« Ch. II. Q.9 The Dogmatic Office | Main | Ch. II. Q.11. The Rule of Faith »
July 12, 2005
Ch. II. Q.10 Provincial Authority
THE teaching authority of a genuine portion of the Catholic Church is, within its lawful sphere, Catholic authority; and may not be rejected by private judgment or by appeal to other particular Churches. An individual obeys the Catholic Church when and only when he obeys his own provincial authority, legitimately constituted and exercised.1
2. Particular Churches can not impose legitimately any teaching or definitions which really conflict with Catholic dogmas, or with doctrines previously and undeniably taught by the Church universal as necessary to be believed; nor may such Churches add to the substantial area of what is required to be believed for salvation. But particular Churches may, within these limitations, impose upon their own people such phrases as seem necessary for the peace and safety of faithful believers. These phrases have authority within the Church which imposes them, their authority being determined as to its extent by the official manner of their imposition. It is not essential to such authority that the phrases imposed should have exact definition for their aim. An eirenicon may be imposed as well as an exact Confession of Faith.2
3. The Anglican Churches have received the ecumenical Creeds and the decrees of faith of the Ecumenical Councils, as having permanent authority.3 They have also set forth a Catechism and other doctrinal language contained in the Book of Common Prayer, and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. These have authority, in their several manners, over the clergy and laity. The only reasons which would justify an Anglican in rejecting any of them are ones which would require him to forsake the Anglican Communion.
4. The Thirty-Nine Articles appeared at a time of confusion, when exact definition was difficult, but when the quieting of controversy seemed necessary for the Church's safety. Except in the limited sphere of Catholic dogma, strictly understood, they were designed to be an eirenicon. Controversies which seemed incapable of precise determination at such a moment were shut up in large phrases, sound so far as their very limited plain grammatical meaning went,4 but sufficiently general, it was hoped, to serve as a provisional basis of peace between opposite partisans.5
5. The authority of such a formulary is obviously limited, but real. No one is obliged to admire its phrases, to make personal use of them, or to accept any interpretation which is not demonstrably intended by the Church and required by their own plain and grammatical meaning.6 Formal subscription to them, such as is required of the English clergy, binds to nothing more, since it is simply a solemn promise to be faithful to the Articles as legitimately interpreted. The historical purpose of the Articles; their undeniably vague phraseology; and the principle that legislative language, apart from its subsequent judicial interpretation, binds no one except to its express and undeniable meaning; all make this view of the Articles natural and legitimate.7 It should be added that the most natural meaning of a formulary issued by a Catholic body is the meaning most consistent with Catholic doctrine, unless the contrary is clearly established.8
6. The writer holds that, in spite of their ambiguities and obscurities, the Articles contain much clear teaching of positive nature and great value. This teaching is authoritative, and may not be rejected by any member of this Church. He holds further that no heresy can be discovered in the Articles, rightly interpreted.
1 Palmer, The Church, Pt. IV., ch. xiii. § 1; Lacey, Elem. of Doctrine, pp. 216-217; Stone, Outlines, pp. 146-148.
2 Palmer, Pt. IV., ch. xiv. § 2.
3 Gore, Rom. Cath. Claims, ch. x.; Mission of the Church, Lec. II., ii. Cf. Arts. of Religion, viii.; Stat. of Eliz., I., ch. i.
4 The Royal Declaration prefixed to the Articles in 1628 required that they should be taken "in the literal and grammatical sense." Cf. Tracts for the Times, No. 90, fin.
5 Forbes, XXXIX. Arts., Epis. Dedicatory; Gore, Rom. Cath. Claims, p. 19, note 1; Maclear, XXXIX. Arts., pp. viii., ix.; Kidd, XXXIX. Arts., ch. i. § 1.
6 Palmer, Pt. IV., ch. xiv.
7 Palmer, Pt. IV., ch. xiv. § 1, who gives references to Anglican divines agreeing.
8 Palmer, Vol. II., pp. 283-285. The best treatises on the Articles are those of Bp. Forbes, E. T. Green, B. J. Kidd, G. F. Maclear, and (with exceptions) E. C. S. Gibson. Hardwick's Hist, of the XXXIX. Arts., is valuable.
Posted by Debra Bullock at July 12, 2005 02:16 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://disseminary.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/426