« הקודםהמשך »
union, whatever concessions might be offered afterward to bring about its execution. And this may be true.
After the delivery of this discourse in the Sorbonne, Dr. Du Pin showed to Girardin, archbishop Wake's letter, which was also communicated to cardinal De Noailles, who admired it greatly, as appears by a letter of Dr. Piers de Girardin to Dr. Wake, written I believe, April 18-29, 1718. Before the arrival of this letter, the archbishop had received a second from Dr. Du Pin, and also a copy of Girardin's discourse. But he does not seem to have entertained any notion, in consequence of all this, that the projected union would go on smoothly. On the contrary, he no sooner received these letters, than he wrote to Mr. Beauvoir, April 15, 1718, that it was his opinion, that neither the regent nor the cardinal would ever come to a rupture with the court of Rome; and that nothing could be done in point of doctrine, until this rupture was brought about. He added, that fundamentals should be distinguished from matters of lesser moment, in which differences or errors might be tolerated. He expresses a curiosity to know the reception which his former letter to Du Pin had met with; and he wrote again to that ecclesiastic, and also to Girardin, May 1, 1718, and sent both his letters toward the end of that month.
The doctors of the Sorbonne, whether they were set in motion by the real desire of an union with the English church, or only intended to make use of this union as a means of intimidating the court of Rome, began to form a plan of reconciliation, and to specify the terms upon which they were willing to bring it into execution. Mr. Beauvoir acquaints the archbishop, July 16, probably N.S. 1718, that Dr. Du Pin had made a rough draught of an essay toward an union, which cardinal De Noailles desired to peruse before it was sent to his Grace; and that both Du Pin and Girardin were highly pleased with his Grace's letters to them. These letters, however, were written with a truly protestant spirit; the archbishop insisted, in them, upon the truth and orthodoxy of the articles of the church of England, and did not make any concession, which supposed the least approximation to the peculiar doctrines, or the smallest approbation of the ambitious pretensions, of the church of Rome; he observed, on the contrary, that it was now the time for Dr. Du Pin, and his brethren of the Sorbonne, to declare openly their true sentiments, with respect to the superstition and tyranny of that church; that it was the interest of all Christians to unmask that court and to reduce its authority to its primitive limits ; and that, according to the fundamental principle of the Reformation in general, and of the church of England in particular, Jesus Christ is the only founder, source, and head of the church. Accordingly, when Mr. Beauvoir had acquainted the archbishop with Du Pin's having formed a plan of union, his grace answered in a manner which showed that he looked upon the removal of the Gallican church from the jurisdiction of Rome as an essential preliminary article, without which no negotiation could even be commenced. " To speak freely," says the prelate, in his letter of the 11th of August, to Mr. Beauvoir, “I do not think the regent, the duke of Orleans, yet strong enough in his interest, to adventure at a separation from the court of Rome. Could the Regent openly appear in this, the divines would follow, and a scheme might fairly be offered for such an union, as alone is requisite, between the Eng-. lish and Gallican church. But, till the time comes when the state will enter into such a work, all the rest is mere speculation. It may amuse a few contemplative men of learning and probity, who see the errors of the church, and groan under the tyranny of the court of Rome. It may dispose them secretly to wish well to us, and think charitably of us; but still they must call themselves catholics, and us heretics; and, to all outward appearance, say mass, and act so as they have been wont to do. If, under the shelter of Gallican privileges, they can now and then serve the state, by speaking big in the Sorbonne, they will do it heartily; but that is all, if I am not greatly mistaken.”!
Soon after this, the archbishop received Du Pin's commonitorium, or advice relating to the method of reuniting the English and Gallican churches; of the contents of which it will not be improper to give here a compendious account, as it was read in the Sorbonne, and was approved of there, and as the concessions it contains, though not sufficient to satisfy a true protestant, are yet such as one would not expect from a very zealous papist. Dr. Du Pin, after some reflections, in a tedious preface, on the reformation, and the present state of the church of England, reduces the controversy between the two churches to three
heasoon am or ad
heads, viz. articles of faith, rules and ceremonies of ecclesiastical discipline, and moral doctrine, or rules of practice; and these he treats, by entering into an examination of the xxxix articles of the church of England. The first five of these articles he approves. With regard to the vill, which affirms that the Scripture contains all things necessary to salvation, he expresses hiinself thus: “ This we will readily grant, provided that you do not entirely exclude tradition, which doth not exhibit new articles of faith, but confirms and illustrates those which are contained in the sacred writings, and places about them new guards to defend them against gainsayers,” &c. The doctor thinks that the Apocryphal Books will not occasion much difficulty. He is, indeed, of opinion, that "they ought to be deenied canonical, as those books concerning which there were doubts for some time; yet since they are not in the first, or Jewish canon, he will allow them to be called Deuterocanonical. He consents to the x' article, which relates to free-will, provided by the word power be understood what school divines call potentia proxima, or a direct and immediate power, since without a remote power of doing good works, sin could not be imputed.
With respect to the xil article, which contains the doctrine of justification, Dr. Du Pin expresses thus the sentiments of his brethren; “ We do not deny that it is by faith alone that we are justified; but we maintain that faith, charity, and good works, are necessary to salvation; and this is acknowledged in the following, i. e. the xiit article."
Concerning the xiii' article, the doctor observes, “that there will be no dispute, since many divines of both communions embrace the doctrine contained in that article," viz. that works done before the grace of Christ are not pleasing to God, and have ihe nature of sin. He indeed thinks “ it very harsh to say, that all those actions are sinful which have not the grace of Christ for their source;" but he considers this rather as a matter of theological discussion than as a term of fraternal communion."
i The original words are ; “ Hoc lubenter admittemus, modo non excludatur Traditio, quæ Articulos Fidei novos non exhibet, sed confirmat et explicat ea, quæ in Sacris Literis habentur ; ac adversus aliter sapientes munit eos novis cautionibus, ita ut non nova dicantur, sed antiqua nove."
k The original words are ; “Fide sola in Christum nos justificari, quod Articulo XImo exponitur, non inficiamur; sed fide, charitate, et adjunctis bonis operibus, quæ omnino necessaria sunt ad salutem, ut articulo sequenti agnoscitur.”
On the xivih article, relating to works of supererogation, undoubtedly one of the most absurd and pernicious doctrines of the Riimish church, Dr. Du Pin observes, that “ works of supererogation, mean only works conducive to salvation, which are not matter of strict precept, but of counsel only ; that the word, being new, may be rejected, provided it be owned that the faithful do some such works."
The doctor makes no objections to the xv, xvi, xvii, and xvijih articles.
His observation on the sixth is, that, to the definition of the church, the words, under lawful pustors, 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 overrurn essential points of faith, or, to use his own words, quæ fidei substantiam evertant.
It is in consequence of this notion that he remarks, on the xxis 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, the doctor 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 Rume doth not affirm this to be done by fire; that indu gences are only relaxations or remissions of temporal penalties in tbis life; that the Roman catholics do not worship the cross, nor relics, nor images, nor even saints before their images, but only pay them an external respect, which is not of a religious nature; and
I De Articulo XIIImo nulla lis erit, cum multi theologi in eadem versentur sententia. Durius videtur id dici, eas omnes actiones quæ ex gratia Christi non fiunt, esse peccata. Nolim tamen de hac re disceptari, nisi inter theologos.
that even this external demonstration of respect is a matter of indifference, which may be laid aside or retained without harm.
He approves of the xxijid article, and does not pretend to dispute about the xxiv", which ordains the celebration of divine worship in the vulgar tongue. He, indeed, excuses the Lilin and Greek churches for preserving their ancient languages; alleges, that great care has been taken that every thing be understood by translations; but allows, that divine service may be performed in the vulgar tongue, where that is customary.
Under the xxvh article he insists, that the five Romish sacraments be acknowledged as such, whether instituted immediately by Christ or not.
He approves of the xxvi' and xxviih articles; and he proposes expressing that part of the xxviii' 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.
Concerning the xxxih, he is for mutual toleration, and would have the receiving the communion in both kinds held indifferent, and liberty left to each church to preserve or change, or dispense, on certain occasions, with its customs.
He is less inclined to concessions on the xxxis 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 xxxii“ article, as to allow that priests may marry, where the laws of the church do not prohibit it.
In the xxxiiia and xxxiv'h articles he acquiesces without exception.
He suspends his judgment with respect to the xxxv"h, as he never perused the homilies mentioned therein...
As to the xxxvi), 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,