« AnteriorContinuar »
the inclination or the object of her opponents to divest themselves of that ignorance which they so liberally charge upon her. Dr. Lamb's book leaves them more inexcusable than it has found them, by exhibiting alike the authority by which the Articles were compiled, and leading to their true interpretation through the gradations which leave their completion in the present form.
The publication before us has many claims to public gratitude. It has reprinted some old and very scarce copies of the Articles; brought others out of the obscurity of College shelves, and from the perils common to all monographs; and given a succinct, but well authenticated account of the circumstances in which they severally arose, and the mode in which they received the sanction of authority.
The documents contained in this work, and the objects it professes to obtain, shall be expressed in Dr. Lamb's own words :
Among the many benefits, which Parker conferred upon the Anglican Church, the final settlement of the Articles of Religion is not the least. It is well known that among the valuable manuscripts, which he bequeathed to the College of Corpus Christi Cambridge, of which he had been Master, are two copies of the Articles : one in Latin with the autograph signatures of the Archbishops and Bishops in 1562: the other in English with the autograph signatures of the Archbishop and Bishops in 1571. These manuscripts have long been objects of interest and curiosity. An account has been given of them in Strype, which is materially incorrect; and his account is frequently referred to as authority by writers of our Church History. These circumstances led me to the determination of printing a few copies of these manuscripts, page, line, and word exactly corresponding with the originals. I have since been induced to prefix an Historical Account of the Articles from their first promulgation by Edward VI. in 1553 to their final establishment by the Act of Elizabeth 1571. And also, in addition to the manuscripts, to reprint the Articles of 1553; distinguishing the parts which were omitted or altered in the Convocation of 1562, and also shewing where additions of Articles or Clauses were made. I have also printed a Facsimile of the edition of Jugg and Cawood of 1563, this being the very book to which the Act of 13 Elizabeth refers. And to complete the collection of editions of the Articles, I have added Day's in Latin of 1571, and Jugg and Cawood's in English of the same year; both of which were edited under the superintendance of Bishop Jewel; and which are now reprinted from the copies formerly belonging to Archbishop Parker, and given by him to the Library of Corpus Christi College.-P. 4.
The author then enters on his historical account, in which there is nothing new, but the events are well selected, and verified by references. One part is curious, as it shows, in confirmation of Mr. Towgood's facts (not his arguments) noticed in our last observations on Schism, that the authority of Convocation was always considered constitutionally necessary in doctrinal cases, even at times when the utmost extent of despotism was exercised by the civil power in the Church. The Articles of 1552, were never offered to or approved by the Convocation, yet the government did not hesitate to entitle them, “ Articles agreed upon by the Bishoppes and other learned and godly men IN THE LAST Convocation at London;" a falsehood so shameless and so easy of detection, as no consideration
could have induced a man in his senses to promulgate, had not he conceived it the only means whereby his interposition could obtain a shadow of legality.
These Articles, of course, at the accession of Mary, were abro. gated. But when Elizabeth ascended the throne, the Reformation was again triumphant. Dr. Lamb narrates the difficulties which this Princess experienced in obtaining a Protestant Convocation, without whom she knew she could not constitutionally authorize Protestant Articles in the National Church. In this part of the History, it is gratifying to find, that the “ laudator temporis acti” may sometimes be in the wrong. What a contrast, for instance, does the following description of Kitchin, Bishop of Llandaff, present to the steady, consistent Protestantism of modern Prelates!
Camden terins him“ Sedis suæ calamitatem.” He was elected Bishop of Landaff in 1545, and took the following oath : “I, Antony, elect Bishop of Landaff, having now the vail of darkness of the usurped power, authority, and jurisdiction of the See and Bishop of Rome clearly taken away from mine eyes, do utterly testify and declare in my heart, that neither the See nor the Bishop of Rome, nor any foreign Potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, or authority within this realm by God's law, or any just law or means, &c. &c. and that I will resist the same to the utmost of my power.” This vail of darkness came over his eyes again upon Mary's accession to the throne. He was one of the commissioners appointed by her to remove the Protestant bishops for “ teaching preaching and setting forth of erroneous doctrines." To complete his character we may add one more circumstance. “In 1555 Rawlins White, an honest poor fisherman, was burnt at Cardiff. He was a very ancient man, and was put in prison only because he had put his son to school that he might hear the Bible read by him. After a year's confinement, the Bishop of Landaff condemned him upon Articles to which he answered as a Heretic.”—P. 10.
In December, 1559, Parker was appointed to the Primacy. This circumstance soon led to a thorough purification of the Church, and the compilation of our present Articles, which, corrected from Parker's copy by Bishop Jewel, are now the National Confession of Faith.
Dr. Lamb has appended to his treatise a brief and candid disquisition of the history of the celebrated clause which opens the Twentieth Article; and although he can scarcely be said to have determined the question, he has certainly brought forward very fair grounds for the determination, and we, for our own part, are inclined to follow his opinion. With an extract from this, as every way curious, we shall conclude the present notice, premising that, however the passage may have been introduced, it has now received the sanction of the Church ; and we think we abundantly proved, in our April Number, that the matter of it is strictly true.
In the preceding account no mention has been made of the disputed clanse at the beginning of the twentieth Article as now found in our authorised copies. “ Habet Ecclesia Ritus statuendi jus, et in fidei controversiis auctoritatem.” “ The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in Matters of Faith.” I shall now proceed to state what I consider to be the real history of this clause.
From the preceding statement and annexed copies it is evident that it was not in the Articles as they passed the Convocation in 1562. For we have before us the manuscript signed by the Archbishops and Bishops, and it appears that no alteration of the Articles took place in the lower house. But this clause is found in the first printed copy after the Convocation of 1562, viz, that of Reginald Wolfe published by Royal authority in 1563. Surely then it can be no difficult matter to ascertain, or at least to form a probable conjecture, by whose means this clause was inserted between the passing of the Articles in Convocation, and their first publication. Let us trace the progress of them during this period. A fair copy, or the copy with the signatures of both houses would be sent to the council board for the approbation of her Majesty, and for the purpose of attaching the great seal, this being necessary according to the Act of submission to give authority to any deed of Convocation. The copy remained in the hands of her Majesty about a twelvemonth, and the disputed clause (there can be little doubt) was added during this period by the Queen, or by the Council at her suggestion.-P. 33.
To the Latin edition of Wolfe, in wbich the clause first appeared is the following remarkable addition: “ Quibus omnibus Articulis Serenissima Princeps Elizabeth, Dei Gratia Anglia, Franciæ, et Hibernia Regina Fidei Defensor fc. PER SÉIPSAM diligenter prius lectis et examinatis, Regium suum assensum præbuit." This declaration is not affixed to any other edition.
The clause did not appear in either of the English editions of Jugg and Cawood of the same date; as these would be translated from the copy in the hands of the Archbishop under his directions. It may perhaps be thought that neither the Queen or her Council would take upon themselves to alter Articles approved of by the Convocation, and to publish them thus altered. But there is a curious circumstance connected with the omission of the twenty-ninth Article, “ Impiä non manducant corpus Christi in usum Cænæ," which throws some light upon the subject. This Article was omitted both in the Latin and English printed copies before 1571 in compliance with the wish or order of Cecil, probably at the suggestion of his royal Mistress. It appears that in a personal conference the Lord Treasurer and the Archbishop had an argument respecting this Article; and that the latter defended it against the objections of the former; this we learn casually from a letter addressed by Parker to Cecil in 1571. He states; “I am advisedly still in my opinion concerning so much as it was alleged for in the Article (alluding to the reference to St. Augustin). And for further truth of the words both he in other places, and Prosper in his sentences out of St. Augustin senten. 338 and 339 doth plainly affirm our opinion in this Article to be most true.”
Hence we find that Cecil or the Queen did not altogether approve of this Article, and that accordingly it was struck out of the copy submitted to them by Convocation before its publication. Is it then too much to suspect that the addition to the twentieth Article was made by the same party, especially as its matter was so consonant with their opinions ?
Archbishop Parker and the Churchmen of his days have been very unjustly accused of the insertion of this clause. In the copy of Articles, which Parker prepared for the Convocation, he added to the thirty-fourth the following sentence: “ Quælibet ecclesia particularis sive nationalis authoritatem habet instituendi, mutandi, aut abrogandi Ceremonias, aut ritus ecclesiasticos, humaná tantum authoritate institutos, modo omnia ad edificationem fiant." And this is all the power, or authority that he considered it right for the Church to claim, or assume. Had the Bishops even approved of the clause, after that it had been prefixed by the twentieth Article in 1563, they would certainly have adopted it in the Convocation of 1571. But it does not appear in the manuscript they signed, or in either the Latin or English copy edited under the superintendance of Bishop Jewel in that year.
In 1637, Archbishop Laud was accused among other matters with having forged this clause. The accusation was clearly unjust. But such a charge
being brought against him shews, that before his time it was not generally found in the authorized copies of the Articles.—Pp. 34, 35. The following are the simple facts respecting it :
IT IS NOT FOUND: 1. In the Latin Manuscript signed by the Archbishops and Bishops in the Convocation of 1562.
2. In the English editions of Jugg and Cawood of 1563.
3. In the English Manuscript signed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops in the Convocation of 1571.
4. In the Latin edition of Day published under the direction of Bishop Jewel in 1571.
5. In the English edition of Jugg and Cawood published under the direction of Bishop Jewel in 1571.
IT IS FOUND: 1. In the Latin edition of Wolfe of 1563. 2. In one (two?) of the later editions of Jugg and Cawood of 1571.
3. Occasionally in subsequent editions until the time of Archbishop Laud, when it was inserted in all the authorized copies. Pp. 36, 37.
We sincerely thank Dr. Lamb for his book. It is but justice to him and to the public to state, that it is one of the most beautiful specimens of typography which the Cambridge press has sent forth : and the fac-similes are executed with great fidelity and exactness.
Art. III.-A Paraphrastic Translation of the Apostolical Epistles.
With Notes. By Philip Nicholas SuutTLEWORTH, D.D. Warden of New College, Oxford, and Rector of Foxley, Wilts. Oxford: Parker. London: Rivingtons. 1829. pp. 555. Price 12s.
A variety of difficulties, arising from different causes, is acknowledged, on all hands, to attend the due apprehension of the writings of the Apostles. In order to the critical study of them, the scholar must bring with him, not only a close and rivetted attention, but an acquaintance with the sacred and profane history of the times in which they were composed, a familiarity with the customs, the habits, and the prejudices of the persons to whom they were addressed, an insight into the circumstances in which they originated, and the errors which they were intended to correct, and a practical knowledge of the language in which they were originally written. Such, indeed, are the requisite attainments for the perusal of any ancient writings whatsoever, and more particularly of those which involve abstruse philosophical inquiries, and polemical disputations. Of this character are the Apostolical Epistles, and especially those of St. Paul, in which there is a depth of close and profound reasoning, which even, at the period when they were written, and among those for whose instruction they were designed, would not be immediately appreciated by the average understandings of mankind. Add to this, that the points under discussion are frequently the transcendental mysteries of God's providence, in which the inspired writer, perfectly familiarized with these profound topics, glances from one argument to another, with a fluent rapidity of apprehension, with which his most highly gifted reader cannot always keep pace. No wonder, then, that under the disadvantages of a strictly literal translation; (and it is obvious, that an authorised translation must necessarily be strictly literal, that no bias or prejudice of the translators may interfere with the undoubted declarations of the Word of God,) the more uninformed and general reader may fall short of the right understanding of some of those important doctrines, which are explained and elucidated in these sacred documents.
To obviate this defect,--to supply a translation sufficiently close to the original to convey an adequate idea of the manner of the sacred penmen, and, at the same time, sufficiently diffuse to pourtray the full scope of the argument, is the object of the volume before us. This object has been attained by developing those minute, but necessary links of reasoning, which are often cursorily glanced at by the writers themselves; by filling up those implied inferences, which escape the observation of the less accurate inquirer ; and by supplying connecting particles, modernizing idiomatic expressions, explaining obsolete allusions, and providing such other helps and illustrations, as may promote that readiness of perception, which is necessary to digest the full import of the truth, which the Apostles intended to establish. We do not hesitate to say, that Dr. Shuttleworth has rendered an essential service to Christianity, by the judicious, comprehensive, and popular paraphrase, which he has thus effected. By saving his readers the labour of continuous thought, which renders the perusal of the Epistles to the casual inquirer an irksome, and sometimes an insuperable task, he has paved the way to the more wide diffusion of a religious knowledge among all classes of the community. This is peculiarly an age of inquiry; and while the various branches of human knowledge are simplified to the capacities of every understanding, it cannot be a less profitable occupation to place within the reach of all, that knowledge which alone can make men wise unto salvation.
We deem it unnecessary to make an extract from the paraphrase itself; and of the notes, it will be sufficient to remark, that they contain a fund of useful information, judiciously subjoined in illustration of such topics as would not admit of a paraphrastic exposition. At the close of most of the Epistles, however, a brief notice is added of the principal topics therein discussed, of the more immediate purposes of instruction for which they are now available, and of those difficulties in point of doctrine, such as the reconciliation of St. Paul and St. James on the subject of faith, which have been the fertile source of polemic discussion in all ages of the Gospel. To the