to throw off the papal yoke in a national council, since a general one is not to be expected; and declares, that this must be the great preliminary and fundamental principle of the projected union, which being settled, an uniformity might be brought about in other matters, or a diversity of sentiments mutually allowed, without any violation of peace or concord. The archbishop commends, in the same letter, the candor and openness that reign in the Commonitorium; entreats Dr. DuPin to write to him always upon the same footing, freely, and without disguise or reserve; and tells him he is pleased with several things in that piece, and with nothing more than with the doctor's declaring it as his opinion, that there is not a great difference between their respective sentiments; but adds, that he cannot at present give his sentiments at large concerning that piece'.

Dr. Wake seems to have aimed principally, in this correspondence, at bringing about a separation between the Gallican church and the court of Rome. The terms in which the French divines often spoke about the liberties of their church, might give him some hope that this separation would take place, if ever these divines should be countenanced by the civil power of France. But a man of the arch

See this Letter, No. III.

1 See this Letter to Du-Pin, No. V. as also the archbishop's letters to Dr. P. Piers de Girardin, No. VI.

[blocks in formation]
« הקודםהמשך »