On the Articles: Article XX

The Fifth Sunday after Trinity

GRANT O Lord, we beseech thee, that the course of this world may be so peaceably ordered by thy governance, that thy Church may joyfully serve thee in all godly quietness; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Octave of the Feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist

ALMIGHTY God, by whose providence thy servant John Baptist was wonderfully born, and sent to prepare the way of thy Son our Saviour, by preaching of repentance: Make us so to follow his doctrine and holy life, that we may truly repent according to his preaching, and after his example constantly speak the truth, boldly rebuke vice, and patiently suffer for the truth’s sake; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

XX. Of the Authority of the Church
The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is 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 be a witness and a keeper of holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree any thing against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation.

Continuing to expand on Anglican ecclesiology, where Article XIX sets the limits of where the Church exists, Article XX sets the limits of the Church’s authority. Interestingly while Article XIX is largely an opportunity to counter Protestant convictions of the Church, presented in opposition to the Catholic traditions which were being upheld by the Roman Catholic Church, Article XX changes course and instead presents opposition to the Roman Catholic practice of declaring the authority of the Church exists outside of Holy Scripture. Today, as in the time of the English Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church claims authority to declare dogma apart from Holy Scripture. This was largely an innovation of the Roman Catholic Church, and the doctrine articulated in Article XX is far more consistent with the practice of the Early Church.

The Article begins by expressing clearly that the Church may authoritatively regulate rites and ceremonies, and then more importantly suggests that the Church also has authority to resolve controversies of faith. This statement is immediately followed up by an expression of limitation on that authority.

“It is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing contrary to God’s Word written,” reminds us that the Church acts in submission to God’s Word as the ultimate authority of God and the Church in the world. When the Church and God’s Word are in conflict, God’s Word must prevail, because while the Church was established by Christ, it is an instrument of man and therefore fallible, whereas God’s Word is authoritatively and divinely inspired.

The Article clarifies that the Church does have power to regulate rites and ceremonies, and thus the rituals of the Church, and also arguments of faith, yet the limit imposed immediately after is categorical: the Church does not have authority apart from what may be proven in Scripture. It can articulate the correct interpretation of Scripture, as effectively the Ecumenical Councils did, but it cannot make pronouncements that depart from what Holy Scripture says.

Interestingly, it also makes clear the point that it is not enough to be able to point to one part of Scripture and suggest it is sufficient to support the claim being made. The Article states, “neither may it expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.” This in some ways may again be an attack on both Rome and some of the Reformation doctrines which seemed to take various verses in isolation to attempt to justify doctrine while ignoring the general thrust of Holy Scripture.

Finally, the way the Article is framed allows for an important distinction in what the Church may teach as required of the faithful versus what else it may say, or rather what it may permit to be said. This again runs somewhat counter to the Reformers who, with their confessional statements, tended towards far greater rigidity in matters of doctrine. By saying specifically the Church may not teach, as being necessary for salvation, anything that may not be proven by Scripture, it does leave open room for debate and disagreement within the Church on matters not pertaining to salvation, so long as they are not contrary to God’s word. So for instance, Holy Scripture does not speak conclusively on the issue of the assumption of the Blessed Theotokos. The Church has historically, however, taught that she was assumed bodily into heaven. There is precedent for it in Enoch and Elijah, and possibly even Moses, as Biblical figures apart from Christ that the Scriptures suggest or state were assumed bodily as well. There are arguments apart from Scripture that come into play to support why the assumption of the Blessed Theotokos makes sense, largely relating to the fact that there is no information about her death or record of relics of hers, despite the importance of both those things during the Apostolic age. Given that it is consistent with Scripture, though, this Article maintains that it may be taught, simply not as being required for salvation. A priest may discuss or teach it as a pious belief only, to be commended to the faithful as a belief consistent with Scripture, but disbelief would neither impair communion within the Church, nor would it in any way affect one’s salvation.

Taken together, Articles XIX and XX begin to lay out a foundation for the ecclesiology of the English Church which will be built upon in subsequent articles as it discusses the sacraments and the role of the priesthood in ministry. It makes clear distinctions between both the new protestant churches that were being established on the continent as well as the ways in which the English Church would differentiate itself from the Roman Catholic Church, seeking to return to more patristic roots.

Today, more and more, secular pressure demands that the Church conform itself to the world. It is more important than ever that Anglicans cleave to antiquity and the formularies: no error can be brought into the Church by respecting the Church’s lack of authority to declare doctrines contrary to Holy Scripture, or to teach in opposition to it.

On the Articles: Article XIX

The Fourth Sunday after Trinity

O GOD, the protector of all that trust in thee, without whom nothing is strong, nothing is holy: Increase and multiply upon us thy mercy; that, thou being our ruler and guide, we may so pass through things temporal, that we finally lose not the things eternal. Grant this, O heavenly Father, for Jesus Christ’s sake our Lord. Amen.

XIX. Of the Church
THE visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the 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 hath erred, not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith.

After having spent a great deal of time arguing for the nature of God, the Trinity and Christ, and then our relation to God in terms of salvation, the Articles of Religion turn to the Church, beginning by setting out a clear ecclesiology of the meaning of the Church.

For some when they speak of the Church, they speak of an invisible Church, composed of the body of all believers. Yet there is a subset of that, the visible Church, the bride of Christ, which Christ ordained when he said to his Apostles “on this rock I will build my church,” (St Mt 16. 18b), and birthed at Pentecost by the Holy Spirit. To those for whom there is a visible Church, there is no problem with accepting also an invisible church, though for most the term body of believers would be preferred as ‘invisible church’ is for many a contradiction in terms. However, for many Protestants, they reject any notion of a visible Church instituted by Christ himself, and so their view finds the idea of a visible Church incompatible with their invisible church. This Article begins by clearly stating that for Anglicans, we believe in the visible Church, indeed as the thrust of the English Reformation was to maintain that the English Church is and has always been a part of Christ’s One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic Church.

In making this claim, the Article goes further to define what distinguishes Christ’s Church from the invisible Church which includes the whole body of believers who profess a saving faith. It lists three general criteria for the Church: the congregation of the faithful, the teaching of God’s Word, and the administration of Christ’s sacraments.

The first criterion is that the Church is, “a congregation of faithful men.” This does not mean to suggest faithful to the Church itself as an institution, but rather faithfulness to Christ. These must be believers, and orthodox believers.

The second criterion is that the Church is a place, “in which the pure Word of God is preached.” Article VI placed a strong emphasis on the Holy Scriptures as containing all things necessary for salvation, in contrast with Rome which taught that the Church had authority outside of Scripture and equal to Scripture to require other dogmas to be accepted as necessary for salvation. It also carries with it the same connotation as faithful in the first criterion: the people cannot be faithful unless the Scriptures are faithfully explained to them. Here the term pure suggests that the Church can err by impurely teaching the Scriptures, something certainly in need of noting in modern times where attempts are made to justify secular practices and mores by twisting Scripture in ways in which it has never been understood and oftentimes contravenes its plain meaning.

The third criterion is that the Church is a place where, “the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinances.” This makes reference to some later Articles which name Holy Baptism and the Holy Eucharist as the only two sacraments ordained by Christ.

While not a direct criterion, there is a fourth clause in the Article which says, “in all those things necessary and requisite of the same.” This is a reference to the three-fold order of ministry which Cranmer refers to in later articles where it makes clear that only ordained persons may administer the sacraments and preach God’s words.

Taking these four together, they establish a clear pattern. The Church is found where-ever the orthodox faith is professed, God’s Word is faithfully preached, Christ’s sacraments are administered, chiefly meaning Holy Baptism and the Holy Eucharist, and the threefold order of ministry of bishops, priests and deacons is maintained. If this sounds familiar, it is because it has previously been referred to several times on this blog, both as referring to the goal of the English Reformation as well as through later documents such as the Canadian Solemn Declaration of 1893 and the Lambeth Quadrilateral, each of which refer to those four points.

While these four goals can be seen as running throughout the Articles and throughout the writings of Cranmer, the Book of Common Prayer and the English Divines, this is certainly one place, in the Formularies, which the point can be made no more clearly.

The Article itself concludes by pointing out that the ancient patriarchates have erred in matters of faith and ceremonies. It is far easier to see what is meant by this in relation to Rome as several other Articles address Roman errors. Indeed, this also goes back to the reason why Protestants developed their view of the invisible Church, as prior to the disunion of East and West there was very clearly a united visible Church ordained by Christ, and even after that disunion, most people generally viewed the other as being schismatic and thus there was still only one Church. Protestants needed a way to justify their legitimacy in opposition to the visible Church which traced its lineage back to the time of the Apostles. This again reinforces their need to reject the concept of a visible Church and put forward the notion of an invisible Church.

While there is nowhere else in the Articles a clear list of which errors this Article is referring to, there are many known errors into which those sees had historically fallen. At various times, Eastern Sees were controlled by Arians, and in Rome Pope Honorius I had been anathematized for the heresy of Monothelitism in the 7th century. This Article was composed while the Roman Council of Trent was ongoing, and one important point at Trent was that its decrees were declared to not be infallible and dogmatic decrees of the past hundred years were also opened for question. This point may have been to reinforce the fallibility of the Church again primarily as a challenge to Rome’s more common claims to infallibility (though not Papal infallibility, a doctrine not yet proclaimed in the 16th century and which was not articulated until the 19th century).

While interpretation of this Article has varied over time, the stance of the visible Church and a willingness to accept the idea of an invisible Church claimed by Protestants now generally being accepted, it makes continued important statements about knowledge of where the visible Church is, and Anglicanism’s role in maintaining the purity of the Christ’s Catholic Church in the Realm of England (and lands subsequently reached by English missionaries).

Wisdom of Saints: St Basil the Great

The Feast of Basil the Great, Doctor, Bishop of Caesarea, Cappadocia, 379

O GOD, who by thy Holy Spirit hast given unto one man a word of wisdom, and to another a word of knowledge, and to another the gift of tongues: We praise thy Name for the gifts of grace manifested in thy servant Basil, and we pray that thy Church may never be destitute of the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Third Sunday after Trinity

LORD, we beseech thee mercifully to hear us; and grant that we, to whom thou hast given an hearty desire to pray, may by thy mighty aid be defended and comforted in all dangers and adversities; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

St Basil the Great, one of the Cappadocian fathers and friend of St Gregory of Nazianzus, St Basil is one of the great Doctors of the Church and one of the foremost Christian theologians of the patristic age. St Basil came from a famous Christian family, the son of St Basil the Elder, he and two of his brothers (Peter and St Gregory of Nyssa) were raised to the episcopate alongside St Basil while in addition to St Gregory and St Basil, their sister St Macrina the Younger, was also honoured as a saint.

St Basil himself was born around 329 in Caesarea Cappadocia. He was raised in a well-known Christian household, and from a young age St Basil was instructed in the Christian faith and piety. Though his father died when he was young, the family continued and St Basil received a full education studying in Caesarea, Constantinople and Athens. It was during the course of his education that he first became acquainted with St Gregory of Nazianzus who would become his lifelong friend. After completing his education, he returned to Caesarea to teach.

Upon his return to Caesarea Cappadocia, he was baptised ordained a reader (readers were a minor ordained order in the early Church and remain so to this day in the Christian East) by the Bishop of Cappadocia, Dianius. Another influential figure in St Basil’s life at this time was his sister, St Macrina. While St Basil had travelled far and wide for his education. St Macrina had dedicated herself to founding a religious community among the family’s various holdings. Her witness helped open St Basil’s eyes to the Gospel and in particular to turn away from material concerns of wealth. To pursue Godly perfection, St Basil began exploring monasteries and monastic piety throughout the known world before returning to Pontus, where he had lived after the death of his father, and founded his own monastic community there. Due in large part to this, St Basil became known as the father of Oriental monasticism.

St Basil was convinced to be ordained a priest in 363 by the new Bishop of Caesarea, and was given a prominent position within the administration of the diocese. He was extremely well-regarded within the diocese, earning for himself a particular reputation as the saviour of the poor after supporting them during a famine. The 14th of June 370 he was consecrated Bishop of Caesarea. As Bishop of Caesarea, St Basil was Metropolitan of Cappadocia, a vast ecclesial territory, which ranked in importance behind only the five patriarchates and Ephesus.

St Basil was very active in his ministry, as the over three hundred existent letters profess plainly. His letters are a form of chronology that help illustrate the many challenges faced in his day. Along with St Athanasius the Great, St Basil was a great defender of Christian orthodoxy during a turbulent time in the Church when orthodoxy was under significant attack by Arians, and particular at times when Arian Emperors controlled the Empire.

One of his famous letters, XLVI, To a fallen virgin, helps to illustrate St Basil’s pastoral heart which was the foundation for all his ministry. It is not known exactly who the recipient of the letter was, as is the case with a number of his letters, but it seems she was a Christian who publicly professed virginity but later in some way admitted to St Basil that it was not true. St Basil quotes liberally from Scriptures, focusing largely on the Prophet Jeremiah and then from the New Testament, drawing upon comparisons of the bride of Christ and Israel as God’s bride. In quoting from these passages, St Basil begins his letter by stressing a case for the fallen virgin’s actions being of severe importance. Basil writes:

I used to describe the high dignity of virginity, and, addressing you as a temple of God, used as it were to give wings to your zeal as I strove to lift you to Jesus. Yet through fear of evil I helped you not to fall by the words “if any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy.” So by my prayers I tried to make you more secure, if by any means “your body, soul, and spirit might be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet all my toil on your behalf has been in vain.

Mirroring Jeremiah’s lament for Israel, St Basil concludes this section by noting his own disappointment, yet it also begins to hint at his pastoral heart as he reminds the recipient that he himself had prayed for her. He uses strong words to show how sincerely he cares for the recipient because of the harm she has done herself:

You have been deceived by the serpent more bitterly than Eve; and not only your mind but also your body has been defiled. Even that last horror has come to pass which I shrink from saying, and yet cannot leave unsaid, for it is as a burning and blazing fire in my bones, and I am undone and cannot endure.

This is again a hint at his pastoral heart. While his words are harsh, he is clearly aggrieved at the sinfulness of what has happened, and laments that he had not been able to do more to prevent it from happening, for the way in which the sin has defiled her soul. Immediately, however, in Chapter 5 of his letter, he turns to the divine remedy:

“Is there no balm in Gilead; is there no physician there? Why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered?” You might indeed find many remedies for evil in Scripture, many medicines to save from destruction and lead to health; the mysteries of death and resurrection, the sentences of terrible judgment and everlasting punishment; the doctrines of repentance and of remission of sins; all the countless illustrations of conversion, the piece of money, the sheep, the son who wasted his substance with harlots, who was lost and was found, who was dead and alive again. Let us not use these remedies for ill; by these means let us heal our soul.

St Basil had previously described how her sin was in effect worse than the sin of Eve, yet immediately he points to Holy Scripture, to God’s testimony of love and repentance and makes clear that there is a solution. He continues in Chapter 6, the conclusion of the letter, where he says:

While we can, let us lift ourselves from the fall: let us never despair of ourselves, if only we depart from evil. Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners. “O come, let us worship and fall down; let us weep before Him.” The Word Who invited us to repentance calls aloud, “Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” There is, then, a way of salvation, if we will. “Death in his might has swallowed up, but again the Lord hath wiped away tears from off all faces” of them that repent. The Lord is faithful in all His words. He does not lie when He says, “Though your sins be as scarlet they shall be as white as snow. Though they be red like crimson they shall be as wool.” The great Physician of souls, Who is the ready liberator, not of you alone, but of all who are enslaved by sin, is ready to heal your sickness.

St Basil concludes his letter with a call to repentance available even to one who had fallen farther than Eve as he described it earlier, and finally ends his letter on a note of assurance as he alludes to the parable of the two sons:

If any of those who think they stand find fault because of your quick reception, the good Father will Himself make answer for you in the words, “It was meet that we should make merry and be glad for this” my daughter “was dead and is alive again, was lost and is found.”

On the Articles: Article XVIII

The Third Sunday after Trinity

O LORD, we beseech thee mercifully to hear us; and grant that we, to whom thou hast given an hearty desire to pray, may by thy mighty aid be defended and comforted in all dangers and adversities; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

XVIII. Of obtaining eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ
They also are to be had accursed that presume to say, That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of Nature. For holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved.

It is a significant denouement to follow-up Article XVII’s controversial discussion of doctrines of predestination and election, both in terms of Article XVII’s complexity and the controversial nature of its theology and how it’s been interpreted over the years.

This Article essentially affirms two essential points. First, that salvation is not found in another law or sect of belief, even if it is framed in light of God’s law. Second, it claims that Holy Scriptures say that salvation is found only in the name of Christ. The second point is easiest to explore, and builds up the second.

The Gospels provide ample passages that prove salvation is found only through Christ. St Jn 3. 36 reads, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.” Again in St John’s Gospel goes on to record Christ’s own words saying, “I am in the way, and the trust, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me,” (St Jn 14. 6). In the comfortable words read during every Eucharist in the Book of Common Prayer we read St Paul’s words, “This is a true saying, and worthy of all to be received, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.” The completion of that passage includes the words, “and not only for our own sins, but for the sins of the whole world.” There are many other passages that continue to make clear that salvation is found in Christ.

The first proposition on salvation outside of the Church is proved by the Scriptural witness as well. St Peter, at Pentecost, was filled with the Holy Spirit and preached to the masses. They were cut to the heart, by his preaching and asked what they must do to be saved. St Peter responded simply, “Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,” (Acts 2. 38). This suggests that failing to repent and be baptised in the name of Christ will preclude one from salvation.

In the Early Church, this was completely understood. There was a clear consensus in the mind of the Fathers that salvation was found in the name of Christ and his Church. From Origen, “Let no one deceive himself; out of this house [the Church], no one is saved.” St Cyprian of Carthage similarly wrote, “Whoever is separated from the Church is separated from the promise of the Church; that if a man have not the Church for his mother, he hath not God for his father; and that as to be saved from the deluge it was needful to be in the ark, so to escape now we must be in the Church.” Pelagian heresy first raised concern over the question of salvation without Baptism, but again it can be seen that among the Fathers there was a consensus that salvation was found in Baptism, which is to say in Christ, given that Baptism represented adoption into sonship through the merits of Christ. St Cyril of Jerusalem argued that, “No one can be saved without baptism except the martyrs.” This theology was mirrored by many other fathers including most notably St Augustine of Hippo who was the great opponent of the Pelagian heretics. In Thomas Cranmer’s Catechism of 1548, his commentary on this article notes that, “if we have heathen parents and die without baptism, we should be damned everlastingly.”

This clear view also lines up with Article XIII on the role of works, which again affirms that salvation cannot be purchased through good deeds. It is not our adherence to the law in which salvation is found, because just as we are justified by faith in Christ (Article XI), our salvation is found in Christ and not in our own works, which properly are viewed as acts processing from our saving faith in Christ, the necessary results of true and lively belief that Christ is our saviour and thus that we are to follow the commandments he has given us and the teachings of his Father commended to us in the Holy Scriptures.

Given this overall clarity of believe in Scripture, the traditional teachings and understanding of the Church and also consistency with the other Articles of Religion, the question then becomes why was this article in particular written? Taking in its historic context, it is a firm statement of belief that opposes compromise that was being put forth.

The Roman Catholic Church in particular was extremely vehement in upholding these teachings, more so than the continental protestants. Rome eventually pushed in the direction of saying not only was there no salvation to be found outside of Christ, but also no salvation to be found outside of Christ’s visible Church, which Rome claimed to be exclusively. This led to consternation and arguments with reformers who attacked Rome’s claim as being an attack on Christ himself. In England, then, there were those who argued at that time that in order to avoid the conflicts that raged on the continent and which had also been visible during various turmoils in England, much of the English Church’s doctrines should be relativized. It is less important to embody the fullness of doctrines than to just be heading generally in the right direction of love and fellowship, they would argue. This Article helps to counter that by stating quite firmly that these doctrines are absolute and rooted in Scripture from which the authority of these Articles is derived.

It is interesting that today, these tendencies towards relativism have become more prominent. As Christians are increasingly exposed to more multi-cultural contexts, particularly in the developed Western world, there is a desire to say, “well my Muslim neighbour is a good person. Surely he will find salvation.” While God may do whatever he likes, his revealed and authoritative truth as we know it says that we cannot affirm there is salvation to be had apart from Christ and the Church. In the same way, this Article reminds us that Anglicanism does deal in absolute doctrines. The Church has authority to declare absolute truths when they are rooted in Scripture. Relativists today are keen to suggest that Anglicanism does not hold to absolute doctrines. It is not just Article VI on the sufficiency of Holy Scripture or Article XX on the Authority of the Church that respond to such suggestions, but the whole of the Thirty-Nine Articles which uphold the authority of Scripture and the absoluteness of Christian doctrine and belief.

On the Articles: Article XVII

The Second Sunday after Trinity 

O LORD, who never failest to help and govern them whom thou dost bring up in thy stedfast fear and love: Keep us, we beseech thee, under the protection of thy good providence, and make us to have a perpetual fear and love of thy holy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

XVII. 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 hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to God’s purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be 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 to us 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.

Predestination. Article XVII is the longest and perhaps most linguistically complex of the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. It also deals with an extremely important issue, but due to the complexity, it does so in a way which is often misunderstood and misinterpreted, because it doesn’t necessarily use terms in the same way they were being used by Continental Reformers.

The Article begins with the statement “Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God. The entire first paragraph goes on to expand this understanding of God’s promises and grace offered through Christ to his chosen people. There are many themes elucidated that correspond quite strictly with St Paul’s writings in Romans 8.

From the outset, therefore, two things are clear. A form of predestination is supported, and that it is a Scriptural version of predestination. There are several, many of which remain familiar today and others of which are less common.

The form many people are familiar with today is the Calvinist view of predestination by which God pre-selected only a few for salvation and that this salvic grace is irresistible. This doctrine, however, seems on its merits to fall afoul both of Holy Scripture (I Tm 2. 4) and also of existing Anglican Formularies (Article XI On Free Will and also the Homily on Justification mentioned both in Article XI and in Article XXXV).

Arminius countered Calvinist doctrine with his own form of predestination in which still only some are saved, but that this is the result merely of God’s foreknowledge. By his sovereignty he knows how individuals will respond and therefore some are saved and others are not. This doctrine can be viewed to be far more consistent with the Holy Scriptures and with the Articles.

John Locke, the English philosopher, much later elucidated a form of predestination which had previously been supported by a small group of others that much like the nation of Israel was God’s Elect in the Old Testament, God worked through elect nations in the New Testament. This is a minority view, however, and it becomes clear that such a doctrine could only be developed at the earliest after the Edict of Milan in 313 which legalized Christianity in the Roman Empire, but more accurately could only have been adopted after the conversion of Constantine the Great and the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity. Prior to that time there was no Christian nation, merely Christian believers, primarily in Rome because at the time Rome was the known world. This doctrine also seems inconsistent with the Scriptures, which clearly state a far more personal relationship with God. We are adopted into Christ, Christ died to save sinners, not nations (Rm 8. 15; I Tm 1. 15).

Ecclesiastical Election is a doctrine which again becomes more prima facie consistent both with Holy Scripture and with the Articles. It suggests that the Elect are the Body of Christ, entry into which is through Baptism by water and the Spirit. God desires that all be saved, but it is only those who respond in faith who are predestined to eternal life by Christ’s atoning sacrifice.

There are a number of other minor doctrines of election and predestination, but their use is far more limited than the Calvinist doctrines which tend to be most commonly referred to in relation to predestination today.

While there is no clear elucidation of this doctrine among the Fathers, nor is there necessarily one mind on the matter throughout the fathers, a number of them do seem to favour a notion of God’s elect as his Church. As Fr EH Browne noted in his Exposition of the Thirty Nine Articles of Religion, in exploring the works of St Clement of Rome, St Ignatius of Antioch, St Justin the Martyr and Philosopher, St Clement of Alexandria and Origen himself, in any of their works touching on the issues of election and predestination, “there is no marked trace of any of the three schemes which have been designated respectively as Calvinism, Arminianism, or Nationalism.” And going further he notes that while there was no unanimity on election and predestination itself, there was far greater concurrence on doctrines such as that of free will which would discount any doctrine of predestination which relies on the Calvinist concept of irresistible grace.

It seems then the first section of this Article speaks to a form of election and predestination that is Ecclesiatical in nature: God’s elect in the new covenant are the members of Christ’s Church.

The second section of the Article goers on to point out that this doctrine is helpful to those who are part of the Elect. It is a sweet and pleasant comfort to a Christian to know they are saved and the benefits of God’s mercy and adoption that they have received, but it is not, the Article suggests, helpful to go to someone who has yet to come to faith and condemn them through this doctrine. Essentially, it says, that it is not God’s way to simply go up to a non-believer and tell them they are going to hell, because, as the Article says, such an action will be used by the devil to, “thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.” Here, wretchlessness should be interpreted as carelessness, a sense of nihilist existentialism by which they have no free will over their lives and no matter what they do they cannot be saved. This is consistent with many modern evangelists who have noted that not only is there a time and place for such discussions, but also that it is the complete opposite of the model of evangelism provided by Christ himself, as suggested by Rev Dr Glen Taylor in reference to Christ’s appearance to the Apostles in St Luke 24. This Article has been used by some more Reform minded Anglicans to suggest a more Calvinist interpretation of the Article, as this warning mirrors a sermon given by Martin Bucer in Cambridge the year before Cranmer composed this Article, however it again seems on the whole to simply show that Cranmer was happy to borrow concept from the Continental reformers when their words and language were consistent with Holy Scripture, but the doctrines set forth in the Articles were far more consistent with the broader goal of restoring the English Church to the faith and order of the Early Church, under the authority of Holy Scripture.

Finally, the third section of the Article again provides an Anglican reminder of the primacy of Holy Scripture. It tells us that God’s promises must be understood not through human will, but through God’s word. It also reminds us of the importance of obedience to God’s will laid out in his Word. For some who follow Calvinist doctrines of double predestination (the logical conclusion that if some are destined to salvation then all others must be destined to condemnation) there is no reason to evangelize and no matter how one lives, one is either saved or not and no act of individual will can affect it.

Ultimately this article is long and confusing, but when taken in the context of Holy Scripture and seen through the lense of the Fathers, it seems more  clearly to articulate a doctrine that reinforces our salvation in Christ, adoption through Baptism into the family of God, and God’s promises assuredly given through Holy Scripture.