ART. and apply them to the elements, as said by him. So we conXXXVI. sider such as deserve to be admitted to those holy functions, as persons called and sent of God; and therefore the church in the name of Christ sends them; and because he gives a portion of his Spirit to those whom he sends, therefore the church in his name says, 'Receive the Holy Ghost.' And in this sense, and with this respect, the use of these words may be well justified. ARTICLE XXXVII. Of Civil Magistrates. The Queen's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of Eng- The Bishop of Rome hath no Jurisdiction in this Realm of Eng- 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 serbe in the Wars. THIS Article was much shorter as it was published in king Edward's time, and did run thus: The king of England is supreme head in earth, next under Christ, of the church of England and Ireland. Then followed the paragraph against the pope's jurisdiction, worded as it is now: to which these words were subjoined, The civil magistrate is ordained and allowed of God; wherefore we must obey him, not only for fear of punishment, but also for conscience sake. In queen Elizabeth's time it was thought fitting to take away those prejudices that the papists were generally infusing into the minds of the people against the term head; which seemed to be the more incongruous, because a woman did then reign; therefore that was left out, and instead of it the words chief power and chief government were made use of, which do signify the same thing. The queen did also by her Injunctions offer an explanation of this matter; for whereas it was given out by those who had complied with every thing that had been done both in her father's and in her brother's time, but that resolved now ART. XXXVII. XXXVII. ART. to set themselves in opposition to her, that she was assuming a much greater authority than they had pretended to: she upon that ordered that explanation which is referred to in the Article, and is in these words: "For certainly her majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any authority, other than that was challenged and lately used by the said noble kings of famous memory, king Henry the Eighth, and king Edward the Sixth, which is and was of ancient time due to the imperial crown of this realm; that is, under God to have the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons born within these her realms, dominions, and countries, of what estate, either ecclesiastical or temporal, soever they be: so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them. And if any person that hath conceived any other sense of the said oath, shall accept the same oath with this interpretation, sense, or meaning, her majesty is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf, as her good and obedient subjects; and shall acquit them of all manner of penalties, contained in the said act, against such as shall peremptorily and obstinately refuse to take the same oath.' Thus this matter is opened, as it is both in the Article and in the Injunctions. In order to the treating regularly of this Article, it is, first, to be proved that the pope hath no jurisdiction in these kingdoms. 2dly, That our kings or queens have it. And, 3dly, The nature and measures of this power and government are to be stated. As for the pope's authority, though it is now connected with infallibility, yet it was pretended to, and was advanced for many ages before infallibility was so much as thought on. Nor was the doctrine of their infallibility ever so universally received and submitted to in these western parts as was that of their universal jurisdiction. They were in possession of it: appeals were made to them: they sent legates and bulls every where they granted exemptions from the ordinary jurisdiction; and took bishops bound to them by oaths, that were penned in the form of oaths of fealty or homage. This was the first point that our reformers did begin with, both here and every where else; that so they might remove that which was an insuperable obstruction, till it was first taken out of the way, to every step that could be made toward a reformation. They laid down therefore this for their foundation, that all bishops were by their office and character equal; and that every one of them had the same authority that any other had over that flock which was committed to his care: and therefore they said, that the bishops of Rome had no authority, according to the constitution in which the churches were settled by the apostles, but over the city of Rome: and that any further jurisdiction that any ancient popes might have had, did arise from the dignity of the city, and the customs and Luke xxii. 14, 19. laws of the empire. As for their deriving that authority from ART St. Peter, it is very plain that the apostles were all made XXXVII. equal to him; and that they never understood our Saviour's words to him, as importing any authority that was given to him over the rest; since they continued to the last, while our Saviour was among them, 'disputing which of them should be Mark ix. the greatest.' The proposition that the mother of James and 33, 35. John made, in which it is evident that they likewise con- 24, 27. curred with her, shews that they did not apprehend that Matt. xx. Christ had made any declaration in favour of St. Peter, as by 21, 24, 26. our Saviour's answer it appears that he had not done; otherwise he would have referred them to what he had already said upon that occasion. By the whole history of the Acts of the Apostles, it appears that the apostles acted and consulted in common, without considering St. Peter as having any superiority over them. He was called to give an account of his baptizing Cornelius; and he delivered his opinion in the Acts xi. 2, council of Jerusalem, without any strain of authority over the 3. rest. St. Paul does expressly deny, that the other apostles Acts xv. 7, had any superiority or jurisdiction over him; and he says in Gal. ii. 7, plain words, that he was the apostle of the uncircumcision, 8, 11. as St. Peter was the apostle of the circumcision;' and in that does rather claim an advantage over him; since his was certainly the much wider province. He withstood St. Peter to his face, when he thought that he deserved to be blamed; and he speaks of his own line and share, as being subordinate in it to none: and by his saying, that 'he did not stretch 2 Cor. x. himself beyond his own measure, he plainly insinuates, that 14. within his own province he was only accountable to Him that had called and sent him. This was also the sense of the primitive church, that all bishops were brethren, colleagues, and fellow-bishops: and though the dignity of that city, which was the head of the empire, and the opinion of that church's being founded by St. Peter and St. Paul, created a great respect to the bishops of that see, which was supported and increased by the eminent worth, as well as the frequent martyrdoms, of their bishops; yet St. Cyprian in his time, as he was against the suffering of any causes to be carried in the way of a complaint for redress to Rome, so he does in plain words say, that all the apostles were equal in power; and that all bishops De Unit, were also equal; since the whole office and episcopate was Eccles. one entire thing, of which every bishop had a complete and equal share.” It is true, he speaks of the unity of the Roman church, and of the union of other churches with it; but those words were occasioned by a schism that Novatian had made then at Rome; he being elected in opposition to the rightful bishop: so that St. Cyprian does not insinuate any thing concerning an authority of the see of Rome over other sees, but * The reader ought to study Barrow's Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy,' in which that great writer has exhausted this subject.-¡ ED.] ART. speaks only of their union under one bishop; and of the XXXVII. other churches holding a brotherly communion with that bishop. Through his whole epistles he treats the bishops of Rome as his equals, with the titles of brother and colleague. Conc. Nic. can. 6. Ep. x. ad Greg. In the first general council, the authority of the bishops of the great sees is stated as equal. The bishops of Alexandria and Antioch are declared to have, according to custom, the same authority over the churches subordinate to them, that the bishops of Rome had over those that lay about that city. This authority is pretended to be derived only from custom, and is considered as under the limitations and decisions of a general council. Soon after that, the Arian heresy was so spread over the east, that those who adhered to the Nicene faith, were not safe in their numbers; and the western churches being free from that contagion, (though St. Basil laments that they neither understood their matters, nor were much concerned about them, but were swelled up with pride,) Athanasius and other oppressed bishops fled to the bishops of Rome, as well as to the other bishops of the west; it being natural for the oppressed to seek protection wheresoever they can find it: and so a sort of appeals was begun, and they were Con. Sard. authorized by the council of Sardica. But the ill effects of can.3.et 7. this, if it should become a precedent, were apprehended by Con. Con- the second general council; in which it was decreed, that stant. can. 3. every province should be governed by its own synod; and that all bishops should be at first judged by the bishops of their own province; and from them an appeal was allowed to the bishops of the diocese; whereas by the canons of Nice no appeal lay from the bishops of the province. But though this canon of Constantinople allows of an appeal to the bishops of every such division of the Roman empire as was known by the name of diocese; yet there is an express prohibition of any other or further appeal; which is a plain repealing of the canon at Sardica. And in that same council it appears upon what the dignity of the see of Rome was then believed to be founded; for Constantinople being made the seat of the empire, and called new Rome, the bishops of that see had the same privileges given them, that the bishops of old Rome had; except only the point of rank, which was preserved to old Rome, because of the dignity of the city. Con. Chal- This was also confirmed at Chalcedon in the middle of the ced. can. fifth century. This shews, that the authority and privileges Labb. and of the bishops of Rome were then considered as arising out Coss. vol. of the dignity of that city, and that the order of them was iv. p. 1691. subject to the authority of a general council. 28. Afric. cap. 101. et Conc. The African churches in that time knew nothing of any superiority that the bishops of Rome had over them: they 105. Epist. condemned the making of appeals to them, and appointed ad Bonifac. that such as made them should be excommunicated. The et Celest. Labb, and popes, who laid that matter much to heart, did not pretend |