The Articles of Religion: The Free Church of England Revision

Introduction:

The Free Church of England (FCE) is an Anglican church which separated from the established Church of England in the course of the 19th century. The church was founded by evangelical clergy and congregations in response to the Oxford Tractarian movement, also known as "the Romeward movement." The first congregations were formed in 1844. In the early years ministers were often provided by the Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion which had its origins in the 18th century Evangelical Revival. In 1863 the Annual Conference of the Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion created a Constitution for the new congregations under the title The Free Church of England (though the name had been in use since the 1840s). The Constitution made provision for the creation of Dioceses, each to be under the oversight of a bishop. The first Bishop was Benjamin Price, who initially had oversight of all the new congregations.

In 1874 the FCE made contact with the newly organised Reformed Episcopal Church in North America. In 1876 an REC bishop from Canada, Edward Cridge, came to the UK and consecrated Benjamin Price and John Sugden in the historic succession. The following year a branch of the REC was founded in the UK. The two Churches lived in parallel until 1927, when the Free Church of England united with the UK branch of the Reformed Episcopal Church. The full name of the united Church since 1927 is: The Free Church of England, otherwise called the Reformed Episcopal Church in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The Free Church of England would revise the Articles of Religion of 1571, commonly known as the Thirty-Nine Articles, along with The Book of Common Prayer of 1662 and the Ordinal of 1661. The intention was to bring these formularies into greater harmony with the Holy Scriptures and the Protestant and Evangelical principles that the revisers believed were to be found in the same Scriptures, and to remove from the formularies those phrases and expressions that could be (and have been) taken by the Tractarians and their Anglo-Catholic successors to support their sacredotal and Romanising teaching. The following text of the revised Articles comes from the most recent edition of the Book of Common Prayer for the use of The Free Church of England, published in 1956. I have marked with an asterisk (*) those articles that have been altered.

The Free Church of England was not the first Anglican church to revise the Articles of Religion. The newly organized Protestant Episcopal Church in the USA revised the Thirty-Nine Articles in 1801.

Articles of Religion

Article 1 – Of Faith in the Holy Trinity

There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the Maker, and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Article 2 – Of the Word, or Son of God, which was made very Man

The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, and of one substance with the Father, took Man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance: so that two whole and perfect Natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in One person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God and very Man, who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile us to his Father, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men.

Article 3 – Of the going down of Christ into Hell*

As Christ died for us, and was buried, so also is it to be believed that He went down into Hell (Hades).

Article 4 – Of the Resurrection of Christ

Christ did truly rise again from death, and took again his body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of man's nature, wherefore he ascended into heaven, and there sitteth until he return to judge all Men at the last day.

Article 5 – Of the Holy Ghost

The Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one substance, majesty, and glory with the Father and the Son, very and eternal God.

Article 6 - The Sufficiency of the holy Scriptures for Salvation*

Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of Holy Scripture, we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.

Of the Names and Number of the Canonical Books

Genesis,
Exodus,
Leviticus,
Numbers,
Deuteronomy,
Joshua,
Judges,
Ruth,
The First Book of Samuel,
The Second Book of Samuel
The First Book of Kings,
The Second Book of Kings
The First Book of Chronicles,
The Second Book of Chronicles
The Book of Ezra,
The Book of Nehemiah,
The Book of Esther
The Book of Job,
The Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, or Preacher
Canticles, or Songs of Solomon
Four Prophets the Greater
Twelve Prophets the Less

The Books commonly called “The Apocrypha,” form no part of the Canonical Scriptures; and therefore, are not to be used to establish any doctrine; nor are they to be publicly read in the Church.

All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them Canonical.

Article 7. Of the Old Testament

The Old Testament is not contrary to the New: for in both everlasting life is offered to Mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and Man, being both God and Man. Wherefore there are not to be heard which feign that the old Fathers did look only for transitory promises. Although the Law given from God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet, notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the commandments which are called Moral.

Article 8 – Of the Three Creeds

The three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius' Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, ought thoroughly to be received and believed; for they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture.

Article 9 - Original or Birth Sin

Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man that naturally is ingendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea, in them that are regenerated, whereby the lust of the flesh, called in the Greek phronema sarkos, which some do expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire, of the flesh, is not subject to the Law of God. And although there is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized, yet the Apostle doth confess that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.

Article 10 – Of Free Will

The condition of Man after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good works, to faith, and calling upon God. Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will.

Article 11 – Of the Justification of Man*

We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deserving. Wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort.

Article 12 – Of Good Works

Albeit that Good Works, which are the fruits of Faith and follow after Justification, cannot put away our sins and endure the severity of God's Judgement, yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively Faith, insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit.

Article 13 – Of Works before Justification*

Works done before the grace of Christ and the Inspiration of His Spirit, are not of saving efficacy, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ, neither do they make men meet to receive grace.

Article 14 – Of Works of Supererogation

Voluntary works besides, over and above, God's Commandments which they call Works of Supererogation, cannot be taught without arrogance and impiety: for by them men do declare that they do not only render unto God as much as they are bound to do, but that they do more for his sake than of bounden duty is required: Whereas Christ said plainly, When you have done all that are commanded to you, say, We are unprofitable servants.

Article 15 – Of Christ alone without Sin

Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only except, from which He was clearly void, both in his flesh and in His spirit. He came to be the Lamb without spot, who, by sacrifice of Himself once made, should take away the sins of the world: and sin, as Saint John said, was not in him. But all we the rest, although baptized, and born again in Christ, yet offend in many things: and if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Article 16 – Of Sin after Baptism

Not every deadly sin willingly committed after Baptism is sin against the Holy Ghost, and unpardonable. Wherefore the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after Baptism. After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given and fall into sin, and by the grace of God we may arise again and amend our lives. And therefore they are to be condemned, which say, they can no more sin as long as they live here, or deny the place of forgiveness to such as truly repent.

Article 17 – Of Predestination and Election

Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom He has chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation as vessels made to honour. Wherefore they which are endued with so excellent a benefit of God are called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season; they through Grace obey the calling; they be justified freely; they are made sons of God by adoption; they are made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ; they walk religiously in good works, and at length by God's mercy they attain to everlasting felicity.

As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation to be enjoyed through Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation or into wretchlessness of most unclean living no less perilous than desperation.

Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth in holy Scripture: and in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.

Article 18 – Of Obtaining eternal salvation only by the name of Christ*

They also err that presume to say, That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he is diligent to frame his life according to that Law and the light of Nature. For holy Scripture doth set out to us only the name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved.

Article 19 – Of the Church*

The Holy Catholic Church is “the blessed company of all faithful people,” who, united to Christ by Faith, and made partakers of the Holy Ghost, are the “Spouse and Body of Christ.” The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.

As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have erred: so also the Church of Rome has erred, not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith.

Article 20 – Of the Authority of the Church

The Church has power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church is a witness and a keeper of holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of Salvation.

Article 21 – Of the authority of General Councils*

General Councils (forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God) may err and sometime have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be proved that they be taken out of holy Scripture.

Article 22 – Of Purgatory

The Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saints, is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture; but rather repugnant to the Word of God.

Article 23 – Of Ministering in the Congregation

It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of publick preaching, or ministering the Sacraments in the Congregation, before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same. And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent, which be chosen and called to this work by men who have publick authority given unto them in the Congregation, to call and send Ministers into the Lord's vineyard.

Article 24 – Of Speaking in the Congregation in such tongue as the people understandeth

It is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of the Primitive Church, to have publick Prayer in the Church, or to minister the Sacraments in a tongue not understanded of the people.

Article 25 – Of the Sacraments*

Sacraments ordained of Christ are not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses to Divine truth, and signs of grace, and God's good will towards us, by which he doth strengthen and confirms our Faith in him.

There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.

Those five, commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures; but yet have not the like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God.

The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon or to be carried about, but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same are they of spiritual benefit: but they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves judgment, as S. Paul said.

Article 26 – Of the unworthiness of Ministers does not hinder the effect of the Sacraments*

Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometime the evil has chief authority in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments; yet forasmuch as they do not do so in their own name, but in Christ's, the believer is not deprived of the benefits of God’s ordinances, though they be ministered by evil men, yet are they Christ’s institution, and set forth his promise.

Nevertheless it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences; and finally, being found guilty, by just judgement, be deprived.

Article 27 – Of Baptism*

Baptism is not only a sign of profession, but is also a sign or symbol, of Regeneration or new Birth. They that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the visible Church; the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God, by the Holy Spirit are visibly set forth; Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. The Baptism of young children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as not contrary to the institution of Christ.
Article 28 – Of the Lord's Supper*

The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another; but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death: in so much that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ.

Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.

Consubstantiation (or the doctrine that Christ is veiled under the unchanged Bread and Wine) is utterly without warrant of Scripture, and is productive, equally with transubstantiation, of idolatrous errors and practices.

The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the means whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith

The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's Ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.

Article 29 – Of the wicked which do not eat the body of Christ, in the use of the Lord's Supper

The Wicked, and such as be void of a lively faith, although they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as Saint. Augustine saith) the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ: but rather, to their condemnation, do eat and drink the sign or Sacrament of so great a thing.

Article 30 – Of both Kinds

The Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the Lay-people; for both the bread and the wine of the Lord's Sacrament, by Christ's ordinance and commandment, ought to be ministered to all Christian men alike.

Article 31 – Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross*

The Offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual, and there is no other satisfaction for sin, but that alone. Wherefore the sacrifice of Mass, and the sacrifices of the Masses, in which it is commonly said, that the Priest doth offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, are blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits.

Article 32 – Of the Marriage of the Clergy*

Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons, are not commanded by God's Law, either to vow the estate of single life, or to abstain from marriage: therefore it is lawful for them, as for all other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness.

Article 33 – Of Auricular Cnfession
Private confession of sins to a priest, commonly called Auricular Confession, has no sanction in the word of God, and is a human invention. No one can forgive sins as against God but God alone.

Article 34 – Of the Traditions of the Church

It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly alike; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times, and men's manners, so that nothing be ordained against God's Word. Whosoever through his private judgement, willingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that offendeth against common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the conscience of the weak brethren.

Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying.

Article 35 – Of Apostolic Succession*

That doctrine of “Apostolic Succession,” by which is taught that the Ministry in the Christian Church must be derived through a series of uninterrupted ordinations from the Apostles themselves, and that without the same there can be no Christian Church, no valid Ministry, and no due ministration of the Sacraments, has no foundation in Scripture, and is productive of great mischief.

Article 36 - Of Consecration of Bishops and Ministers*

The Book of Consecration of Bishops and Ordering of Presbyters and Deacons, set forth by this Church, doth contain all things necessary to such Consecration and Ordering: neither hath it anything, that of itself is superstitious or ungodly. And therefore whosoever are consecrated or ordered according to the Rites of that Book, or hereafter shall be consecrated or ordered according to the same Rites, we decree all such to be rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated and ordered.

Article 37 - Of the Civil Magistrates*

The King's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England and other of his dominions, unto whom the chief civil Government of all Estates of this Realm, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign Jurisdiction.

Where we attribute to the King's Majesty the chief government, we give not to our Princes the ministering either of God's Word or of Sacraments; but that only prerogative, which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himself, that is, that they should rule all states and degrees committed to their charge by God, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evildoers.

The Bishop of Rome has no jurisdiction in this realm of England.

The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian men with death for heinous and grievous offences.

It is lawful for Christian men, at the commandment of the Magistrate, to wear weapons, and serve in the wars.

Article 38 – Of Christian men's goods which are not common*

The Riches and Goods of Christians are not common, as touching the right, title, and possession of the same. Notwithstanding, every man ought, of such things as he possesses, liberally to give alms to the poor, according to his ability.

Article 39 – Of a Christian man's Oath*

As we confess that vain and rash Swearing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ, and James his Apostle, so we judge, that Christian Religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the Magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to the Prophet's teaching in justice, judgement, and truth.

Ordinariate Watch: "Bishop Makes Few Friends and Many Enemies in Diocesan Down-Sizing"

Even before he was officially installed as the Roman Catholic bishop of Cleveland in 2006, Richard G. Lennon was already talking about the need to close churches.

“As painful as a funeral is, it’s there that you commend your loved one to God,” Lennon told reporters just weeks before his installation.

Those words, coming from an auxiliary bishop who had just closed scores of churches in Boston, sounded a death knell for dozens more in Northeast Ohio—and unleashed a small but shrill backlash across Lennon’s new flock.

The extensive downsizing is essentially over, although some of the closings remain under appeal with the Vatican. In the end, 50 parishes were closed. Vacant churches are up for sale, merged parishes are moving forward.

Now, Lennon must minister to a diocese where emotions remain raw.

To read more, click here.

Is this what awaits small Anglo-Catholic congregations that convert to Roman Catholicism?

Personal Reflections upon the Apostolic Constitution Anglicorum Coetibus and the Personal Ordinariates

By Robin G. Jordan

Several of my readers have asked why I post articles related to the Apostolic Constitution Anglicorum Coetibus and the Personal Ordinariates. “You are a conservative evangelical,” they tell me. "Why do you take an interest in something that has nothing to do with the conservative evangelicalism?"

First, I am also a Christian who seeks to live his life according to the teaching of the Bible. I find a great deal in the Bible that teaches that I cannot simply turn my back on someone because I do not agree with his beliefs and practices. For example, James in his epistle writes, “My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.” (James 5:19-20) We cannot shrug our shoulders and go about our business.

In the Sermon on the Mount Matthew records our Lord to have made this statement:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.(Matthew 5:43-48)

Second, the establishment of these Ordinariates for Anglican converts to Roman Catholicism is a top news story. It is on par with the global realignment of the Anglican Communion. Indeed it is a part of that realignment.

While the Anglican Church has always had a number of its members become Roman Catholics over the years and the Roman Catholic Church has in turn had a number of its members become Anglicans, the number of defections from the Anglican Church to the Roman Catholic Church have never been as large as they will be under this scheme. If substantial numbers of Anglo-Catholics defect to the Roman Catholic Church Pope Benedict will have pulled off the coup of the century.

Third, it is going to impact the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church in a variety of ways, some of which are anticipated and even eagerly awaited in certain quarters, and others which will be wholly unexpected and will come as an unpleasant surprise especially to those who did not give sufficient heed to this development and its ramifications.

Groups that have been overshadowed by the Anglo-Catholic wing of the Anglican Church may begin to emerge. Anglican bodies like the Anglican Church in North America may become even more accommodating toward Anglo-Catholics out of fear of losing them to the Roman Catholic Church while other groups may grow resentful of this further accommodation. Anglo-Catholics remaining in the Anglican Church may be forced to re-evaluate and rethink their identity. The full working out of effects of the establishment of Anglican Ordinariates in the Roman Catholic Church may take years.

Fourth, judging by their comments on the Internet a number of the Anglo-Catholics who are encouraging the defection of their fellow Anglo-Catholics to the Roman Catholic Church are completely out of touch with the realities of life in the Roman Catholic Church. As TAC Archbishop John Hepworth recently admitted, Anglo-Catholics are ill informed about the Roman Catholic Church and the Roman Catholic Church is ill informed about Anglo-Catholicism.

The Book of Divine Services containing the Anglican Use Liturgy had only one printing and now is out of print. This says a lot about how the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy saw this liturgy. It was a temporary measure. The Roman Catholic Church is introducing a new, more conservative Roman Rite. There is a strong likelihood that the new “personal parishes” and “personal quasi-parishes” will be expected to use the new liturgy. It certainly will not be the 1928 Book of Common Prayer and the American Missal.

There is a strong likelihood that a number of the smaller Anglo-Catholic congregations that convert en masse to Roman Catholicism will not be granted “quasi-parish status” and will be disbanded. Their members will be expected to attend the local Roman Catholic parish. The churches that these folks sacrificed to build will be sold and the Roman Catholic Church will pocket the proceeds from their sale. In a number of cases the Roman Catholic Church will be the beneficiary of the hard work of Anglicans who, if they were still alive, would be opposed to the mass conversion of the congregation to Roman Catholicism and its subsequent disbanding. Once the church is sold, converting Anglo-Catholic congregations will have little choice but lie in the bed that they have made for themselves. Older Anglo-Catholics, if they do not like the Roman Catholic church and change their minds, will not have the energy, the resources, or the time to build a new church.

While it is becoming fairly clear how Anglican Ordinariates will be erected in Australia and England, it is not so clear what is going to happen in North America.

The establishment of the Anglican Ordinariates is not likely to change the face of the Roman Catholic Church. However, it is very likely to change the face of the Anglican Church. How it will change the face of the Anglican Church is beyond my ken. But I do anticipate that we are in for more “exciting” times. The tension and turmoil that has marked the past 30 odd years is not going to go away. If anything it may become even more pronounced. We live in a time in history when the world is going through a series of major paradigm shifts and other major changes.

Ordinariate Watch: "Bishop of London tells Ordinariate worshippers: we don't want you using our churches"

The Bishop of London, the Rt Rev Richard Chartres, had long had a reputation for being less appreciative of Roman Catholicism, shall we say, than many of his High Church colleagues. So the following statement he made to the London diocesan synod strikes me as entirely in character. (H/T: Ordinariate Portal.) In it, he tells London clergy and worshippers joining the Ordinariate that he will NOT let them take any buildings with them, and he’d rather they didn’t share Anglican churches with C of E congregations but took themselves off to the Italian Mission to the Irish. (OK, so he didn’t use that last phrase, but he might as well have.) Here’s the statement. Oh, and for more background on this delightful prelate, here’s an article I wrote about him in the Spectator a few years ago.

To read more, click here.

More articles on the Ordinariates may be found at the Ordinariate Portal.

Ordinariate Watch: "Wounding and Grace: A Brief Appraisal of the Roman Catholic Ordinariate, Anglican Christianity, and Modern Ecumenism"

For several weeks now there have been stories and opinion in the media about the resignation of five Anglican bishops who intend to join the proposed Ordinariates in the Roman Catholic Church along with fifty Anglican priests who intend the same. Many on the right say the Anglican Communion will only see more of these defections, particularly if the Church of England continues to move forward with the consecration of women to the episcopate and the Episcopal Church continues to move forward with affirming the gifts of its gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered (GLBT) members. Many on the left rush to make clear that this is no large-scale defection, but that these bishops and priests existed on the edge of the Anglican Communion and their departure carries little significance.

What is lost in the midst of all the opinion and statements offered by various groups in the church is the ecumenical and ecclesiological implications of this movement. In particular, it may be helpful for a moment to consider this development in light of the approach to Anglicanism articulated by Michael Ramsey, Archbishop of Canterbury from 1961 to 1973. Ramsey is not only well-respected by both liberals and conservatives within contemporary Anglicanism, he likely has had more significance than any other person on modern ecumenical relations between Anglicanism and other Christian traditions. It was Ramsey who oversaw the creation of the Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC). It was Ramsey who had fought so mightily for the union of English Methodism with the Church of England. And it was to Ramsey that Pope Paul VI gave his own episcopal ring, back in days when relations between the two traditions were somewhat warmer.

To read more, click here.

Guest reflection: A liturgical truth

It is a given of our time that every parish should aim to celebrate the Eucharist every Sunday. This in significant measure grows out of the liturgical movement of the latter half of the 20th century, of which the Book of Alternatives Services is a fruit. We should be grateful for this witness that the Supper celebrating the Lord’s death and resurrection is paramount for a Christian congregation, especially on the weekly day of His resurrection.

Still, it is worth recalling how recently, namely a generation ago, communion once or twice a month was the practice in many parishes. We do well to note some of the unforeseen consequences of that custom’s eclipse. The disappearance of Sunday Morning Prayer means a greater clericalization. Every congregation needs a priest every Sunday. We might offer, by way of contrast, the example of the Anglican Church in the rapidly growing parts of Africa, where a parish priest might oversee a dozen congregations with catechists leading Morning Prayer on Sundays. To be sure, communion usually is celebrated somewhere in an African parish every Sunday. But the priest might not arrive for communion in any particular village more than once every couple of months. Such occasions are filled with anticipation and excitement. Their ministry is more weighted toward lay leadership and catechesis. What if we, like they, had an order of catechists? How might this help us to know our faith better, and help some struggling missions to survive?

There are other unforeseen consequences. Parishes seeking to be more inviting to newcomers flirt with the theologically dubious practice of open communion (giving the unbaptized the sacrament). But at Morning Prayer, the moment at which an inquirer must be barred from receiving never arises; it would seem a better format for a seeker service. Furthermore, the offices of Morning and Evening Prayer are jewels of the Prayer Book tradition and distinctives of Anglican spirituality which are now far less known. In this regard, the booklet called What Happened to Morning Prayer? by John Webster and Alan Hayes is worth reconsideration.

To read more, click here.

To read John Webster and Alan Hayes' booklet, What Happened to Morning Prayer, click here.

To read The Effect of the Parish Communion Movement, click here.

To read Brian Green's Cross+Way article, "40-Year Nose Dive...Does Anyone Ask Why?" click here.

Ordinariate Watch: Anglican Patrimony

There's been quite a bit written lately about "Anglican patrimony." It's been kicked around by bloggers and internet discussion groups. Sometimes it's just been kicked.

There seems to be consensus that any patrimony would include the liturgy, and not just the Eucharist, but the Offices and everything else that's associated with the Book of Common Prayer. Hymnody has been mentioned, as well as the Psalter and Anglican chant. Things like architecture, our choral tradition, a particular pastoral style - all these things and more come into the mix when there's a discussion of Anglican patrimony.

I'm wondering if these things really aren't our patrimony, but instead are things that simply allow our patrimony to be expressed.

To read more, click here.

This article was posted on the Anglican Patrimony web page in March of this year. It provides further background to the Roman Catholic concept of "Anglican patrimony."

Fear for Pakistan's death row Christian woman

There is growing concern over the fate of a Christian woman on death row in Pakistan for blasphemy.

Pope Benedict is among those calling for the release of Aasiya Bibi, a mother of five, who was convicted last month of breaching the country's blasphemy laws.

The legislation has been controversial since it was introduced in the 1980s, with campaigners saying it is often used to persecute religious minorities.

The BBC's Orla Guerin reports from Punjab Province.

Pakistan Minister Condemns Reward for Killing Christian Woman

Pakistan's Federal Minister for Minorities Affairs Shahbaz Bhatti condemned Saturday the recent announcement of a reward for killing the jailed Christian woman on death row for blasphemy.

Bhatti said the call is unjust and irresponsible and should be discouraged in the strongest possible manner because no one has the right to issue a decree to kill someone else, according to Pakistan’s Daily Times newspaper. He also added that Pakistan is a civilized country and violation of the rule of law is not allowed.

“Every legal and constitutional means will be adopted in the Asia Bibi case,” assured Bhatti, who was in charge of investigating the case and reported that Bibi was innocent to President Asif Ali Zadari.

To read more, click here.

The Narnia Policeman

When 2005's The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe—the first film in the Chronicles of Narnis series—was being filmed in Prague, the American ambassador to the Czech Republic visited the set. Producer Mark Johnson introduced the man to co-producer Douglas Gresham, the stepson of C. S. Lewis who had the task of ensuring filmmakers got everything right. He was essentially his stepfather's eyes and ears on the project.

When the diplomat asked Johnson about Gresham's role, Johnson quipped, "Oh, he's to blame." They all had a good laugh, but Gresham knew it was absolutely true: "That just about sums it up," he says today. When Narnia fans complain about how the films—Prince Caspian released in 2008, and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader hits theaters on at midnight on December 9—have strayed from the books, Gresham is their first target.

We spoke with him recently about playing that role.

To read more, click here.

Men: the hole in ministry?

A growing number of books are being produced claiming men are not in church. The real statistics however, are not so bleak. But why do we feel there are no men in church?

Stage of life

We all progress through stages of life.

Young excited, committed men begin demanding jobs, get married and have children. Their wives have to juggle family responsibilities while often working part time or full time. It is a very difficult stage of life.

With limited resources, in order to survive many mums and dads of young families rightly focus on the intensive ministry to their families. Out of necessity they have to pull out of congregational ministries. They are still committed to the Lord, still regularly at church, but just don’t have the capacity to do more than be part of the gathering and serve while in the meeting.

To read more, click here.

The Changing Culture War

But as religious conservatives have climbed the educational ladder, American churches seem to be having trouble reaching the people left behind. This is bad news for both Christianity and the country. The reinforcing bonds of strong families and strong religious communities have been crucial to working-class prosperity in America. Yet today, no religious body seems equipped to play the kind of stabilizing role in the lives of the “moderately educated middle” (let alone among high school dropouts) that the early-20th-century Catholic Church played among the ethnic working class.

As a result, the long-running culture war arguments about how to structure family life (Should marriage be reserved for heterosexuals? Is abstinence or “safe sex” the most responsible way to navigate the premarital landscape?) look increasingly irrelevant further down the educational ladder, where sex and child-rearing often take place in the absence of any social structures at all.

This, in turn, may be remembered as the great tragedy of the culture war: While college-educated Americans battle over what marriage should mean, much of the country may be abandoning the institution entirely.

To read the entire article, click here.

Add to this picture, the fact that the Anglican churches in North America (the Protestant Episcopal Church in the USA, the Anglican Church of Canada, and more recent Anglican bodies) historically have for a variety of reasons not done well in rural areas and small towns and among the lower classes, have focused their efforts upon the more affluent, more educated, and more urban upper middle classes, and consider the implications. Is the formation of 1000 new Anglican churches over a period of 5 years for which ACNA Archbishop Bob Duncan has called going to play a stabilizing role in the lives of the working class and other less educated segments of the North American population? Or will it have no effect upon these population groups at all?

Ordinariate Watch: The Book of Divine Worship and the Anglican Use Liturgy

The Book of Divine Worship, now out of print, contains the complete texts of the liturgy approved for the Anglican Use Liturgy. Our Lady of the Atonement Church, a Roman Catholic parish of the Archdiocese of San Antonio, and the first of several “personal parishes” erected in the United States for the Anglican Use Liturgy, however, offers The Book of Divine Worship in PDF format for online reading and downloading.

In addition, a Mass celebrated according to The Book of Divine Worship was recorded and is available on DVD.

Ordinariate Watch: Abp. Hepworth and the Traditional Anglican Communion's Plans for Ordinariates

We wait, and with the Blessed Newman make our Advent prayer that wonderful first verse of his: Lead, kindly Light

'Each of us, in our application to become a member of an Ordinariate, will be seeking to be Catholics of the Western Church, but with unique ecclesial structures that "gather" us. The Anglican Use in the United States has proudly carried the name Anglican within the Catholic Church for the past thirty years. And soon, so shall we.'

To read more, click here.

One picture is worth a thousand words.

Ordinariate Watch: It was Pope Paul’s idea to preserve an Anglican heritage within the Catholic Church

Everyone, at the beginning of the week, was expecting an announcement from two Anglican bishops that they had resigned their episcopal office and that they would soon be received into the Catholic Church in preparation for joining the Ordinariate soon to be established; and we all knew that there were other bishops in the pipeline. But not many expected five in one go: unsurprisingly, it caused something of a stir, though not exactly jaw-dropping astonishment.

By now, the choreography of this process has become fairly clear. What is less understood is its nature. Some cradle Catholics still just don’t get it. Why do they want their own little enclave: if they want to be Catholics, why don’t they just join? What is this stuff about an Anglican “patrimony”? Isn’t that just what they want to get away from?

The first thing to say about the usage of Anglican “patrimony” is that it wasn’t coined by an Anglican, but by Pope Paul, in the days before the aspiration of an eventual corporate reunion of Canterbury and Rome (always, with the benefit of hindsight, an impossible dream) had been rudely shattered by the Anglicans’ unilateral decision fundamentally to redefine their orders in a way impossible for Catholics ever to accept.

To read more, click here.

This article was published in the Catholic Herald early in November and provides the background to the Roman Catholic concept of "Anglican patrimony."

Ordinariate Watch: Conditional Ordination for Ordinariate Anglicans?

A good technical case could, it is true, be made for this on the grounds of the Bishop Graham Leonard precedent. But, in his case, the CDF considered the orthodoxy or otherwise of every 'link' in the ordinations which led from the Dutchmen to the Bishop who ordained him priest. It cannot be anything other than a profound mistake in practical terms to attempt to clutter up the beginning of an Ordinariate with the sort of paper chases and delays which would be involved. And it would create an invidious divide between most of us and a few worthy priests who, because of age or because they were ordained in other parts of the Anglican Communion, were priested by bishops who had not contracted the Dutch Touch. So, my strong conviction is: NO ... just don't go there.

But is there a problem in conscience about 'receiving again' the Sacrament of Order when one is morally certain that one has already received it? This did indeed trouble Blessed John Henry Newman. But he willingly accepted it after being assured that the conditionality would be "implied in the Church's intention" (Ker pp 321 and 466). In view of the repeated assurances given, to the effect that clergy entering into full communion are not being required to deny the validity of anything they have previously received or done, and the careful statement of Fr Aidan Nichols that the invalidity of Anglican Orders is not now unconditionally proposed by the Roman Magisterium, I feel that the understanding which satisfied Newman should be good enough for less brilliant minds than his. Indeed, if the Magisterium took the view that those entering an Ordinariate must accept the invalidity of their current Orders, either explicitly or constructively, they would presumably have required that, before even applying for admission to the presbyterate of the Latin Church, Anglican clergy should have ceased performing sacrilegious simulations of the Eucharist. This is, quite simply, not the line which, so I gather, has been or is being taken either in Rome or locally.

To read more, click here.

Related article: "Regarding Holy Orders"

Would Christ go to Mayberry?

When it comes to Missions, reasons are often given to bypass small towns for the cities. Nothing is more compelling than the argument that more will be plucked from the brink of hell and won for heaven if we go to the cities. Targeting the masses sounds like a good strategy in an ivory tower where missiologists have gathered, but one has to wonder if it’s that kind of strategy that would pass the muster with God.

There is one significant opportunity in history for us to observe God’s mission strategy. When Christ was on the earth, where did He take the gospel? With only three years to get the job done, did he feel pressed to go to the masses while bypassing the small towns?

I decided to read through a harmony of the gospels – charting, as I did so, every recorded place that Christ took the gospel. I was curious: Would Christ go to Mayberry? The answer is that He not only would, He did. In fact even I, an advocate for small towns, was shocked to discover the percentage of time Christ devoted to small towns.

To read more, click here.

Anglican Curmudgeon: Bare Ruined Choirs

Two-and-a-half years ago, when I sat down to write what became the first post on this Weblog, I never conceived how far and how fast the Anglican Communion could fall in the ensuing thirty-two months. Its very structures are unraveling before our eyes, and there are calls for it to go into a state of suspended animation for twenty years or so, with still others saying it should be put out of its misery here and now.

There is only one slight problem with recommendations such as these: since the current members of the Communion cannot agree even on as much as a Standing Committee, how could they ever come to agreement on such a weighty matter as suspension, or total dissolution?

To read more, click here.

A Sermon against Contention and Brawling

In doing research for a new article series, I have been re-reading the two Books of Homilies. I was particularly impressed by "A Sermon against Contention and Brawling," the last of the twelve sermons in the First Book of Homilies, published in 1547.

Let us so read the Scripture, that by reading thereof we may be made the better livers, rather than themore contentions disputers. If any thing is necessary to be taught, reasoned, or disputed, let us do it with all meekness, softness, and lenity. If any thing shall chance to be spoken uncomely, let one bear another’s frailty. He that is faulty, let him rather amend than defend that which he hath spoken amiss, lest he fall by contention from a foolish error into an obstinate heresy. For it is better to give place meekly than to win the victory with the breach of charity; which chanceth where everyy man will defend his opinion obstinately....

...Then, if he cannot quiet him with gentle words, at the least let him not follow him in wicked and uncharitable words. If he can pacify him with suffering, let him suffer; and if not, it is better to suffer evil than to do evil, to say well than to say evil: for to speak well against evil cometh of the Spirit of God; but to render evil for evil cometh of the contrary spirit....

To read the entire homily, click here.

Toward a Definition of ‘Puritan’ and "Puritanism": A Study in Puritan Historiography

Kelly Kapic and Randall Gleason have recently attempted definitions of ‘Puritan’ and ‘Puritanism’ in their “Introduction” to The Devoted Life,12 a collection of chapters surveying the life and writings of eighteen significant Puritans. They maintain that ‘Puritanism was a genuine movement that wielded considerable force within seventeenth-century England and New England’.13 They go on to say that—

Puritans should not be limited strictly to radical Protestant nonconformists, but rather to a much broader movement of individuals distinguished by a cluster of characteristics that transcends their political,ecclesiastical, and religious differences.14

These ‘characteristics’ are seven in number: (1) Puritanism was a movement of spirituality;(2) it lays stress on experiencing communion with God; (3) Puritans were united in their dependence upon the Bible as their supreme source of spiritual sustenance and guide for the reformation of life; (4) they were predominantly Augustinian in their emphasis upon human sinfulness and divine grace; (5) they placed great emphasis upon the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life; (6) they were deeply troubled by sacramental forms of Catholic spirituality fostered within the Anglican Church; and (7) Puritanism was also, in part, a revival movement.15 These characteristics are the foundation of Kapic and Gleason’s overarching definition—‘a genuine movement that wielded considerable force’—and not their definition itself. But are these qualifications necessary ingredients of a proper definition? As we shall see, no generally acceptable definition of these terms is possible without at least some qualifications.

To read the entire Churchman article, click here.

Liturgy, Doctrine, and the 1928 Book of Common Prayer

By Robin G. Jordan

This article was suggested by a paper that the Rev. Neil Patterson delivered to the 2009 conference of the Prayer Book Society in the United Kingdom and which was subsequently published in the Prayer Book Society’s review, Faith and Worship. The Revd. Patterson is Rector of Ariconium, a Trustee of the Prayer Book Society and Chairman of its Hereford Branch.

The idea that liturgy and doctrine are inextricably linked to each other is summarized in the principle lex orandi lex credendi. “The law of prayer is the law of belief.” This principle is derived from the writings of Prosper of Aquitaine in the fifth century.

What this principle originally meant is that the words of the liturgy that we use should conform to the faith that we officially profess. In other words, our beliefs should shape our prayers. It was in this sense that the principle was applied at the Reformation in the development of the Prayer Book.

Since the Reformation, particularly in the nineteenth century, this principle has been used in reverse. The present or historical existence of prayers or liturgical texts with a particular theological implication has been taken as proof of the acceptability of a particular theological concept. For example, the Tractarians argued on the basis of the regeneration language in the 1662 Baptismal Office that the Church of England taught the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

The 1928 Book of Common Prayer was compiled at a time in the history of the then Protestant Episcopal Church in the USA when the dominant theologies were Anglo-Catholicism and Broad Church latitudinarianism. The 1928 Prayer Book reflects the influence of these two schools of thought. Traditional Anglican evangelicalism, which had been influential in the Episcopal Church in the 1840, 1850s, and 1860s, had disappeared from the Episcopal Church by 1900.

The small number of self-identified evangelicals and Low-Churchmen in the Anglican Church in North America and other North American Anglican bodies who use the 1928 Prayer Book are confronted with the fact that the Prayer Book that they use in their worship articulates and embodies doctrine largely at variance with their own. Its texts and practices have been interpreted as proof of the acceptability of doctrine that is contradictory to or inconsistent with their Protestant and Reformed views.

A few argue that it does not matter what Prayer Book is used, claiming that their teaching has greater influence upon the congregation than the teaching of the Prayer Book. However, the repeated use of its texts and practices and how other clergy have interpreted them to members of the congregation will influence the thinking of the congregation. The preacher is also denied the support of the Prayer Book for his teaching. The astute congregant is bound to ask why is the preacher teaching one thing and the Prayer Book another. The preacher is, in responding to this question, faced with the choice of paltering with the truth or honestly acknowledging the disparity between the Prayer Book’s teaching and his own.

Why then does this group of self-identified evangelicals and Low-Churchmen continue to use a Prayer Book that is essentially at odds with everything for which they stand? Some would say that the 1928 Prayer Book is the liturgy to which they are accustomed. They have become attached to it through repeated use. They dislike the modern service books. It represents for them continuity with the past. And so on. The answer will vary with the individual.

A number of the same individuals in their capacity as a minister have over the years omitted or altered texts in the 1928 services. They have also disregarded the rubrics when the rubrics direct the minister to follow a particular practice. They have made their own personal revision of the 1928 services for use in their respective churches.

The 1928 Prayer Book does have more variable options than its predecessors. They may, in a sense, be viewed as taking one step further a principle that these variable options embody—the adaptation of the liturgy to local circumstances. Anglo-Catholics have done the same thing, supplementing the authorized texts and practices of the 1928 Prayer Book with formerly unauthorized ones from the American or Anglican Missal.

The additions, alterations, and omissions, however, point to the uncomfortable truth that the 1928 Prayer Book does not really meet the needs of the congregations using it. For Protestant congregations the book is too Catholic and for Catholic congregations it is not Catholic enough.

I personally have difficulty with the 1928 Prayer Book due to the doctrine that the book articulates and embodies or for which it appears to offer proof of acceptability. Its Holy Communion and Baptismal Offices, its Offices of Instruction, its Confirmation Service, its Form for the Visitation of the Sick, its Burial Service, and its Form for the Consecration of a Church make it in my opinion a most unsuitable Prayer Book for a congregations and clergy committed to upholding and maintaining the Protestant and Reformed character of the Anglican Church. However, I also recognize that the heart is apt to over-rule the head in such matters and those who have been using the 1928 Prayer Book for their entire life and ministry are not going to abandon its use on the account of any critique of the book that I make however accurate it may be.

I would be interested in hearing from the readers of Anglicans Ablaze who identify themselves evangelicals or Low Churchmen, who have been using the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, and who have modified its forms and services in order to make them more distinctively Protestant and Reformed. I am particularly interested in hearing what they have done to overcoming the sacerdotalism of the 1928 Prayer Book and to make its forms and services more congregational and participatory, more truly common prayer.

Bible distribution in classrooms divides Ontario community

An Ontario school board’s vote to allow the distribution of Bibles in classrooms has created a rift between those who insist religion has been pushed too far outside the mainstream of society and those who believe proselytizing should never be allowed in a public school system.

“The distribution of these Bibles is causing division in our community and making many of our teachers uncomfortable,” said Rick Pryce, a local Lutheran minister. “This is an issue of justice and it is wrong to divide people along religious lines.”

On Monday, the school board that encompasses Kitchener and the surrounding environs, the Waterloo Region District School Board, voted to let Gideons International in Canada to distribute Bibles to Grade 5 students. The schools gives permission slips to each student who in turn must get parental permission to receive a Gideon’s Bible. The Bibles are then handed out to students in the classroom to take home and are not for classroom use.

“A public school needs to educate the whole child … It seems to me if we want to see students survive in life and make the correct decisions they have to have some knowledge of religious feeling,” said Colin Harrington, a trustee who voted in favour of Bibles being handed out.

“The important message religion has to tell you is about compassion and love and caring for your neighbour and not being simply selfish to one’s desires. The programs in the schools are not cutting it. If you deny the religious experience in your education system you open the door to the demonic experience.”

The board has had a policy in place since 2008 that allows the distribution of “non-instructional religious materials” through the school system. All publications are supposed to be read by the trustees to make sure “such materials are for information [only] and not for the purpose of proselytization.”

To read more, click here.

Believe this, or else

Last year Asia Bibi, a mother of five, was told to bring water to fellow workers in a field in rural Pakistan. They declined to drink, saying that as a Christian she had contaminated it. They pressured her to convert to Islam and, goaded, she said she did not believe Muhammad was a true prophet. For that remark she has been sentenced to death.

Without even seeking her account, a Pakistani court has condemned her to hang under the country's notorious blasphemy law. Thanks to international pressure, including a plea from the Pope, she may receive a presidential pardon, but Islamist groups have promised to kill her anyway.

This is no idle threat. Last month Latif Masih was shot dead after being bailed on another blasphemy charge, that he "desecrated a Koran". His accuser then admitted he had invented the tale because he wanted to take over the 22-year-old Christian's shop in Pakistan's Punjab province.

Meanwhile,an Iranian court has sentenced to death a Muslim man who converted to Christianity , and an Afghan amputee has pleaded for help after being tortured in jail over his conversion. In the Maldives last month, parents tried to lynch a Christian teacher for drawing a cross on a blackboard (she was demonstrating the points of the compass.

To read more, click here.

C.S Lewis continues to delight

Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, rated PG, premiers in US cinemas on December 10, 2010.

For many of us, the films made of the Chronicles of Narnia are a pleasurable return to the adventures we enjoyed reading as children. If we grew up in a Christian home the stories – which combined ripping yarns with journeys of self-discovery – also contained the familiar ring of the Christian message: human fallibility and the need for a saviour; love that can overcome any wrong; unworthiness replaced by trust in one who is truly worthy.

The Voyage of the Dawn Treader has always been a favourite among Narnia fans. The two youngest Pevensie children, Edmund (Skandar Keynes) and Lucy (Georgie Henley), return to the magical world they love through a painting – bringing their tiresome cousin Eustace (Will Poulter) along for the ride as they embark on a seafaring journey with their old friend Caspian (Ben Barnes), who is now king of Narnia.

So far, so good. Yet seeing trailers and posters for the film over recent weeks I had qualms. Why was the (long-dead) White Witch bobbing up to torment Edmund? Did this mean the story was being altered to make it more accessible for those only familiar with The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe? And would this make the Dawn Treader film less effective or true to the book C.S. Lewis wrote, or the Christian message that he (intentionally or unintentionally) laid within its pages?

To read more, click here.

Apologia Ecclesiae Anglicanae: Part III

Also known as An Apology, or Answer, in Defense of the Church of England and An Apology for the Bible

Behold these are the horrible heresies, for the which, a good part of the world is at this day condemned by the Bishop of Rome; and yet were never heard to plead their cause. He should have commenced his suit rather against Christ, against the Apostles, and against the holy fathers. For these things did not only proceed from them, but were also appointed by them: except perhaps these men will say (as I think they will indeed), that Christ never instituted the Holy Communion to be divided amongst the faithful; or that Christ's Apostles and the ancient fathers said private masses in every corner of the temples, now ten, now twenty together in one day: or that Christ and His Apostles banished all the common people from the Sacrament of His blood: or that the thing, which they themselves do at this day everywhere, and do it so as they condemn him for a heretic which doth otherwise, is not called of Gelasius, their own doctor, plain sacrilege: or that these be not the very words of Ambrose, Augustine, Gelasius, Theodoret, Chrysostom, and Origen: "The bread and wine in the Sacraments remain still the same they were before:" "The thing which is seen upon the Holy Table is bread;" "There ceaseth not to be still the substance of bread, and nature of wine;" "The substance and nature of bread are not changed;" "The self-same bread, as touching the material substance, goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the privy:" or that Christ, the Apostles, and holy fathers prayed not in that tongue which the people might understand: or that Christ hath not performed all things by that one offering which He once offered: or that the same sacrifice was unperfect, and so now we have need of another. All these things must they of necessity say, unless perchance they had rather say thus, that "all law and right is locked up in the treasury of the Pope's breast," and that, as once one of his soothing pages and claw-backs did not stick to say, "The Pope is able to dispense against the Apostles;" against a council, and against the canons and rules of the Apostles: and that he is not bound to stand neither to the examples, nor to the ordinances, nor to the laws of Christ. We, for our part, have learned these things of Christ, of the Apostles, of the devout fathers: and do sincerely, with good faith, teach the people of God the same. Which thing is the only cause why we at this day are called heretics of the chief prelates (no doubt) of religion.

O immortal God! hath Christ Himself, then, the Apostles, and so many fathers all at once gone astray? Were then Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, Gelasius, Theodoret, forsakers of the Catholic faith? was so notable a consent of so many ancient bishops and learned men nothing else but a conspiracy of heretics? or is that now condemned in us, which was then commended in them? or is the thing now, by alteration only of men's affections, suddenly become schismatic, which in them was counted Catholic? or shall that which in times past was true, now by-and-by, because it liketh not these men, be judged false? let them then bring forth another Gospel, and let them show the causes why these things, which so long have openly been observed and well-allowed in the Church of God, ought now in the end to be called in again. We know well enough that the same word which was opened by Christ, and spread abroad by the Apostles, is sufficient both, our salvation and all truth, to uphold and maintain; and also to confound all manner of heresy. By that word only do we condemn all sorts of the old heretics, whom these men say we have called out of hell again. As for the Arians, the Eutychians, the Marcionites, the Ebionites, the Valentinians, the Carpocratians, the Tatians, the Novatians, and shortly all them which have a wicked opinion, either of God the Father, or of Christ, or of the Holy Ghost, or of any other point of Christian religion, forsomuch as they be confuted by the Gospel of Christ, we plainly pronounce them for detestable and castaway persons, and defy them even unto the devil. Neither do we leave them so, but we also severely and straitly hold them in by lawful and politic punishments, if they fortune to break out anywhere, and bewray themselves.

Indeed, we grant that certain new and very strange sects, as the Anabaptists, Libertines, Menonians, and Zuenckfeldians, have been stirring in the world ever since the Gospel did first spring. But the world seeth now right well, thanks be given to our God, that we neither have bred, nor taught, nor kept up these monsters. In good fellowship, I pray thee, whosoever thou be, read our books: they are to be sold in every place. What hath there ever been written by any of our company which might plainly bear with the madness of any of those heretics. Nay, I say unto you, there is no country this day so free from their pestilent infections, as they be, wherein the Gospel is freely and commonly taught. So that if they weigh the very matter with earnest and upright advisement, this thing is a great argument, that this same is the very truth of the Gospel of Christ, which we do teach. For lightly neither is cockle wont to grow without the wheat, nor yet the chaff without the corn. For from the very Apostles' times, who knoweth not how many heresies did rise up even together so soon, as the Gospel was first spread abroad? Who ever had heard tell of Simon, Menander, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Cerinthus, Ebion, Valentinus, Secundus, Marcosius, Colorbasius, Heracleo, Lucianus, and Severus, before the Apostles were sent abroad? But why stand we reckoning up these? Epiphanius rehearseth up fourscore sundry heresies; and Augustine many more, which sprang up even together with the Gospel? What then? Was the Gospel therefore not the Gospel, because heresies sprang up withal? or was Christ therefore not Christ? And yet, as we said, doth not this great crop and heap of heresies grow up amongst us, which do openly, abroad, and frankly teach the Gospel. These poisons take their beginnings, their increasings, and strength, amongst our adversaries, in blindness and in darkness, amongst whom truth is with cruelty and tyranny kept under, and cannot be heard but in corners and secret meetings. But let them make a proof: let them give the Gospel free passage: let the truth of Jesu Christ give his clear light, and stretch forth His bright beams into all parts: and then shall they forthwith see how all these shadows straight will vanish and pass away at the light of the Gospel, even as the thick mist of the night consumeth at the sight of the sun. For whilst these men sit still, and make merry and do nothing, we continually repress and put back all those heresies which they falsely charge us to nourish and maintain.

Where they say, that we have fallen into sundry sects, and would be called some of us Lutherians, and some of us Zuinglians, and cannot yet well agree among ourselves touching the whole substance of doctrine: what would these men have said, if they had been in the first times of the Apostles and holy fathers, when one said, "I hold of Paul;" another, "I hold of Cephas;" another, "I hold of Apollo;" when Paul did so sharply rebuke Peter; when, upon a falling out, Barnabas departed from Paul; when, as Origen mentioneth, the Christians were divided into so many factions, as that they kept no more but the name of Christians in common among them, being in no manner of thing else like unto Christians; when, as Socrates saith, for their dissensions and sundry sects they were laughed and jested at openly of the people in the common game-plays; when, as Constantine the emperor affirmeth, there were such a number of variances and brawlings in the Church, that it might justly seem a misery far passing all the former miseries; when also Theophilus, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, Augustine, Ruffine, Hierom, being all Christians, being all fathers, being all Catholics, did strive one against another with most bitter and remediless contentions without end; when, as saith Nazianzen, the parts of one body were consumed and wasted one of another; when the east part was divided from the west, only for leavened bread and only for keeping of Easter Day; which were indeed no great matters to be strived for; and when in all councils new creeds and new decrees continually were devised. What would these men (trow ye) have said in those days? which side would they specially then have taken? and which would they then have forsaken? which Gospel would they have believed? whom would they have accounted for heretics, and whom for Catholics? And yet what a stir and revel keep they at this time upon two poor names only of Luther and Zuinglius? Because these two men do not yet fully agree upon some one point, therefore would they needs have us think that both of them were deceived; that neither of them had the Gospel; and that neither of them taught the truth aright.

But, good God, what manner of fellows be these which blame us for disagreeing? And do all they themselves, ween you, agree well together? Is every one of them fully resolved what to follow? Hath there been no strifes, no debates, no quarrels among them at no time? Why then do the Scotists and the Thomists, about that they call _meritum congrui_ and _meritum condigni_, no better agree together? Why agree they no better among themselves concerning original sin in the Blessed Virgin? concerning a solemn vow and a single vow? Why say the canonists, that auricular confession is appointed by the positive law of man: and the schoolmen contrariwise, that it is appointed by the law of God? Why doth Albertus Pighius dissent from Cajetanus? Why doth Thomas dissent from Lombardus, Scotus from Thomas, Occamus from Scotus, Alliacensis [ed. 1564 Alliensis] from Occamus? And why do the Nominals disagree from the Reals? And yet say I nothing of so many diversities of friars and monks; how some of them put a great holiness in eating of fish, and some in eating of herbs; some in wearing of shoes, and some in wearing of sandals; some in going in a linen garment, and some in a woollen; some of them called white, some black; some being shaven broad, and some narrow: some stalking abroad upon pattens, some barefooted; some girt, and some ungirt. They ought, I wiss, to remember, how there be some of their own company which say, that the body of Christ is in His Supper naturally: contrary, other some of the self-same company deny it to be so. Again, that there be other of them, which say, the body of Christ in the Holy Communion "is rent and torn with our teeth:" and some again that deny the same. Some also of them there be, which write that the body of Christ is _quantum_ in the Eucharistia; that is to say, hath his perfect quantity in the Sacrament; some other again say nay. That there be others of them which say Christ did consecrate with a certain Divine power: some, that he did the same with His blessing: some again that say, He did it with uttering five solemn chosen words: and some, with rehearsing the same words afterward again. Some will have it, that, when Christ did speak those five words, the material wheaten bread was pointed by this demonstrative pronoun _hoc_: some had rather have, that a certain _vagum individuum_, as they term it, was meant thereby. Again, others there be that say dogs and mice may truly and in very deed eat the body of Christ; and others again there be that steadfastly deny it. There be others, which say, that the very accidents of bread and wine may nourish: others again there be which say, how that the substance of bread doth return again. What need I say more? It were overlong and tedious to reckon up all things. So very uncertain, and full of controversies, is yet the whole form of these men's religion and doctrine, even amongst themselves, from whence it did first spring and begin. For hardly at any time do they well agree between themselves: except it be peradventure as, in times past, the Pharisees and Sadducees; or as Herod and Pilate did accord against Christ.

They were best, therefore, to go and set peace at home rather among their own selves. Of a truth, unity and concord doth best become religion: yet is not unity the sure and certain mark whereby to know the Church of God. For there was the greatest consent that might be amongst them that worshipped the golden calf; and among them which with one voice jointly cried against our Saviour Jesus Christ, "Crucify Him." Neither, because the Corinthians were unquieted with private dissensions: or because Paul did square with Peter, or Barnabas with Paul: or, because the Christians, upon the very beginning of the Gospel, were at mutual discord touching some one matter or other, may we therefore think there was no Church of God amongst them. And as for those persons, whom they upon spite call Zuinglians and Lutherians, in very deed they of both sides be Christians, good friends and brethren. They vary not betwixt themselves upon the principles and foundations of our religion, nor as touching God, nor Christ, nor the Holy Ghost, nor of the means of justification, nor yet everlasting life, but upon one only question, which is neither weighty nor great: neither mistrust we, or make doubt at all, but they will shortly be agreed. And if there be any of them which have other opinion than is meet, we doubt not but ere it be long they will put apart all affections and names of parties, and that God will reveal it unto them: so that by better considering and searching out of the matter, as once it came to pass in the Council of Chalcedon, all causes and seeds of dissension shall be thoroughly plucked up by the root, and be buried, and quite forgotten for ever. Which God grant.

But this is the most grievous and heavy case, that they call us wicked and ungodly men, and say we have thrown away all care of religion. Though this ought not to trouble us much, whilst they themselves that thus have charged us know full well how spiteful and false a saying it is: for Justin the martyr is a witness, how that all Christians were called [Greek text], that is, godless, as soon as the Gospel first began to be published, and the Name of Christ to be openly declared. And when Polycarpus stood to be judged, the people stirred up the president to slay and murder all them which professed the Gospel, with these words, [Greek text], that is to say, "Rid out of the way these wicked and godless creatures." And this was not because it was true that the Christians were godless, but because they would not worship stones and stocks which were then honoured as God. The whole world seeth plainly enough already, what we and ours have endured at these men's hands for religion and our only God's cause. They have thrown us into prison, into water, into fire, and imbrued themselves in our blood: not because we were either adulterers, or robbers, or murderers, but only for that we confessed the Gospel of Jesu Christ, and put our confidence in the living God; and for that we complained too justly and truly (Lord, thou knowest), that they did break the law of God for their own most vain traditions; and that our adversaries were the very foes to the Gospel, and enemies to Christ's Cross, who so wittingly and willingly did obstinately despise God's commandments.

Wherefore, when these men saw they could not rightly find fault with our doctrine, they would needs pick a quarrel and inveigh and rail against our manners, surmising, how that we do condemn all well-doings: that we set open the door to all licentiousness and lust, and lead away the people from all love of virtue. And in very deed, the life of all men, even of the devoutest and most Christian, both is, and evermore hath been, such as one may always find some lack, even in the very best and purest conversation. And such is the inclination of all creatures unto evil, and the readiness of all men to suspect that the things which neither have been done, nor once meant to be done, yet may be easily both heard and credited for true. And like as a small spot is soon espied in the neatest and whitest garment, even so the least stain of dishonesty is easily found out in the purest and sincerest life. Neither take we all them which have at this day embraced the doctrine of the Gospel, to be angels, and to live clearly without any mote or wrinkle; nor yet think we these men either so blind, that if anything may be noted in us, they are not able to perceive the same even through the least crevice: nor so friendly, that they will construe aught to the best: nor yet so honest of nature nor courteous, that they will look back upon themselves, and weigh our fashions by their own. If so be we list to search this matter from the bottom, we know in the very Apostles' times there were Christians, through whom the Name of the Lord was blasphemed and evil spoken of among the Gentiles. Constantius the emperor bewaileth, as it is written in Sozomenus, that many waxed worse after they had fallen to the religion of Christ. And Cyprian, in a lamentable oration, setteth out the corrupt manners in his time: "The wholesome discipline," saith he, "which the Apostles left unto us, hath idleness and long rest now utterly marred: everyone studied to increase his livelihood; and clean forgetting either what they had done before whilst they were under the Apostles, or what they ought continually to do, having received the faith they earnestly laboured to make great their own wealth with an unsatiable desire of covetousness. There is no devout religion," saith he, "in priests, no sound faith in ministers, no charity showed in good works, no form of godliness in their conditions: men are become effeminate, and women's beauty is counterfeited." And before his days, said Tertullian, "O how wretched be we, which are called Christians at this time! for we live as heathens under the Name of Christ." And without reciting of many more writers, Gregory Nazianzen speaketh thus of the pitiful state of his own time: "We," saith he, "are in hatred among the heathen for our own vices' sake; we are also become now a wonder, not only to angels and men, but even to all the ungodly." In this case was the Church of God, when the Gospel first began to shine, and when the fury of tyrants was not as yet cooled, nor the sword taken off from the Christians' necks. Surely it is no new thing that men be but men, although they be called by the name of Christians.

Part I may be found here; Part II here.

Failure—a one-of-a-kind teacher

Failure is one of God’s primary tools in making you the kind of person—and leader—He wants you to be. He’ll use failure to mold you, shape you, and develop your character. The truth is, we rarely learn anything from success. When we succeed we immediately think, “It’s just because of my sheer natural talent.” We don’t figure out why we succeeded.

But if we’re wise we’ll use our failures to our advantage. Wise people make the most of failure. It’s a stepping-stone to greater days.

So how can failure benefit me? There’s lots of ways, but here are three of the most important.

To read more, click here.

The Perspicuity of Holy Scripture

William Whitaker (1548-1595) was a prominent Anglican theologian in the reign of Elizabeth I. He championed the teaching of the reformed Church of England against its Roman Catholic detractors particularly Robert Cardinal Bellarmine and Thomas Stapleton.

Whitaker, a nephew of Alexander Nowell, was a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. He was appointed Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge in 1580 and Master of St. John’s College in 1586. He wrote a number of theological treatises. The following passages are taken from A disputation on Holy Scripture, against the papists, especially Bellarmine and Stapleton.

For there is nothing in Scripture so plain that some men have not doubted it; as, that God is Almighty, that he created heaven and earth, that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, conceived of the Holy Ghost, and so forth: these are indeed plainly and openly set down in Scripture, and yet there are controversies about them. Things therefore are not presently obscure, concerning which there are many controversies; because these so manifold disputes arise rather from the perversity and curiosity of the human mind, than from any real obscurity. The apostle says that the minds of infidels are blinded by the devil, lest they should see that brillant light and acquiesce in it: which is most true of our adversaries. (pp. 388-389)

The fathers proved their opinions out of the scriptures. Therefore the scriptures are clearer than the writings and commentaries of the fathers: for no one proves what is unknown by what is still more unknown. Luther hath this argument in the Preface of his Articles condemned by Leo X. The Jesuit [i.e., Bellarmine] answers, that the scriptures are indeed, in respect of their truth, clearer and more open than the writings of the fathers, but not in respect of the words. Which surely is a foolish answer: for to say that the scriptures are clearer than the fathers in respect of their truth, is nothing more than saying they are truer. But what sort of distinction is this? If the truth of scripture be clearer, how can the words be more obscure? For it is from the words that the truth arises. If therefore he confesses that the scriptures are plainer than the commentaries of the fathers, in respect of their truth, then he concedes that the truth is plainer in the scriptures than the in the writings of any father; which is sufficient. And doubtless if we will compare the scripture with the writings of the fathers, we shall generally find greater obscurity and difficulty in the latter than in the former. There is no less perspicuity in the Gospel of John or in the Epistles of Paul, than in Tertullian, in Irenaeus, in certain books of Origen and Jerome, and in some other writings of the fathers. But in all the schoolmen there is such obscurity as is nowhere found in scripture. "The words of scripture," says he, "are more obscure than the words of the fathers." Even if there were some obscurity in the words of scripture greater than in those of the fathers, it would not nevertheless be a just consequence, that the scriptures were so obscure that they should not be read by the people. This should rather rouse men to an attentive reading than deter them from reading altogether. Besides, the scriptures speak of necessary things no less plainly than any fathers, or even much more plainly, because the Holy Spirit excels in all powers of expression. (p. 390)

Indeed all the papists in their books, when they seek to prove any thing, boast everywhere that they can bring arguments against us from the most luminous, plain, clear and manifest testimonies of Scripture . . . For in every dispute their common phrases are,"”This is clear,"”This is plain,"”This is manifest in the scriptures, and such like. Surely when they speak thus, they ignorantly and unawares confess the perspicuity of the scriptures even in the greatest questions and controversies. (p. 401)

Our fifteenth argument is this: Every one ought to rest upon his own faith and his own judgment, and not depend upon another´s will and pleasure. Therefore the Roman pontiff is not the sole judge of controversies in the church. For each individual should be his own judge, and stand by his own judgment, not indeed mere private judgment, but such as is inspired by God: and no one can bestow the Holy Spirit save God who infuses it in whom he will. Nor can any one man render another certain in matters of religion, with whatever authority he may be invested. Christ says, John vi. 44, 45, "No man can come unto me unless my Father draw him: wherefore whosoever hath heard and learned of the Father cometh unto me." John the Baptist says also, John iii. 33, "He that receiveth his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true." There is, therefore, need of Christ´s testimony before we can truly and aright believe anything. (pp. 460-461)

The text of A disputation on Holy Scripture, against the papists, especially Bellarmine and Stapleton, translated by William Fitzgerald from Latin into English and published by the Cambridge University Press for the Parker Society in 1849 may be downloaded from Google Books or Internet Archives.