The Church of England is Protestant, Reformed & Calvinistic (Boultbee, 47-54, Article VI

The Church of England is Protestant, Reformed & Calvinistic. This is not a heavy-weight systematic, but would be a suitable undergraduate text-book or a text-book for an adult-group study. Regarding Article VI and the Articles in general, Boultbee summarizes: "They may also decide whether Protestantism is a bare negation or the assertion of a living principle, the absolute supremacy of the Word of God, and the right of all men to search that Word. Other Articles protest against individual Roman errors. This Article is the fundamental one which stamps the Church of England as essentially PROTESTANT." As Anglicans, we are Anglo-Reformed.

Thomas Pownal Boultbee’s Introduction to the Theology of the Church of England: Thirty-nine Articles book is free and downloadable at:
http://books.google.com/books?id=1tECAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=boultbee&hl=en&ei=PV3jTLT6GIP88Aavu-mEDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
Page 47-51, Article VI and the Sufficiency, Authority and Inspiration of Canonical Scriptures. A few classics from Boultbee, pp.52-54, “It is unnecessary to refer to the Confessions of other Protestant Churches, as they are notoriously one with the English Church on this head…Other Articles protest against individual Roman errors. This Article is the fundamental one which stamps the Church of England as essentially PROTESTANT.

But the Church of the first three centuries never pronounced, or had an opportunity of pronouncing, its judgment on the subject. Hence the historical demonstration of the Canon of Scripture consists, in point of fact, of a collection of the testimony of individual divines and Churches to the reception of the several books from the first age of Christianity downwards. The hesitation of some as to a few of the books has been always justly thought to give the greater value to the final and all but general consent of the whole body. So that the less learned reader may rest satisfied with the result briefly, and somewhat boldly, expressed in our Article, that there has been unanimity from the first as to the authority of every portion of Holy Scripture. Not that every book came at once into the possession of every individual Church with full evidence as to its origin. But that after due communication of the several Churches which possessed the original apostolic writings, the whole Church came to a complete and early agreement; and the hesitation which lingered here or there was very partial, arose out of imperfect information, and before long merged in the general consent. Paley remarks upon this: “When that diversity of opinion which prevailed, and prevails among Christians in other points, is considered, their concurrence in the Canon of Scripture is remarkable, and of great weight, especially as it seems to have been the result of private and free enquiry.”
This subject may be illustrated by the following precept of Augustine:—“In Canonical Scriptures you must follow the judgment of the majority of Churches. You will prefer those received by all Catholic Churches to those which are not received by some; but in those which are not universally received, you will prefer those which the major and graver part receive to those which are received by fewer Churches” De Doctrina Christiana, ii. 8.

The inspiration of Holy Scripture might have naturally found a place among the statements of this Article. But there was no controversy on this head at the time of the Reformation, and thus all reference to it was omitted. It is, however, necessarily implied and assumed throughout the Articles. In particular, the expression “God's word written” (Art. XX.) may be noted.

This Article has been considerably altered from the Fifth Article of 1552, which asserted the sufficiency of Holy Scripture for salvation, but did not enumerate or define the Canonical books. The clause which defines the Canonical books was derived from the Wurtemburg Confession in 1563.

1. Texts which imply or assert the Inspiration of Scripture such as these:

“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim. iii. 16).

“Which He promised afore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures” (Rom. i. 2).

“The oracles of God” (Rom. iii. 2).

“One jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matt. v. 18).

“The Scripture cannot be broken “ (John x. 35).

“In the words which the Holy Ghost teacheth” (1 Cor. ii. 13).

“The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His word was in my tongue” (2 Sam. xxiii. 2).

“Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth” (Jer. i. 9).

“Which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before” (Acts i. 16).

“If any man shall add .... and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life,' &c. (Rev. xxii. 18,19).

'No prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation: for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost' (2 Pet. i. 20, 21).

2. Texts appealing to the Scripture as authoritative; for example:

“What things soever the law saith” (Rom. iii. 19).

“What saith the Scripture?” (Rom. iv. 3).

“The Scripture saith” (Rom. ix. 17).

“The Scripture foreseeing” (Gal. iii. 8).

“ That the Scripture might be fulfilled”' (John xix. 28, 36).

“ As the Scripture hath said” (John vii. 38).

'This Scripture must needs have been fulfilled which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before" (Acts i. 16)

"Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith" (Heb. iii. 7).

"David himself said by the Holy Ghost" (Mark xii. 36).

3. Forms perpetually recurring, such as these:

"Thus saith the Lord;" "The Lord hath spoken;" "The voice of the Lord;" "The word of the Lord by the mouth of;"&c.

4. Duties which we owe to the Scripture. Search the Scriptures (John v. 39). Meditation therein (Ps. cxix. 15). Love (Ps. cxix. 97). Obedience (Rom. xvi. 26). They must be taught (Deut vi. 7). They must be used against our spiritual enemies (Eph.vi. 17).

5. Effects of Scripture on the Believer. It makes wise unto salvation (2 Tim. iii. 15). It perfects, thoroughly furnishing unto all good works (2 Tim. iii. 17).

It converts the soul (1 Pet. i. 23).

It causes growth in grace (1 Pet. ii. 2).

It sanctifies (John xvii. 17).

P.52, the Roman Sect on Council of Trent, Session 4

The doctrine of the Roman Church on the authority of Scripture is laid down in the decree of the Fourth Session of the Council of Trent. The following extracts contain those portions which bear most closely on the present subject.

The Council declared that “the truth and discipline” given by Christ and His Apostles “are contained in books written and in unwritten traditions, which having been received from the mouth of Christ Himself by the Apostles, or at the dictation of the Holy Ghost from the Apostles themselves, and transmitted as it were by hand, have come down to us.” That the Council, therefore, “following the example of the Orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates with equal pious affection the books both of the Old and New Testament, and the traditions themselves, whether pertaining to faith or manners, as having been orally dictated by Christ or by the Holy Ghost, and preserved by continuous succession in the Church Catholic.” [Ed. Emphasis added. A boatload of accretions, contradictions, confusions and chaos in doctrine, worship and piety have been imported.]

With respect to the use of the Bible by private persons, the Council decreed (De libris prohibitis) that "he who shall presume to read or to have a Bible without a license, may not receive absolution until he has surrendered the Bible." Much stronger expressions have been used by individual popes or divines, but the above is sufficient as setting forth the unquestionable law of the Roman Church. [Ed. Emhasis added. This Papist restraint--yeah, chokehold--was lifted in the late 20th century. In this scribe’s time, however, I well recall the Papist stronghold on some friends re: Bibles. As a lad, about age seven, I crossed the street after church, went into a Papist synagogue with my Bible in hand to meet my friend, George. The Papist priest took it from me. As a lad, it scared me. My father went and reconfiscated it from the Vicar of Satan, the Priest.]

Page 53-54, The English Church. Boultbee avoids, with Hooker, the “precisionism” of some Puritan RPW-types that appear to “regulate” circumstances and inessentials. A few classics from Boultbee, found below. “It is unnecessary to refer to the Confessions of other Protestant Churches, as they are notoriously one with the English Church on this head…Other Articles protest against individual Roman errors. This Article is the fundamental one which stamps the Church of England as essentially PROTESTANT.

This Article draws a great distinction between things necessary for salvation, and things practically beneficial, but not essential. This distinction is the main subject of the second book of Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity. He defends it against some extreme Puritans, who demanded Scripture authority for every act of life and for all the minutest matters of Church order. The concluding paragraph of that book draws the distinguishing line with admirable clearness:—“Two opinions there are concerning sufficiency of Holy Scripture, each extremely opposite unto the other, and both repugnant unto truth. The schools of Rome teach Scripture to be insufficient, as if, except traditions were added, it did not contain all revealed and supernatural truth, which absolutely is necessary for the children of men in this life to know, that they may in the next be saved. Others, justly condemning this opinion, grow likewise unto a dangerous extremity, as if Scripture did not only contain all things in that kind necessary, but all things simply, and in such sort, that to do anything according to any other law were not only unnecessary, but even opposite unto salvation, unlawful, and sinful. Whatsoever is spoken of God, or things appertaining to God, otherwise than the truth is, though it seem an honour, it is an injury. And as incredible praises given unto men do often abate and impair the credit of their deserved commendation; so we must likewise take great heed, lest, in attributing unto Scripture more than it can have, the incredibility of that do cause even those things which it hath most abundantly to be less reverently esteemed.”

The sufficiency of Holy Scripture for salvation (as taught in this Article) was a universal article of faith in the first four centuries. This has been abundantly demonstrated by overwhelming collections of quotations from all the primitive writers. The citations in Paley's Evidences, chap. ix. §§ 1, 9, are naturally those which first come before the attention of the student. And these will give him a fair impression as to the usual manner in which the authority and use of the Holy Scripture are handled by the Fathers. But a complete and masterly investigation of this subject will be found in the tenth chapter of the Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, by the late Dean Goode. The general result of that investigation may be summed up in the following well-known quotation from Augustine:—“If it is established by the clear authority of the divine Scriptures, those I mean that are called Canonical in the Church, it is to be believed without any doubt. But other witnesses or testimonies which are used to persuade you to believe anything, you may believe or not, just as you shall see that they have or have not any weight giving them a just claim to your confidence.” Ad Paulin Ep. 147.

For a further declaration of the mind of the Church of England on this subject the First Homily may be consulted. It is in entire harmony with this Article, as may be inferred from the following citation :—“Let us diligently search for the well of life in the books of the Old and New Testament, and not run to the stinking puddles of men's traditions, devised by men's imaginations for our justification and salvation.”

It is unnecessary to refer to the Confessions of other Protestant Churches, as they are notoriously one with the English Church on this head. Much obloquy has been thrown on the word Protestant of late, as if it were a mere negation implying no positive truth. It may, therefore, be useful as well as interesting to quote the following passage from the original Protest presented to the diet at Spires, 1529, by the Lutheran princes of Germany, from which the name Protestant was derived :—“Seeing that there is no sure doctrine but such as is conformable to the Word of God; that the Lord forbids the teaching of any other doctrine; that each text of the Holy Scripture ought to be explained by other and clearer texts; and that this holy book is, in all things necessary for the Christian, easy of understanding, and calculated to scatter the darkness; we are resolved, by the grace of God, to maintain the pure and exclusive teaching of His only Word, such as it is contained in the Biblical books of the Old and New Testament, without adding anything thereto that may be contrary to it. This Word is the only truth; it is the sure rule of all doctrine and of all life, and can never fail or deceive us. He who builds on this foundation shall stand against all the powers of hell, whilst all the human vanities that are set up against it shall fall before the face of God [emphasis added].

“For these reasons we earnestly entreat you to weigh carefully our grievances and our motives. If you do not yield to our request, we PROTEST by these presents before God, our only Creator, Preserver, Redeemer, and Saviour, and who will one day be our Judge, as well as before all men and all creatures, that we, for us and our people, neither consent nor adhere in any manner whatsoever to the proposed decree, in anything that is contrary to God, to His Holy Word, to our right conscience, to the salvation of our souls, and to the last decree of Spires.” [This decree had given liberty of worship to each German State.]

Those who read this noble Protest and compare the doctrines of the Church of England and the Church of Rome on the rule of faith, as given above, can say whether the Church of England is Protestant or no. They may also decide whether Protestantism is a bare negation or the assertion of a living principle, the absolute supremacy of the Word of God, and the right of all men to search that Word. Other Articles protest against individual Roman errors. This Article is the fundamental one which stamps the Church of England as essentially PROTESTANT [emphasis added].

For others, see:
Boultbee (i-xix): Thirty-nine Articles
http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2010/11/boultbee-i-xix-protestand-reformed.html

Boultbee (i-pg.12): Thirty-nine Articles
http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2010/11/boultbee-i-pg12-thirty-nine-articles.html

Boultbee (12-51): Thirty-nine Articles
http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2010/11/boultbee-12-51-reformed-theology-of.html

Boultbee (12-51): Reformed Theology of the Church of England: Thirty-nine Articles

An Introduction to the theology of the Church of England, in an exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England by Thomas Pownall Boultbee (London: Longmans, Green & Co., n.d.)

In general, this book, thus far, is unremarkable, except at points. We are not sure of his intended audience, a factor that governs the content. A college level class? A graduate or doctoral level? In general, it is orthodox, classical and close to the Articles of Religion. As a stand-alone text, it is unsuitable for a graduate level theological student. As such, however, it surely stands as a stern rebuke to Anglican liberalism.

Boultbee’s book is free and downloadable at:
http://books.google.com/books?id=1tECAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=boultbee&hl=en&ei=PV3jTLT6GIP88Aavu-mEDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

For our comments on Boultbee (i-xix): Thirty-nine Article, see:
http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2010/11/boultbee-i-xix-protestand-reformed.html

For our comments on Boultbee (xxi-pg.12): Thirty-nine Articles
http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2010/11/boultbee-i-pg12-thirty-nine-articles.html

What we offer below are isolated comments and quotes on Boultbee, 12-51.

Pg.12ff, gives a standard and orthodox treatment of the Trinity, suitable for beginners and as a handbook for—perhaps—a first or second-year college student. Of interest, historically, is pg.14.

The Trinitarian controversy in the Church of England belonged chiefly to the commencement of the eighteenth century. In 1685 the celebrated work of Bishop Bull appeared, the Defensio Fidei Niceni. It is a learned investigation of the opinions of the fathers of the first three centuries on the doctrine of the Trinity. It remains the standard work on that part of the subject. Bishop Bull died in 1709, and the controversy took another form, mainly in consequence of the publications of Dr. Samuel Clarke, which were considered to be a revival of Arian opinions. This led to the valuable treatises of Waterland on the Trinity; they appeared in succession for some years, and remain as a copious storehouse of theology on the various points of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.

Pg. 16, Boultbee will continuously invoked John Pearson’s classic on the Creeds. Pearson on the Creed is recognizably a classic of scholarship, albeit so little known.

For reasons already stated, we shall again recur to 'Pearson on the Creed.'

Pg. 22ff. Fairly standard material re: Christ, His Person, natures, incarnation and death. Not worth citing anything.

Pg. 26, do we have an odious Arminian before us? We believe we do. Boultbee needs to back up and do more work on theology proper and the divine attributes. We will soon see with Article 17.

But if all this is undeniable, it is manifest that great caution is needed in stating the doctrine of the atonement. It is in theology, as a science, as it is in other sciences. In astronomy the results of multitudinous observations give certain facts, which must be all accounted for and included in any theory of the science which claims acceptance. In theblogy each passage of Scripture is a fact; and the undoubtedly ascertained qualities of man's nature are other facts. Any doctrinal theory, in order to be true, must unite in itself, and take account of, all these facts. If itf ails to unite them (within those limits which are possible to man), it is not a true doctrine. If the results of our induction, carefully conducted, lead to two apparently conflicting doctrines, it does not follow of necessity that either is false. For example, the free-will of man, to such an extent at least as to make him responsible, is an unquestionable fact of Scripture and experience. The foreknowledge of God, and His universal sovereignty, are necessary deductions of reason and clear assertions of Scripture. Perfectly to reconcile these with man's free-will may be impossible. This need not distress us when we have carefully followed our facts to the verge of the infinite or the unknown. There we must leave them, and we need have little difficulty in feeling assured that the missing facts which would reconcile the apparent contradictions in our deductions lie within, and probably not many steps within, the dark margin it which we pause.

Pg. 37, some helpful notes on the alteration of the Creed and double procession, as well as corruption in the Eastern and Western branches. Food for thought.

The history of this doctrine may be briefly recapitulated. The original form of the Nicene, or rather the Constantinopolitan, Creed declared that the Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father. At the close of the sixth century the words and from the Son were added by the Provincial Council of Toledo, in Spain. Thence the clause appears to have gradually found its way into Gaul, in portions of which kindred Gothic races were settled. Nearly two hundred years afterwards, this dogma of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son, as well as from the Father, found a strenuous supporter in Charlemagne. He called a council of his own bishops at Frankfort, in which this doctrine was affirmed, and the Pope was afterwards addressed on the subject of the defect of the Creed on this important matter. The Pope declined to make any change in the Creed. Nor, so far as can be clearly ascertained, was the alteration ever made officially and authoritatively. Gradually and stealthily the change spread. About the year 1014 it had established itself in Rome, and was adopted in the Pontifical services.

The opposition called forth in the Eastern Church is well known. The presumption of the Western portion of the Church in venturing to alter the Creed confirmed by all the great General Councils, added to the assumptions of the Pope, made the great schism between the East and the West which has never been closed. It has, perhaps, been a divine mercy that, in the midst of so general a corruption of Christian doctrine, the Papal tyranny should have thus received a check ; and that a perpetual protest should have been made against it by a Church scarcely purer than itself in point of doctrine.

Nothing could well be more unsatisfactory than the mode in which this additional, clause found its way into the Creed. Nevertheless we see that it is distinctly affirmed by the Church of England; and the fact of its truth, or otherwise, is quite distinct from any particular time or mode of its promulgation.

Pg. 47ff. Unremarkable comments, except for an interesting and classical view of Scriptures.

THE PROOF FROM SCRIPTURE.

Passages bearing on this Article may be arranged in the following manner:—

1. Texts which imply or assert the Inspiration of Scripture,
such as these :

'All Scripture is given by inspiration of God' (2 Tim. iii. 16).
' Which He promised afore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures' (Rom. i. 2).
' The oracles of God' (Rom. iii. 2).
' One jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled' (Matt. v. 18).
' The Scripture cannot be broken ' (John x. 35).
' In the words which the Holy Ghost teacheth ' (1 Cor. ii. 13).
' The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His word was in my tongue' (2 Sam. xxiii. 2).
' Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth' (Jer. i. 9).
' Which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before' (Acts i. 16).
' If any man shall add, .... and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out ofthe book of life,' &c. (Rev. xxii. 18,19).
' No prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation : for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man : but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost' (2 Pet. i. 20, 21).

2. Texts appealing to the Scripture as authoritative; for
example:

' What things soever the law saith ' (Rom. iii. 19).
' What saith the Scripture ? ' (Rom. iv. 3).
' The Scripture saith' (Rom. ix. 17).
' The Scripture foreseeing' (Gal. iii. 8).
` That the Scripture might be fulfilled ' (John xix. 28, 36).
` As the Scripture hath said ' (John vii. 38).
' This Scripture must needs have been fulfilled which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before ' (Acts i. 16) ' Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith' (Heb. iii. 7). ' David himself said by the Holy Ghost' (Mark xii. 36).

3. Forms perpetually recurring, such as these :
`Thus saith the Lord;' ' The Lord hath spoken; ' ' The voice of the Lord;' ' The word of the Lord by the mouth of;' &c.

4. Duties which we owe to the Scripture. Search the Scriptures (John v. 39). Meditation therein (Ps. cxix. 15). Love (Ps. cxix. 97). Obedience (Rom. xvi. 26). They must be taught (Deut vi. 7). They must be used against our spiritual enemies (Eph.vi. 17).
5. Effects of Scripture on the Believer. It makes wise unto salvation (2 Tim. iii. 15). It perfects, thoroughly furnishing unto all good works (2 Tim. iii. 17).
It converts the soul (1 Pet. i. 23).
It causes growth in grace (1 Pet. ii. 2).
It sanctifies (John xvii. 17).

Boultbee (i-pg.12): Thirty-nine Articles

An introduction to the theology of the Church of England, in an exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England by Thomas Pownall Boultbee (London: Longmans, Green & Co., n.d.)

For part one, i-xix, see:
http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2010/11/boultbee-i-xix-protestand-reformed.html

Part two follows.

Pg .1, no wonder the Orthodox, Romanists and Anglo-Romewardizers would not not read Boultbee.

Part IV. (Arts. XIX.-XXXIV.) We now come to the Church which holds these doctrines. It is defined as consisting of an assembly of faithful men, possessing the pure word of God and the sacraments complete in all essentials. But the most famous individual churches have not been exempt from serious error. The Church may appoint rites, and can judge in controversy, subject to the supreme authority of Scripture. But even General Councils, being composed of fallible men, have no collective infallibility, and are subject to the authority of Scripture. In particular, purgatory, indulgences, saint and image worship, are errors which have prevailed, contrary to the Word of God.

The ministers of the Church ought to be lawfully appointed, and the services performed in the vulgar tongue.

The nature and number of the sacraments of Christ are next set forth; the five Romish sacraments are repudiated; and the exhibition, as distinguished from the use, of the sacraments is rejected. Evil ministers cannot annul that grace which Christ bestows on the faithful in the use of His ordinances. Yet such ministers should receive due ecclesiastical discipline.
The efficacy of Baptism follows, and the privilege of infants to receive it. The nature of the communion of Christ's body and blood in the Lord's Supper is described; and all participation of Christ by those who have not! living faith is denied. To partake of the Cup as well as the Bread is the right of the laity. Christ cannot be offered again in the Eucharist, for His sacrifice is complete and, sufficient. The clergy have full liberty to marry. Excommunicated persons ought to be avoided. Rites and ceremonies may vary according to the convenience of national Churches. But private persons ought not to disobey them.

Pg. 2, standard material, but not very enlightening, not very deep, not very challenging and quite substandard the Westminster Confession of Faith.

NOTES ON THE TEXT OF ARTICLE I.

Comparing the Latin with the English text, we may notice the following expressions:—
Without body : Latin, incorporeus. Without parts : Latin impartibilis, i.e. insusceptible of division into parts. Without passions : Latin, impassibilis, i.e. incapable of suffering. Infinite : Latin, immense, immeasurable.

This Article remains as it was in the original formula of 1552.

It has been chiefly derived from Art. I. of the Augsburg -Confession, as may be seen from the following quotation from that document:—

Pg. 12, amidst the other rather banal and un-developed observations by Boultbee, an historical note on Trinitarianism:

The Trinitarian controversy in the Church of England belonged chiefly to the commencement of the eighteenth century. In 1685 the celebrated work of Bishop Bull appeared, the Defensio Fidei Niceni. It is a learned investigation of the opinions of the fathers of the first three centuries on the doctrine of the Trinity. It remains the standard work on that part of the subject. Bishop Bull died in 1709, and the controversy took another form, mainly in consequence of the publications of Dr. Samuel Clarke, which were considered to be a revival of Arian opinions. This led to the valuable treatises of Waterland on the Trinity; they appeared in succession for some years, and remain as a copious storehouse of theology on the various points of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.

Boultbee (i-xix): Protestant-Reformed Theology of the Church of England

An introduction to the theology of the Church of England, in an Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England by Thomas Pownall Boultbee (London: Longmans, Green & Co., n.d.)

http://books.google.com/books?id=1tECAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=boultbee&hl=en&ei=PV3jTLT6GIP88Aavu-mEDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
P.x, Boultbee refers to “our great Reformation divines,” language that will not be heard in American Anglicanism or Episcopalianism. ACNA, Reformation divines? C o E divines, Reformation divines? David Virtue at http://www.virtueonline.org/, the Voice of Orthodox Anglicans (small chance)?

It is impossible, without a thoughtful study of their theological phraseology and general system, to understand rightly the true position of those ancient writers. Even our own Hooker may be, and has often been, misunderstood on some important points from want of this. Much more must this be the case when medieval or modern theological glossaries are used to interpret the meaning of the earliest Christian writers. The Author has no misgivings as to the general result of that meaning. Our great Reformation divines were not mere men of indices and cyclopedias. They wrought out their systems by painful and laborious study of the Scriptures and the early authors. The mind and intent of primitive writers were familiar to them, and their appeal to antiquity was unwavering and decisive. Modern criticism has produced very little change in the general position as they left it. An excrescence, an inaccuracy, a spurious document, may have been lopped off here or there ; but, substantially, the patristic bearing of the main controversies remains where our Reformers believed it to lie.

Pg. xiv, the Thirty-nine Articles are initially rooted in Lutheranism, a nasty little fact that is brute and ugly to Anglo-Catholics, Orthodox ecumenists, American ecumenists, and modern day Latitudinarians.

The earliest doctrinal formulary of a Reformed Church is that known as ' the Confession of Augsburg.' It was the work of Melanchthon, revised by Luther and other divines, and was presented to the Diet at Augsburg in 1530. To a great extent this suggested the several Confessions of Faith published by different Reformed National Churches in that century. But in the case of the English Church it had a more direct influence. Our Articles have borrowed from it some considerable portion of their theological statements. It may be found at length, together with other similar documents, in the ' Sylloge Confessionum,' published at Oxford.
We may notice here the Wurtemberg Confession, which belongs to the same school, and was consulted in the formation of our Articles. It was intended for presentation to the Council of Trent in 1552, by the ambassadors of Wurtemberg, but the Council refused to hear them.

Pg. 16, Cranmer envisions a “Reformed” and Protestant vision, another brute fact for revisionists. Cranmer was consulting with Mr. Jean Calvin about this. Cranmer solicited Calvin's involvement for a pan-Reformation council.

The death of Henry in 1547 introduces us to another stage of the Reformation. Cranmer still adhered to his long cherished plan of a scheme of doctrine which should embrace the whole of the Reformed Church. But from various causes his efforts failed. Perhaps, among other reasons, the fact that the Archbishop abandoned the idea of the corporal presence, whether under the transubstantiation or consubstantiation theory, proved a serious impediment to union with Lutheran divines in such a formulary. There appears to have been a collection of Articles of Religion drawn up by Cranmer as early as 1549. What this may have been is unknown, but it may probably have served as the basis of the Forty-two Articles. In 1551 the Archbishop was directed by the Privy Council to frame a book of Articles of Religion, for the preserving and maintaining peace and unity of doctrine in this Church, that being finished they might be set forth by public authority. This was done, and the Articles were sent for inspection to some other bishops, and to other eminent persons. The Articles, forty-two in number, were finally issued under the authority of a royal mandate in 1553. This document is accordingly referred to by Hardwick as the Articles of 1553.

Pg. xix, the Articles arranged. Note the Reformed and Protestant character. This bilges the amorphous answers afoot in the ACNA. It's almost as if this is a "family secret," or, an old Uncle Toby to be kept in the closet. Take note of the Protestant character here.

Part I. (Arts. I.-V.) treats of the nature of the Deity in this order. The essential attributes of God, and His mode of existence in three Persons. The Deity, incarnation, sufferings, and death of Christ for sin. The descent of Christ into hell; His resurrection, and ascension, and the future judgment. The Deity and Personality of the Holy Ghost.

Part II. (Arts. VI.-VIII.) treats of the rule of faith thus. The sole authority of Holy Scripture in matters of faith is asserted. The relation of the Old Testament to the New, and the degree of obligation of the Mosaic law, are set forth. The three Creeds are accepted, but are denied any authority independent of Holy Scripture.

Part III. (Arts. IX.-XVIII.) The basis of doctrinal authority having been laid down, the main doctrines of man's salvation are next defined in this order. The lost condition of man by nature is described, and it is denied that he is able to turn to God without preventing grace, or to do what is pleasing to God without co-operating grace. It is then declared that man can only be accounted righteous before God for the merits of Christ, and that faith only is the grace regarded by God in thus justifying the sinner; for which purpose God is pleased to isolate it from other graces present with it simultaneously. Thenceforward the good works of the justified sinner surely follow, and are pleasing to God in Christ, although themselves imperfect. But works, although in themselves good, done before justification, are not regarded in Christ, and therefore of necessity retain the sinful taint of the nature from which they come.
Further, however pleasing in God's sight the gracious works of His children in Christ may be, none can render to God by the utmost self-sacrifice more than He has invited us to give. No human being, save the Son of God in His human nature, has escaped the universal corruption. The baptised, on falling into sin, have the way to God still open to them through repentance ; nor can a sinless state be attained on this side the grave.

Next, the original ground of calling, justifying, and sanctifying sinners, is traced in the gracious purpose and predestinating love of God. This ought to call forth in them warm spiritual affections, 'but the opposite doctrine of reprobation is regarded as one calculated to harden the sinner.

Finally, salvation can be obtained through Christ only. There is no other way to God.