Proposed Surrender of the Prayer-Book and Articles of the Church of England: A Letter to the Lord Bishop of London on Professor Stanley's Views of Clerical and University "Subscription"Irons, William J. (William Josiah)
Religion
Proposed Surrender of the Prayer-Book and Articles of the Church of England: A Letter to the Lord Bishop of London on Professor Stanley's Views of Clerical and University "Subscription"
Irons, William J. (William Josiah)
Church and college -- England -- History -- 19th century; Church of England -- Doctrines -- History -- 19th century; Church of England -- Liturgy -- History -- 19th century; Church of England. Book of common prayer; Church of England. Thirty-nine Articles; Dissenters, Religious -- England -- History
The object, then, being thus simplified, we need not here pause to
estimate the excellences or defects of any of the formularies which we
all alike have thought to be good enough to _sign_. With more than
judicial fairness, Dr. STANLEY admits that the whole Thirty-nine Articles
are “incomparably superior” to the “Nine Articles of the Evangelical
Alliance” (p. 11), or any that would be drawn up by “the dominant
factions” of our Church, _or Commonwealth_. But this kind of criticism
may well be postponed till the prior question is disposed of—whether we
should “sign” _any_ thing? When the Articles and Prayer-book come to be
hereafter discussed, these details may have interest with some, as parts
of the literature of the “_Eighteenth Century_;” but at present might it
not be disrespectful merely to glance at them in a sketchy way, to give
pungency and interest to a somewhat barren subject? I do not say that
the highly rhetorical sentences in which praise and blame are judiciously
administered by Dr. STANLEY to Article 1, 5, 9, or 34, contribute nothing
to the effectiveness of the pamphlet with the “general reader;” but it is
obvious that with the argument, strictly speaking, they have nothing to
do.
Dr. Stanley’s Three Arguments.
The Relaxation of Subscription appears, as far as I can gather, to be
urged by three arguments,—the first founded the _origin_ of the
“Subscriptions” among us after the Reformation; the second, on the
alleged absence of “Subscription” in the Primitive Church; and the third
on the practical evils of the present state of “Subscription” in the
Church and in the Universities. If I examine each of these, I shall not,
I think, have omitted any point hitherto prominently alleged in this
controversy.
I. “The Church of England, as such, recognises absolutely no
Subscriptions.” Such is Dr. STANLEY’S proposition (p. 38). The tests of
membership are “incorporated in the Services to the exclusion, as it
would seem, of all besides.” It is added (p. 39)—“These other
obligations were, in fact, _not contemplated_ at the time of the first
compilation of the Prayer-book and Articles, and have grown up as a mere
excrescence through the pressure of political and ecclesiastical parties.
The Articles were not subscribed (by anything like general usage) till
the 12th year of Elizabeth; they were then, after much hesitation and
opposition, ordered to be subscribed for a special purpose,” &c.
The Reformation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account