An Outline of an Anglican Life (Tarsitano, 1994)/Notes

These are the author’s notes to the ten lessons of An Outline of an Anglican Life. They are far more than bare citations: Tarsitano uses the notes as a running source-book, giving extended discussions of the authorities he cites, the history behind disputed points, and guidance for the teacher preparing candidates for Confirmation. The numbers correspond to the superscript markers in each lesson’s text, where they are shown as references linking back to this page. The notes are arranged by lesson, as printed.

Lesson One: The Church

1.The reference here is to the Second Office of Instruction in the Prayer Book (unless otherwise noted, all BCP page numbers refer to the American Prayer Book of 1928). The two Offices of Instruction were added to the American Prayer Book in 1928, with most of the instructional material derived from the Catechism (BCP 577), which itself first appeared in the English Prayer Book of 1549. The Offices are a liturgical presentation of the Church's Faith and intended for the entire congregation, and not simply those preparing for Confirmation (Massey H. Shepherd, Jr., The Oxford American Prayer Book Commentary [New York: Oxford, 1950], notes on 283, 577-583).

2.Depending on one's religious background, now might be a good time to review John 15:16: "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you . . ." (all biblical quotations King James Version, unless otherwise noted). A persistent American heresy is the notion that we choose what God we will worship in the same way that we choose a political candidate in a civil election. But this view is exactly backwards. God elects the Church, not the other way around. Our membership in the Church is a free gift of God's grace, and not something we can choose for ourselves.

3.The key Scriptural passages to review are 1 Cor. 12:12-31 (explaining Christian membership in the Body of Christ) and 15:35-58 (the comparison of the body of Adam and the Body of Christ). From the length of these discussions it is obvious that St. Paul believed that these were critical issues for understanding the Christian life. It remains essential that modern Christians understand that Christianity is not simply ordinary-humanity-plus. Life in Christ is a whole new life and membership in an entirely new humanity established in Christ's resurrected Body. We were dead in Adam, and now we are alive in Christ.

4.This is a good time to mention some helpful books for researching words in English Bible translations. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) is still the best reference on the history of word usage in English. It gives examples of how words were used in various time periods, including samples of Christian documents (The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary [New York: Oxford, 1971]). For Greek words (spelled in Greek characters), see William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. A translation and adaptation of Walter Bauer's GriechischDeutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur, 4th revised and augmented edition, 1952 (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1957). A good compromise for those who do not read Greek or Hebrew is Spiros Zodhiates, ed., The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible: King James Version (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World, 1984). This vol ume includes transliterations, linguistic commentary, and Strong's Dictionary.

5."In itself the term 'Catholic' simply means 'universal.' It is first applied to the Church in the letters of St. Ignatius, who contrasts the one universal Church with the many local bod ies of which it is composed. Later on, as meaning the Church throughout the world, one in discipline and doctrine, it was used to mark the contrast with heretical bodies that were local, peculiar, and isolated in their views" (E. J. Bicknell, with additional references by H. J. Carpenter, A Theological Introduction to the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England, 2nd. ed. with additional references [London: Longmans, Green, 1946], 810). From Bicknell's discussion of Article XIX: Of the Church (see BCP 606).

6. Extensive commentaries on this Article, as well as all the others, are available in Bicknell (cited above), and in Edward Harold Browne, ed., with notes by J. Williams, An Exposition of the Thirty-Nine Articles (New York: Dutton, 1890); and B. J. Kidd, The Thirty-Nine Articles: Their History and Explanation, 2nd ed. two volumes in one (New York: Gorham, 1905).

7. See Van A. Harvey, A Handbook of Theological Terms (New York: Macmillan, 1964), 166; and F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. (London: Oxford, 1974), 982-983. The Oxford Dictionary is a far more extensive work, but Harvey's Handbook is a very useful small book, and helpful in reading more advanced theology.

8.OED, s.v. "religion"; and Philip Schaff, et. al., eds., A Religious Encyclopaedia: or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, based on the RealEncyklopadie of Herzog, Plitt, and Hauk, in three volumes, revised edition (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1889), s.v. "religion and revelation."

9. Our branch of the Church could not make its commitment to this truth any clearer. See Article XVIII, "Of Obtaining eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ" (BCP 606): They are also 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.

10.See Article XXXIV, "Of the Traditions of the Church" (BCP 609-610). Note this limit on legitimate diversity: "Every particular or nation 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." For a good, brief commentary on the entire article, see Kidd, 251-254.

11.It might be well to recall here that Jesus Christ's human descent from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob unites the Old and New Testament Churches. This unity (and the faithfulness with which God keeps his promises) is the point of the often-ignored family records in Matthew 1 and Luke 3.

12. For a further discussion of division and diversity, and a slightly different view, see C. B. Moss, The Christian Faith: An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology (London: SPCK, 1943; reprint 1957), 268-269.

13.See on unity and schism13.See on unity and schism, including internal and external terminology, Francis J. Hall, The Church and the Sacramental System, The Dogmatic Theology Series (London: Longmans, Green, 1920; republished American Church Union, 1967; reprint, 1973), 173-179.

14.Good brief articles on "Salvation" and "Election" can be found in J. I. Packer, Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1993), s.v. It might also be well to review Article XVII: "Of Predestination and Election," noting the pastoral nature of this doctrine (BCP 606). The Christians of the Middle Ages were often dangled over the abyss of hell throughout their lives, without any assurance of salvation ever being offered them. In contrast, the Bible doctrine articulated here is a gift of real hope in the divine, sovereign, and consistent mercy offered by a faithful and dependable God.

15.The Quadrilateral was adopted by the Episcopal Church's House of Bishops at General Convention, in Chicago, in 1886. It was adopted, with slight emendation by the international Lambeth Conference of Anglican Bishops in 1888. For a brief history and the final text, see David M. Paton, Anglicans and Unity (London: Mowbray, 1962), 8-10. For an older, more extended study see Christian Unity and the Bishops' Declaration, The Church Club Lectures 1895 (New York: E. & J. B. Young, 1895).

16.We would all do well to remember that these bounden (or "obligatory") duties are ours by virtue of our baptism. These are duties we reaffirm as binding on our lives in Confirmation, so that, if we do not intend to perform them, we ought not to be confirmed.

17. For a brief sketch on the Anglican Church, see my pamphlet What is the Anglican Church? (Charlottesville, VA: Carillon, 1994). For a simple, popular history of the Church from an Anglican perspective, see Frank E. Wilson, The Divine Commission: A Sketch of Church History, 5th cd. (New York; Morehouse-Barlow, 1964). For more advanced readers, see J. R. H. Moorman, A History of the Church in England, 3rd ed., reprinted with corrections (London: Adam & Charles Black, 1976). For the history of the Episcopal Church in the United States, see S. D. McConnell, History of the American Episcopal Church: 1600-1915, 11th ed. (Milwaukee, WI: Morehouse, 1934) and William Wilson Manross, A History of the American Episcopal Church (New York: Morehouse, 1935).

18.See, for example, the Preface to the American editions of the Book of Common Prayer, adopted in Philadelphia, in 1789 (BCP v-vi).

19.Besides the historical works mentioned in note 17 (above), a very useful work is Henry Bettenson, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. (London: Oxford, 1963; Oxford Paperback, 1967). Bettenson provides brief selections of key historical documents and helpful commentaries. See, for example, his use of Tacitus to date the Christian mission to Britain (1). These original documents can bring real life to a study of Church history.

20.One serious challenge continuing Churches face is unity. Not surprisingly, the con tinuing movement sprang up in a variety of locations, under a variety of leaders. Given human nature, it is also not surprising that the unification of these efforts was not automatic. Hopeful signs for the future are working arrangements and inter-communion agreements, or negotiations toward such, among the several continuing Churches and the older Reformed Episcopal Church. For example, in 1991, at Deerfield Beach, Florida, the Anglican Church in America was formed of uniting elements from the American Episcopal Church, the Anglican Catholic Church, and others. The Anglican Church in America also participates in an international union of continuing Churches called the Traditional Anglican Communion. For an excellent history of the Reformed Episcopal Church, as well as a study of the difficulties that face church reform movements in general, see Allen C. Guelzo, For the Union of Evangelical Christendom: The Irony of the Reformed Episcopalians (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994).

21.See Helen Gardner, Art through the Ages, rev. Horst de la Croix and Richard Tansey, 5th ed. (New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1970), Chapter Seven: Early Christian and Byzantine Art, 232-273.

22.Helpful books for studying the ceremonial usages of the Anglican Church and their history include: Nelson R. Boss, The Prayer Book Reason Why, 36th ed. (New York: Thomas Whittaker, 1890); Charles Walker, ed., The Ritual Reason Why, 2nd ed. (New York: James Pott, 1868); and Percy Dearmer, The Parson's Handbook, 12 ed. (London: Humphrey Milford, 1932; 3rd impression, 1943). See especially Dearmer's Plate 19 (facing 249), for a charming seventeenth century representation of the altar or holy table as the throne of God and mercy seat, above which abides the shecinah or presence of God. This reminds us that we do not reverence altar or cross, but salute the King who rules over us.

Lesson Two: The Doctrine of God

1. See Stephen Neill, Anglicanism, 3rd ed. (Baltimore, MD: Penguin, 1965), 417-418. The lack of any specifically Anglican doctrine is a more important point (or commitment) than it may seem at first. In much of the rest of the Church today, sectarian appeal to denominational distinctives is often made. But it ought not to be so among us. Anglicans should strive constantly to keep all of the faith, but nothing more than all of the faith that can be found in the Bible. Out of this same spirit of Biblical loyalty, our Puritan brother Richard Baxter (1615-1691) coined the term "mere Christianity," adopted in the twentieth century by C. S. Lewis for his popular introduction to Christian doctrine: Mere Christianity, rev. ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1952; Macmillan Paperbacks, 1960).

2.Browne's commentary on these articles is especially useful and exhaustive. The need for both the Church and the Scriptures as elements of a single, unified Christianity was notably articulated during the Patristic period by Vincent of Lerins in 434, in the so-called "Vincentian Canon": . . . if any one wishes, to detect the deceits of heretics that arise and to avoid their snares and to keep healthy and sound in a healthy faith, we ought, with the Lord's help, to fortify our faith in a twofold manner, firstly, that is, by the authority of God's Law [meaning the Scriptures], then by the traditions of the Catholic Church. . . . Now in the Catholic Church itself we take the greatest care to hold THAT WHICH HAS BEEN BELIEVED EVERYWHERE, ALWAYS, AND BY ALL (Commonitorium, ed. Moxon, Cambridge Patristic Texts, in Bettenson, Documents, 83-85).

3. See A. A. Benton, ed., The Church Cyclopaedia: A Dictionary of Church Doctrine, History, Organization, and Ritual (New York: M. H. Mallory, 1883), s.v., for an extended definition of "dogma." The Cyclopaedia itself is a fascinating window into life in the Episcopal Church prior to its conquest by modernism.

4. Relativism is an environmental given in our society, and we, as well as those to whom we witness our faith, may become uncomfortable when it is challenged. But relativism itself rests on a logical absurdity: the claim that there are (and can be) no absolutes, except for the absolute statement that there are no absolutes. Relativism and its evil twin subjectivism (the claim that there can be no objective knowledge) are word games, and they have their origin in the sin of Adam and Eve: a desire to be our own gods and to avoid the objective moral law of the True God. For many modern examples of the use of relativism as a means of avoiding objective moral standards, see Paul Johnson, Intellectuals (New York: Harper and Row, 1988). Pastors often encounter relativism and subjectivism expressed as "a crisis of faith." This usually occurs when a person knows or suspects that some action (ongoing or planned) is contrary to God's moral law, while still desiring to perform it. The effectiveness of prayer for a strengthened will to obey God at such times indicates the interrelationship between objective knowledge and the will.

5. It might be well here to consider the difference between philosophy and theology. While philosophy may supply some useful methodologies for organizing thought and some valuable technical vocabulary for discussing complex issues (e.g., metaphysics [the study of reality and its sources] or epistemology [the study of knowledge, its sources, and validity]), most philosophy is founded in a love of knowledge for its own sake and the self-sufficiency of the human mind for achieving all knowledge. Theology, on the other hand, admits the possibility of a transcendent God who cannot be contained by either the physical universe or the human mind. Biblical theology, in fact, insists on the insufficiency of the human mind to comprehend God and the absolute need for God's self-revelation to those whom he wishes to know him. Moreover, Biblical theology is founded in a desire to glorify God and to share loving communion with him, rather than an abstract love of knowledge for its own sake. Christians have used philosophy from the beginning, often failing to heed St. Paul's admonition: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (Colossians 2:18). Every system of philosophy has its own set of premises or starting principles, which may in fact conflict with Christian truths. The "School-authors" criticized in Article XIII (BCP 605), for example, were scholastic philosophers who had allowed their desire for consistency within their Aristotelian method to overshadow their loyalty to God's Word Written. Thus, while no one can escape using a philosophical vocabulary, whether he is aware of it or not, Christians must test every idea and method by God's revelation in the Scriptures. For an extended discussion, see S. R. Obitts, "The Christian View of Philosophy," in Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1984); on The Bible Library CD ROM (Oklahoma City, OK: Ellis Enterprises, 1988).

6. Some have attempted to claim, on the basis of the out-of-context misuse of Scriptural passages such as Romans 2:12-16, that there is such a thing as "natural theology" or "natural religion," founded solely in the human study of the natural universe, in opposition to revealed religion and theology founded in the supernatural grace of God. They forget, however, that the creation of the universe itself is an act of God's grace to proclaim his glory; and they for get the present fellenness of created nature in general and of the human intellect in particular. Much preferable is the comparison of general and special revelation. General revelation refers to God's use of the created order to reveal his glory. Special revelation refers to God's specific, personal revelation of himself by his own historical actions, in particular to his chosen people and by the Incarnation, as recorded in the Holy Scriptures. See, for example, "Revelation," in Louis Berkhof, Summary of Christian Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1938; Reprinted, 1986), 13-17. The necessity of revelation for the knowledge of God has been a fixed principle in all orthodox Christian theology. For example, one of the first Christian theologians, St. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-200), wrote: The Lord has taught us that no one can know God unless he is taught by God; that is, without God's help he cannot be known. But it is the will of the Father that he should be known; for he is known by those to whom the Son reveals him. And the Father has revealed the Son to this end that he may be displayed to all through the Son and that those who believe in him and are justified may be received into immortality and eternal refreshment. Now to believe in him is to do his will. Those who do not believe and therefore shun his light he will rightly shut up in the darkness which they themselves have chosen. Therefore the Father has revealed himself to all, making his Word visible to all: and on his part the Word showed the Father and the Son to all since he was seen by all. And thus there is a just judgement of God; for all alike saw, but all did not believe {Adversus Haereses, iv.vi.4, in Henry Bettenson, ed., The Early Christian Fathers (London: Oxford, 1956; Oxford Paperback, 1969), 101.

7. While the use of the imagination as part of a meditation on the Scriptures can be helpful in learning about God as he reveals himself, a free-wheeling imagination is no help at all, and dangerous. As J. I. Packer rightly observes in his excellent and useful book Knowing God: Just as [the Second Commandment] forbids us to manufacture molten images of God so it forbids us to dream up mental images of him. . . . How often do we hear this sort of thing: "I like to think of God as the great Architect (or Mathematician or Artist). " "I don't like to think of God as a Judge; I like to think of him simply as a Father. " We know from experience how often remarks of this kind serve as the prelude to a denial of something that the Bible tells us about God." J. I. Packer, Knowing God, 20th Anniversary Ed. [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993], 47.

8. The first four of the Articles are especially relevant to the topic of the doctrine of God. Bicknell's and, especially, Browne's commentaries are very thorough. For a good sampling of Anglican writing on this subject in the seventeenth century, a key era in Anglican theology, see Section VII: Revealed Theology, in Paul Elmer More and Frank Leslie Cross, eds., Anglicanism: The Thought and Practice of the Church of England, Illustrated from the Religious Literature of the Seventeenth Century (London: SPCK, 1935; repr. 1962), 241-280. For a very accessible presentation by a modern Anglican evangelical see J. I. Packer's Concise Theology.

9. For a brief review of the history and early texts of the Creeds, see Section II: Creeds, Bettenson, Documents, 23-26. For a detailed history of early Christian doctrine and the development of the Creeds, see J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1960); and Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600), The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, vol. 1 (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1971).

10.It is important to remember the danger of abstractions when talking about God. Abstractions are not alive, so they cannot contain the majesty of the Living God. Abstractions give the illusion of definitive statements about God, and a sense of power over him. It sounds as if we have said something definitive when we say, "God is just," as if God must obey some standard of justice apart from himself. But justice is how God acts, what he promises to do, what he commands. We don't know "justice" as an abstraction at all, but as an experience of the Living God. As long as we remember the descriptive, but not definitive, nature of true theological language, we will remain on safe ground. But we must not fell into abstraction, and we must guide our thinking safely away from it.

11.For a good, but very brief, exposition of Trinitarian doctrine, along with basic theo logical errors in conflict with the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity, see J. I Packer, Concise Theology, "Trinity," 40-42. Similarly, see Van Harvey, Handbook of Theological Terms, s.v., 244-247. For a longer exposition and a history of the theological development of the doctrine of the Trinity, see C. B. Moss, The Christian Faith, 35-51. Fora book-length study, see Francis J. Hall, The Trinity, The Dogmatic Theology Series (London: Longmans, Green, 1910; Republished, American Church Union, 1964; 2nd reprint ed., 1968). For an Evangelical Anglican's look at the doctrine of God, see Gerald Bray, The Doctrine of God Contours of Christian Theology series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993).

12.Note carefully, however, that a Biblical statement such as "God is love" cannot be reversed into "love is God," any more than "God is one" can be reversed into "one is God." We encounter here the limits of language, such that a simple declarative sentence should not be confused with an algebraic equation. The sense of St. John's inspired statement is more along the lines of "God is God loving," "God is a loving God," or "God's self-defining action is to love."

Lesson Three: Sin, Salvation & Grace

1. We must all understand clearly that we all are sinners, that sin is not a problem that "other people" have. Consider Romans 3:23, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Consider, too, the sobering truth of 1 John 1:8: "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." Given the laxity of much teaching, some may labor under the misapprehension that the Anglican Church teaches something other than the sinfulness of all men. But this is not so. The American version of Article XXXV "Of the Homilies" (BCP 610) teaches that the Homilies are "an explication of Christian doctrine, and instructive in piety and morals." Thus they are the teaching of this Church. Further, the "Homily of Justification" referred to in Article XI "Of the Justification of Man" is understood to be Archbishop Thomas Cranmer's "Homily of Salvation" (Browne 299). The entire "Homily of Salvation" is worth intense study, but the opening is especially useful here to indicate the unequivocal teaching of this Church: Because all men be sinners and offenders against God, and breakers of his law and commandments, therefore can no man by his own acts, works, and deeds (seem they never so good) be justified and made righteous before God; but every man of necessity is constrained to seek for another righteousness, or justification, to be received at God's own hands, that is to say, the remission, pardon, and forgiveness of his sins and trespasses in such things as he hath offended. And this justification or righteousness, which we so receive by God's mercy and Christ's merits, embraced by faith, is taken, accepted, and allowed of God for our perfect and full justification (Carl S. Meyer, ed., Cranmer's Selected Writings [London: SPCK, 1961], 12).

2.The term "original righteousness" is used in Article IX "Of Original or Birth Sin." Kidd's commentary on this article is especially interesting, especially his discussion of the theological term "total depravity." Bicknell's commentary suffers from his inability to conceive of a literal Adam and Eve. Packer, Concise Theology, 82-84, also offers an excellent, brief discussion of the effects of sin on human nature.

3.What is presented here is called the "trichotomous," or three-part description of human nature: that man is made up of body, soul, and spirit. The competing description among faithful Christians is called the "dichotomous," or two-part position: that man is made up of body and soul, with the soul being itself the spiritual element in man. Of course, we must remember that God did not create man to be taken apart, so that both of these descriptions are only attempts to describe God's creation and are elements of a theological doctrine of man, called an "anthropology." The present author believes that trichotomy is more consistent with a completely biblical anthropology. For a dichotomist position, see Berkhof's Summary of Christian Doctrine, 67-68.

4.The word "sacrament" means originally in Classical Latin "an oath," in particular a military oath (Schaff-Herzog, Encyclopedia, s.v.). Roman soldiers also referred to the "blood ing" of a new member of a legion, and thus his fulfillment of his oath, as a sacramentum. The word appears in the Latin Vulgate as a translation of Greek mysterion, and comes into technical use in the writing of Tertullian, the first major theological writer in Latin. St. Augustine of Hippo gave us our present definition (found, for example, in the Second Office of Instruction, BCP 292) of "a visible sign of an invisible grace" (Schaff-Herzog, s.v.). The number seven, attached to the sacraments by many writers, only comes later as an application of numerological principles. Henry Bettenson gives us a picture of the broadness of the term in his notes to his translation of Tertullian (c. 200), in The Early Christian Fathers. He gives the sense of sacramentum as a symbol or bond (n. 122); as a mystery (n. 131); as a revelation (n. 137); and excerpts Tertullian's explanation from De Baptismo that the sealing of baptism is "the clothing, as it were, of the faith which before was bare" (145). Similarly, in Bettenson's The Later Christian Fathers (London: Oxford, 1970; Oxford Paperback, 1972; reprint with corrections, 1974) we find a variety of interesting uses of the word sacramentum in St. Hilary of Poitiers (315-67). Summarizing, we find Christ himself is the sacramentum of mediation between God and mankind (p.49, De Trinitate, 9.3,4); there is the sacramentum of the gospel dispensation (p.50, De Trinitate,

9.14); and there is the sacramentum of Christ's weeping (p.53, De Trinitate, 10.55). 5. John Milton summarizes a number of passages of Scripture when he describes Adam and Eve in creation: "He for God only, she for God in him" {Paradise Lost, IV, 299; in The Complete Poetical Works of John Milton, Cambridge Edition, ed. Douglas Bush [Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1965]). For example, St. Paul outlines the human order in terms of creation and marriage in 1 Timothy 2:13-15. Moreover, the entire Song of Solomon has consistently been read as an extended allegory of the relation between God and the elect. Here we see the interlocking human order, since the redeemed taken together (male and female) are described as the Bride of God. The same image is offered in St. John's vision of the Wedding Feast of the Lamb (Revelation 19:7-9). This two tier set of signs is also used in Isaiah 62:5: "For as a young man marrieth a virgin; so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bride-groom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee." 6.Kidd explains in his discussion of Article IX that "birth sin" is a clearer term in English than original sin, since it translates the sense of the original Latin that sinfulness is a fact of fallen human existence from the very beginning of each human person's life (The Thirty Nine Articles 122). 7.St. Augustine of Hippo offers the classic explanation of original sin in The City of God, XIII, 14 (Trans. Marcus Dods, with intro. by Thomas Merton [New York: Modern Library, 1950], 422-423): For God, the author of natures, not of vices, created man upright; but man, being of his own will corrupted, and justly condemned, begot corrupted and condemned children. For we all were in that one man, since we all were that one man who fell into sin by the woman who was made from him before sin. For not yet was the particular form created and distributed to us, in which we as individuals were to live, but already the seminal nature was there from which we were to be propagated; and this being vitiated by sin and bound by the chain of death, and justly condemned, man could not be born of man in any other state. And thus, from the bad use of free will, there originated the whole train of evil, which, with its concatenation of miseries, convoys the human race from its depraved origin, as from a corrupt root, on to the destruction of the second death, which has no end, those only being excepted who are freed by the grace of God. 8.St. Basil of Caesarea (330-379) writes in his Ninth Homily (Bettenson, Later Fathers, 60-61): Do not on any account suppose God responsible for the existence of evil: and do not imagine that evil has any substantive existence of its own. Wickedness does not exist as if it were a kind of living creature. . . . For evil is the privation of good. . . as blindness supervenes on destruction of the eyes, so evil, having no independent existence, supervenes on mutilations of the soul.

9.St. Augustine explains, "The devil encouraged evil, as a sin: he did not create evil, as a part of nature. Man is a part of nature; thus the devil persuaded nature, and perverted it. To inflict a wound is not to create a limb, but to harm it" (De Nuptiis et Concupiscentia, 2.57, in Bettenson, Later Fathers, 197).

10.One frequent error that we must watch for in our thinking is the tendency to read the Bible outside of any historical context. The Bible is not a random assembly of verses, but a historical narrative of the teaching and works of God. This is one of the points of Article VII "Of the Old Testament" (BCP 604). God's moral law never changes, but the teaching ordnances of the Old Testament have been fulfilled in the New, so that their preparatory purpose is complete. This is a Biblical doctrine, as evidenced by the tearing of the Temple veil (Luke 23:45), indicating God's completed use of that sanctuary and its ordinances. Similarly, in Peter's vision of the great sheet in Acts 10:9-16, God replaces the purity laws of the Old Testament with a completed, higher standard of redeemed spirituality and purity.

11.For a brief commentary on Article X "Of Free Will" (BCP 604) see Kidd 128-130. For a very interesting exposition of the Scriptural proofs for this Article, see Browne 273-281.

12.Of the commentaries on Article XI, "Of the Justification of Man," BCP 605, Kidd's is as usual a masterpiece of concision and Browne's is both extensive, covering the theological history of the related doctrines, and Scriptural.

13.See St. Augustine's explanation of paternal or "seminal" transmission, in note 7, above.

14.The word "remission" in Matthew 26:28 is aphesis, "to release," "to pardon," "to cancel an obligation, punishment, or guilt." It comes from the verb aphiemi, which has the legal sense of the cancellation of a debt or even a divorce (in this case from bondage to sin [see Romans 7:4]) (see Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, s.w.).

15.For a longer discussion of faith, see Cranmer's "Homily of Faith, or A Short Declaration of the True, Lively, and Christian Faith" from the Book of Homilies of 1547 (Meyer, Cranmer's Writings, 22-31). Here, for example, Cranmer writes about true faith: "Therefore, as ye profess the name of Christ, good Christian people, let no such phantasy and imagination of faith at any time beguile you; but be sure of your faith, try it by your living, Look upon the fruits that cometh of it, mark the increase of love and charity by it towards God and your neighbour, and so shall you perceive it to be a true lively faith" (31). True faith is not simply intellectual knowledge or assent, but a moral commitment to God and to all his purposes.

16. As is so often the case, Kidd offers a useful brief commentary on Articles XII and XIII "Of Good Works" and "Of Works before Justification"), and Browne offers a more extended discussion of them (Kidd, 138-142; Browne, 324-340). Cranmer's "Homily of Good Works or A Sermon of Good Works Annexed unto Faith" is also helpful (Meyer, Cranmer's Writings, 32-43). He writes there, "Even as a picture graven or painted is but a dead representation of the thing itself, and is without life, or any manner of moving; so be the works of all unfaithful persons before God" (32). See, also, Appendix II of the present work, for a discussion of Article XIII.

17. Good summary discussions of the doctrines of salvation can be found in Berkhof's and Packer's Concise Theology (146-171).

Lesson Four: The Dominical Sacraments

It is worth noting that the Greek word for sign (semeion) is used throughout St. John's Gospel to name what we call a "miracle," the sovereign use of God's power to intervene in nature. We should also note that Article XIX, "Of the Church" (BCP 606), teaches that the administration of the sacraments is a mark of a true Church. The sense of this declaration becomes especially clear when we realize that Christianity is a new covenant with God in the Blood of Jesus Christ. A covenant is of its nature a mutual promise between the covenanting parties, including an outward expression. Just as a covenant or contract between men bs u enession, perhaps a handshake or a signed and sealed document, Biblical covenants with God have their signs. For example, God uses the rainbow as a sign of his covenant with Noah (Genesis 9:11-13). Similarly, God sets out the blessings and curses that ire it spot obedience and disobedience of his covenant with Israel in Deuteronomy 28.

1. Regarding the sacraments of the New Testament, Calvin summarizes quite effectively in the lias*, "I affirm that Christ is the matter, or substance, of all the sacraments; since they have no solidity in him, and promise nothing out of him" (Book 4, Chapter 16) (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans, and ed., John Allen, intro. by Benjamin Wiiild aid Thomas Pears, in two volumes [Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Christian EAmklffl.vol. 2,570).

2. It would be helpful here to take time to review Article XXV, "Of the Sacraments," | K W.Browne provides an extensive commentary, including Scriptural proofs in his Exposition of the Thirty-Nine Articles (583-609). Bicknell provides a generally scholastic discussion of the Article, while Kidd gives a good short summary. It should especially be noted that the Article denies the medieval doctrine of ex opere operato, the notion that the mere performance of the outward sign guarantees the promised grace, separate from faith and worthy reception. Compare St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:28-50, and the application of his teaching in Article XXIX, "Of the Wicked, which eat not the Body of Christ in the use of the Lord's Supper" (BCP 609). klknaon that might be helpful is a birthday cake. Singing the birthday song and blowing out candles on a cake do not make a person another year older. It is God whom miBtsJvctbepcrson life and time to celebrate the birthday. The celebration is a participatory anofltdjient, a sign, of what God has done, not a means of compelling him to do it. J, We like English Reformers were attempting a more careful use of the word "sacrament” than most of their immediate theological predecessors, a perusal of even the tables of contents of the First (1549) and Second (1552) English Prayer Books (let alone the texts) will demonstrate their loyalty to the traditional administrations of the Church (The First and Second Prayer Books of Edward VI, intro. Douglas Harrison, Everyman's Library 448 [New York: Dutton, 1910; 1968 reprint]). For insight into the terms of the Reformation debate, read Richard Baxter, the Puritan divine, who wrote in 1658: The name "Sacrament" being not in Scripture, but of mere Ecclesiastic use, and being a word that will stretch, I distinguish between three sorts of Sacraments: (1) For any Divine institution which notably signifieth spiritual grace. . . (2) For any solemn investiture of a person by ministerial delivery in a state of Church privileges, or some special Gospel mercy. . . . (3) . . . in that strictest sense, as our Divines define a Sacrament, as it is an outward sign of Christ's institution for the obsignation of the full covenant of grace betwixt Him and the covenanter, and a delivery, representation, and investiture of the grace or benefits of that covenant; thus [by this definition] we have only two Sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper (Richard Baxter, Confirmation and Restauration, The Necessary Means of Reformation and Reconciliation for the Healing of the Corruption and Divisions of the Churches, Proposition 10, in More and Cross, Anglicanism, Selection 172, 413-414).

4. See C. B. Moss on the effects of a sacrament, on the meaning of "validity," and the conditions for a valid sacrament (The Christian Faith, 332-336). But it must not be assumed that the theological analysis of the necessary elements for the validity (proper administration) of a sacrament is the work of human theologians alone. It is the application of the Word of God, found in Hebrews 10:19-25, to the outward signs of God's grace, by theologians. Here we see all the elements of the Church's historic understanding: the Proper Minister (v. 21); the Proper Object (receiver: v. 22); the Proper Form (manner of administration: w. 23, 24, 25); the Proper Matter (the proper visible, physical sign of God's grace: w. 20, 22, 25); and the Proper Intention (v. 19).

5. The authority to baptize in emergencies granted in the Baptism rubric (BCP 281) is derived from the status of the entirety of the Church's members as a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:5-6). Under the usual terminology, we would describe a lay baptism (in water, in the Name of the Trinity, and with the intention of doing what the Bible teaches and the Church requires) as "valid" but "irregular." In Latin a regula is "a rule." Something irregular, therefore, does not follow the usual rule or discipline, but is not necessarily so defective as to be invalid or useless.

6. This requirement that a bishop or priest (presbyter) officiate at the Holy Communion is derived from Christ's institution of the sacrament at the Last Supper, when only his Apostles were present to receive his command. Thus, the tradition of the Church has been that only the "elders" (Greek presbuteroi, contracted in English to "priest") should officiate at the Lord's Supper. We know that this term was applied to the Apostles by themselves from St. Peter's calling himself "also an elder" (Greek sumpresbuteros, or "fellow-elder") (1 Peter 5:1-2).

7. It cannot be repeated enough that the true minister of the sacraments is Christ, by the Holy Ghost, through the instrumentality of his ministers, who being human must be sinners. It is Christ's perfect goodness that stands behind the sacraments. Often the false doctrine that makes the worthiness of the minister a precondition of sacramental validity is called "Donatism" (see Cross and Livingstone, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, s.v.). Browne {Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles) gives an excellent summary of the controversies behind Article XXVI, in his article under that tide.

8. See Browne and Kidd for Article XXVII, "Of Baptism." For an extended study of the historical background of Baptism and the development of the rite, see Francis Procter and Walter Frere, A New History of the Book of Common Prayer: with a Rationale of its Offices, Third revised and corrected impression of 1905 (London: Macmillan, 1949), 556-602; and W. K.

Lowther Clarke's discussion in W. K. Lowther Clarke and Charles Harris, eds., Liturgy and Worship (London: SPCK, 1932; reprint 1940), 410-425. See, too, the article under "Baptism in Benton's Church Cyclopaedia.

9. The claim that the primitive custom in baptism (and thus the normative form today) was total immersion is more romance than reality: "[The] probabilities of the case, on the Day of Pentecost, for example, and in the prison at Philippi, descriptions of baptisms, and pictorial representations in the Catacombs and elsewhere, combine to show that affusion was the normal method" (Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 417).

10.See Browne, Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, 677-682, on infant baptism.

11.See Browne and Kidd for Article XXVIII, "Of the Lord's Supper." For a background history of the sacrament and the rite, including the Prayer Book form, see Procter and Frere, A New History, 430-505- See also Frank Gavin, "The Eucharist in East and West" and James Herbert Srawley, "The Holy Communion Service" in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 78-129 and 302-373.

12.We must stress that Jesus Christ is both the power and the substance of the Holy Communion, acknowledging the Church's limited capacity to define so great a thing. George Herbert (1593-1633) wrote in his classic Anglican discussion of the ministry A Priest to the Temple; or the Countrey Parson: The countrey parson being to administer the sacraments is at a stand with himself how or what behaviour to assume for so holy things. Especially at communion times he is in a great confusion, as being not only to receive God, but to break and administer Him. Neither finds he any issue in this, but to throw himself down at the throne of grace, saying, Lord Thou knowest what Thou didst when Thou appointedst it to be done thus; therefore doe Thou fulfill what Thou dost appoint; for Thou are not only the feast, but the way to it" (George Herbert, The Temple and A Priest to the Temple, Everyman's Library [London: Dent, n.d.], Chapter 13, 255-256). Similarly, the Middleburg Liturgy of the English Puritans (1586), taking up the term of St. Augustine, requires that during the administration of the sacrament, ". . .

some place of the Scriptures is to bee read, whiche doeth set forth the death of Christ, to the intent that our eyes and senses maye not onely be occupied in these outwarde signes of bread and wine, whiche are called the visible word [emphasis added], but that our heartes and mindes also may be fullie fixed in the contemplation of the Lordes death, which is by this holy Sacrament represented" (in Bard Thompson, ed., Liturgies of the Western Church [New York: New American Library, Meridian, 1961], 338-339). Whatever other matters may have been at issue, the working of Christ in the Holy Communion was not in dispute even in this Puritan liturgy.

13.The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, George Arthur Buttrick, et. al., eds., Four volumes and supplement (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962-1976), has an interesting background article on the significance of memory in the Bible under "Memorial, Memory."

14.On the conduct of the Holy Communion in the early Church and who presided, see Frank Gavin in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 88-89. See also the Second Office of Instruction's description of the offices of the ministry, BCP 294, which excludes the deacons from celebrating the Holy Communion, as an order subordinate to the priesthood (presbyterate) and episcopate.

15.The term "real presence" is a good illustration of the confusion that can come about due to a term's differing use in various historical periods and by different communions. Among the Roman Catholics, for example, "real presence" is often used as a synonym for "transubstantiation," which of course, this Church does not teach or believe. Part of this difficulty comes from the unwarranted insistence by some that "real" must mean "physical" or "corporal." But this is not so, since the spiritual must also be real. Christ tells us, "God is a Spirit" (John 4:24), and God is certainly real. In fact, the spiritual is the basis of the reality of the physical, not the other way around. It was to avoid this confusion that the rubric concerning kneeling by communicants was added at the conclusion of the Order of the Holy Communion in the 1552 Prayer Book, denying any "reall and essencial presence" (First and Second Prayer Books, 393). This rubric was dropped under Queen Elizabeth, but readopted with amendments in the 1662 Prayer Book. Mant cites Charles Wheatly's Rational Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer, regarding this amended rubric: [In 1662] it was again added, with some little amendment of the expression and transposal of the sentences; but exactly the same throughout as to the sense; excepting that the words "real and essential presence" were thought proper to be changed for "corporal presence. "Fora "real presence" of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, is what our Church frequently asserts in this very office of Communion, and in her Articles, in her Homilies, and her Catechism: particularly in the two latter, in the first of which she tells us, "Thus much we must be sure to hold, that in the supper of the Lord there is no vain ceremony, no bare sign, no untrue figure of a thing absent; —but the communion of the body and blood of the Lord in a marvellous incorporation, which by the operation of the Holy Ghost is through faith wrought in the souls of the faithful, etc.; who therefore" (as she farther instructs us in the Catechism) "verily and indeed take and receive the body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper. " This is the doctrine of our Church in relation to the "real presence" in the sacrament, entirely different from the doctrine of transubstantiation, which she here, as well as elsewhere disclaims. . . (in Richard Mant, ed., The Book of Common Prayer with Notes, Explanatory, Practical, and Historical, from Approved Writers of the Church of England Sixth ed. [London: Francis and John Rivington, 1850], 328. The Seventeenth Century Divines also shed light on the doctrine of the real presence. Richard Hooker (Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book V, Chapter 67, 12) explains our Church's exposition of "This is my Body" with this paraphrase: "this hallowed food, through concurrence of divine power, is in verity and truth unto faithful receivers instrumentally a cause of that mystical participation, whereby, as I make Myself wholly theirs, so I given them in hand an actual possession of all such saving grace as My sacrificed Body can yield, and as their souls do presendy need, this is to them and in diem My Body" (in More and Cross, Anglicanism, Selection 199, 463). Lancelot Andrewes, in a controversy with Cardinal Bellarmine wrote, "We believe no less than you that the presence is real. Concerning the method of the presence, we define nothing rashly, and, I add, we do not anxiously inquire, any more than how the Blood of Christ washes us in our Baptism, any more than how the Human and Divine Natures are united in one Person in the Incarnation of Christ . . . (Responsio ad Apologiam Cardinalis Bellarmini, Chapter 1, trans. D. Stone, in Cross and More, Anglicanism, Selection 200, 464). And Bishop James Ussher explains, "In the outward part of this mystical action, which reacheth to that which is sacramentum only, we receive this Body and Blood but Sacramentally; in the inward, that containeth rem, the thing itself in it, we receive it really. And consequently, the presence of these in the one is relative and symbolical, in the other real and substantial" (A Sermon Preached before the Commons House of Parliament in St. Margaret's Church, at Westminster, the 18th of February, 1620, in Cross and More, Anglicanism, Selection 71 1. Finally, on this spiritual reality, Calvin writes: We conclude, that our souls are fed by the flesh and blood of Christ, just as our corporeal life is preserved and sustained by bread and wine. For otherwise there would be no suitableness in the analogy of the sign, if our souls did not find their food in Christ; which cannot be the case unless Christ truly becomes one with us, and refreshes us by the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his blood. Though it appears incredible for the flesh of Christ, from such an immense local distance, to reach us, so as to become our food, we should remember how much the secret power of the Holy Spirit transcends all our senses, and what folly it is to apply any measure of ours to his immensity (Institutes, Book IV, Chapter 17, Sec. 10, 650-651).

16.Bicknell, Theological Introduction, note on 497.

17.See, for example, the provisions of The Apostolic Tradition ofHippolytus (beginning of the third century), in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 101-102.

Lesson Five: The Minor Sacraments

1.For a discussion of the history and rite of Confirmation, see W. K. Lowther Clarke, "Confirmation," in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 443-457. See also, Procter and Frere, A New History, 602-607; and E. L. Parsons and B. H. Jones, The American Prayer Book: Its Origins and Principles (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1937), 242-246. Mant's BCP with Notes, provides an interesting set of comments from various Anglican divines, as well as offering Scriptural citations warranting the various sentences of the rite, 386-394.

2.See Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 444, for Confirmation as the ordination of the laity.

3.Mant quotes Dean Comber on the minister of Confirmation: "The person who doth confirm is a bishop, to which order the ancient church did always reserve the dispensing of this rite, because the apostles only did this, Acts viii. 14; and therefore the bishops are highly obliged to take care that all in their dioceses, who need and desire it, may not want the opportunity of coming to it" (Mant, BCP with Notes, 386).

4.Bishop Sparrow, Rationale of the Book of Common Prayer, writes about the prayer for the gifts of the Spirit: This is a prayer, that God would strengthen the baptized with "the Holy Ghost the Comforter, " whom they had in their baptism received as a sanctifier. These two ways, to omit others, we are taught in holy Scripture, that the Holy Ghost may be received: as a sanctifier and cleanser in holy baptism, Tit. iii.5, "He saved us by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost:" and after baptism we may receive Him again as a comforter and strengthener. The apostles, who received Him the first way in baptism, are promised to receive Him the second, John xvi.7; Acts 1.8: which was performed Acts ii.4, when "they were filled with the Holy Ghost" (in Mant, BCP with Notes, 390).

5. Canon XIX of the Church of Ireland (1634) makes this case for private confession, if any should scruple to receive the Holy Communion: And to this end the people are often to be exhorted to enter into a special examination of the state of their own souls; and that finding themselves either dull or much troubled in mind they do resort to God's ministers to receive from them as well advice and counsel for the quickening of their dead hearts and the subduing of those corruptions whereunto they have been subject, as the benefit of Absolution likewise for the quieting of their consciences, by the power of the keys which Christ hath committed to His ministers for that purpose (in More and Cross, Anglicanism, Selection 230, 38).

6. If there is any doubt about how seriously the Church takes the confidences and welfare of her people, it might be well to refer to the bishop's exhortation to those about to be ordained priests in the Ordinal. It reads, in part: Have always therefore printed in your remembrance, how great a treasure is committed to your charge. For they are the sheep of Christ, which he bought with his death, and for whom he shed his blood. The Church and Congregation whom you must serve, is his Spouse, and his Body. And if it shall happen that the same Church, or any Member thereof, do take any hurt or hindrance by reason of your negligence, ye know the greatness of the fault, and also the horrible punishment that will ensue (BCP 540).

7. Dr. Matthew Hole, Practical Discourses on the Liturgy, writes about the absolution appointed in the Prayer Book for Morning Prayer: It is here to be noticed that the minister does not presume to pardon or absolve in his own right, nor to publish absolution in his own name, but only in the power or name of God, saying, "He pardoneth and absolveth:" where the word "He" refers to Almighty God at the commencement of the Absolution. It is also to be noticed, that this declaration is not absolute and without limitation: it is confined to such only as "truly repent, and unfeignedly believe his holy Gospel. " But then, as the minister pronounces pardon only to the penitent, so does he declare it to all that are so. It is not withheld from any that are qualified to receive it: but it is pronounced by authority of Almighty God. . . (in Mant, BCP with Notes, 12).

8.For a history of matrimony and the rite, see Procter and Frere, A New History, 608-622. The discussion in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 458-471, is interesting but rather scholastic. See also, Parsons and Jones, American Prayer Book, 247-253.

9.The 1662 Prayer Book of the Church of England makes a number of matters clearer in its Form for the Solemnization of Matrimony than in the shortened form of the service derived from it and found in the American Prayer Book (BCP 300-304). Especially telling is the reminder that God instituted marriage "in the time of man's innocency," as is also the long Scriptural exhortation that concludes the order. The notes in Mant, BCP with Notes, 395-408, are uniformly fascinating, if too involved to go into here.

10.The idea of sin as the "opposite" of marriage is made clearer by God's use of the image of divorce as a punishment against Israel for her sins in Jeremiah 3:8. Sinfulness against the Lord is also symbolized by the prostitution of Gomer, Hosea's wife (Hosea 1-3).

11.Understood correctly, St. Paul's statements in 1 Corinthians 7:7-9, simply concur with our Lord in Matthew 19, and with this doctrine of married and celibate vocations. When Paul writes, "it is better to marry than to burn" (v. 9), "to burn" means "to burn with desire or need" (see Arndt and Gingrich, under purpoo). While "to burn" can mean illicit lust (e.g., Romans 1:27), here the matrimonial desire is legitimate and God-given. Strangely, Paul is often accused of being anti-love, or at least anti-sex; but here we see him arguing that the only proper reason for marriage is a God-given need of one person for another, conducive to the spiritual goals of marriage.

12.It is necessary, here, to elaborate upon the issue of homosexuality, given the propagandizing in favor of it by the secular culture. First, God is the Creator, so it is his absolute right to declare the purposes and uses of his creation. Second, homosexuality is not the only sexual behavior forbidden by God, but all sexual activity outside of a godly marriage. Third, homosexuality is equally condemned by the New Testament as the Old (see Leviticus 18:22; Romans 1:24-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9). Fourth, false-love and lust are not "other forms of love," but forms of idolatry, since they worship a standard other than God's. Fifth, mankind is fallen, so God did not create men and women to be homosexual; homosexuality is part of original sin, not created human nature. Sixth, a claim that homosexuality is rooted in genetics (proved or not) is no more a justification of homosexuality than a genetic basis for alcoholism would justify drunkenness. While there might be additional temptation for such people, temptation is not a reason to sin (1 Corinthians 10:1-13). Seventh, our Lord dealt with "the genetic problem" in Matthew 9:12; being born a eunuch (genetic cause) or being made a eunuch (social, psychological cause) is not a release from the law of marriage. Eighth, homosexuality is simply one sin among many. It is our purpose as the Church to glorify God by administering God's grace for the overcoming of all sins.

13.For a brief history of the ministry and the rite of ordination, see Parsons and Jones, American Prayer Book, 267-286; Procter and Frere, A New History, 647-675. For a more complicated history, see W. K. Firminger, "The Ordinal," in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 626-682.

14.St. Clement of Rome (c. 95) describes the ordained ministry and the laity in perfected Old Testament terms: Since all this is clear, and we have gazed into the depths of Divine knowledge, we are bound to perform in due order all that the master bade us accomplish at their proper seasons. He ordered that the offerings and services should be performed at their appointed times and seasons, not at random and without order; and also by his own supreme will he himself appointed the place and the ministers of their performance, that all might be done according to his good pleasure and so be acceptable to his will. Therefore they that make their offerings at the appointed seasons are acceptable and blessed, for in following the ordinances of the master they do not err. To the high priest are given his special ministrations, a special place is reserved for the priests, and special duties are imposed upon the levites, while the layman is bound by the ordinances concerning the laity {Epistle to the Corinthians, xl, in Bettenson, Documents, 62-63). On the significance of the bishop, as a chief pastor, Ignatius of Antioch (c. 112) writes: Let that be considered a valid Eucharist over which the bishop presides, or one to whom he commits it. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as wheresoever Christ Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church {Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, c. viii, in Bettenson, Documents, 64). We can see from these sub-apostolic fathers that the ministry of the Church is representative of Christ, who is the personal perfection of the Old Testament ministry. Christ's one sacrifice for sin, once offered, ended the Old Testament sacrifices (see the tearing of the Temple veil, Matthew 27:51, proclaiming the end of that sanctuary; see Hebrews 9:11-14; 1 Peter 2:25). Now Christ is our great High Priest, and deacons, priests, and bishops are his ministers and representatives, even when officiating on behalf of Christ and his Body in the offering of the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving (see Hebrews 13:15). When St. Paul writes "they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar" (see 1 Corinthians 9:13-14), he is arguing that the New Testament ministry has replaced the Old Testament ministry, and is now to receive the ministry's share of the offerings (compare Leviticus 2:3, 6:16). This does not mean, however, that the character of the New Testament ministry is the same as that of the Old. New Testament ministers do not offer a sacrifice for sin; this work is already accomplished by Jesus Christ. The New Testament ministry is, therefore, a much higher calling than the Old Testament priesthood, since salvation is accomplished in Christ, whereas it was only promised in the Old Testament. It may also be well to deal with a confusion in terms here. The term "priest," referred to in the Ordinal and in the Book of Common Prayer, is a linguistic shortening of the Greek word presbuteros or "presbyter," literally "an elder." Both priest and presbyter are used interchangeably by the Prayer Book (see the Letter of Institution of a Minister, BCP 569, where both terms are used). This is not the same Greek word used to describe the Old Testament "priesthood": hiereus. Jesus Christ is the hiereus, the archiereus (high priest) of the New Testament, and none other (see Hebrews 9:11). Our ministry, by Christ's commandment, administers the blessings and benefits of Christ's sole sacrificial priesthood. It is unfortunate that our English language obscures these important facts by translating both hiereus and pres-buteros with the word "priest." At the same time, the connection of the two terms in English is probably a testimony to the completeness of the conversion of the Angles and Saxons to Christianity, so that they could only understand the Old Testament ministry as a foreshadowing of the New Testament ministry founded in Christ Jesus.

15. Important insights into the Anglican understanding of the pastoral office can be gained by reading George Herbert's definition of a pastor, at the beginning of the First Chapter of The Countrey Parson, 217: A pastor is the deputy of Christ for the reducing of man to obedience to God. This definition is evident, and containes the direct steps of pastoral! duty and auctority [authority]. For, first, man fell from God by disobedience. Secondly, Christ is the glorious instrument of God for the revoking [recalling] of man. Thirdly, Christ being not to continue on earth, but after Hee had fulfilled the work of reconciliation to be received up into heaven, He constituted deputies in His place; and these are priests. And therefore St. Paul, in the beginning of his Epistles [Romans 1:1], professeth this; and in the first to the Colossians [Colossians 1:24-29] plainly avoucheth [avows, asserts] that he fib us that which is behinde of the afflictions of Christ in his flesh, for his Bodies sake, which is the Church.' Wherein is contained the complete definition of a minister. Out of this chartre [charter] of the priesthood may be plainly gathered both the dignity thereof and the duty: the dignity, in that a priest may do that which Christ did and by His auctority and as His viceregent; the duty, in that a priest is to do that which Christ did, and after His manner, both for doctrine and life.

16.One needs to remember that the Church is the living Body of Christ, so that some genuine historical variety is found in the outward signs of the minor sacraments, including ordination. For example, Part 1.10 of The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus reads: "On a confessor, if he has been in bonds for the name of the Lord, hands shall not be laid for the diaconate or the presbyterate, for he has the honour of the presbyterate by his confession. But if he is to be ordained bishop, hands shall be laid on him" (trans, and ed. Burton Scott Easton [London: Cambridge University, 1934; 1962 Archon reprint], 39, notes 81-82).

17.St. Jerome (c. 345-420) offers an interesting account of the setting aside of the bishop as chief pastor in the early Church: Hence a presbyter is the same as a bishop, and before ambitions came into religion, by the prompting of the devil, and people began to say: T belong to Paul: I to Apollo; I to Cephas', the churches were governed by the direction of presbyters, acting as a body But when each presbyter began to suppose that those whom he had baptized belonged to him, rather than Christ, it was decreed in the whole Church that one of the presbyters should be chosen to preside over the others, and that the whole responsibility for the Church should devolve on him, so that the seeds of schism should be removed [Translator's note: Jerome cites Philippians 1:1-2; Acts 20:17,28; 1 Peter 5:1-2] (In Epistolam ad Titum, 1.1,5; in Bettenson, Later Fathers, 189).

18.Apostolic Succession ought not to be reduced to a mere list of episcopal consecrators and their antecedents. This approach is liable to the condemnation given to other sorts of genealogies (see 1 Timothy 1:4; Titus 3:9), and is a product of the mechanistic cast of so much of nineteenth century thought. Bettenson offers this quote from Hegisippus (c. 175), via Eusebius, as the "first extant use of the technical term": "The Church of Corinth remained in the right doctrine down to the episcopate of Primus at Corinth. I had converse with them on my voyage to Rome, and we took comfort together in the right doctrine. After arriving in Rome I made a succession down to Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus. To Anicetus succeeded Soter, who was followed by Eleutherus. In every succession and in every City things are ordered according to the preaching of the Law, the Prophets, and the Lord" (Bettenson, Documents, 67-68). The purpose of succession, then, is the orderly transmission of lawful authority and the protection, not of the episcopate itself, but of the right doctrine and the welfare of the Church, under the authority of the Scriptures.

19.The words "clergy" and "clerical," in reference to those in Holy Orders, comes from the Greek word kleros, which means a "lot," "that which is obtained by lot or divine grace" (see Arndt and Gingrich, s.v.; and Psalm 16:7, BCP 358; Acts 1:28). Admission to the ministry is by divine call and the Church's testing of that call. The Scriptures give us examples of the disasters that followed when someone demanded a share in the ministry, despite Gods call of someone else. In Numbers 12, Aaron and Miriam murmur against Moses, and Miriam is made a leper. In Numbers 16:1-32, Korah and Dathan assert their "right" to minister, and the earth swallowed their congregation. A plague followed later. In 1 Samuel 15, Saul makes up his own rules for sacrifice and worship, and is deprived of his kingdom.

Finally, sometimes Deborah (Judges 4 and 5) is suggested as a model for a female ministry, since she judged Israel. And yet, when we read the Scriptural account, we find that Deborah was raised up "a mother in Israel" (Judges 5:7), not a king, a general, or a priest. Her spiritual task was to recall the men of Israel to their God-given duty, not to supplant them in it.

20. For a general discussion of the form for the anointing of the sick (BCP 320), see Parson and Jones, American Prayer Book, 254-259. For a very technical discussion, see Charles Harris, "Visitation of the Sick," Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 472-540. See Procter and Frere, A New History, 625-626, for a comparison of the present form with the 1549 Prayer Book. The 1549 rite, which demonstrates the logic of the administration admirably, reads in part [spelling modernized for clarity]: As with this visible oil thy body is outwardly anointed: so our heavenly father almighty God, grant of his infinite goodness, that thy soul inwardly may be anointed with the holy ghost, who is the spirit of all strength, comfort, relief, and gladness. And vouchsafe for his great mercy (if it be his blessed will) to restore unto thee thy bodily health, and strength, to serve him, and send thee release of all thy pains, troubles, and diseases, both in body and mind. And howsoever his goodness (by his divine and unsearchable providence) shall dispose of thee: we, his unworthy ministers and servants, humbly beseech the eternal majesty, to do with thee according to the multitude of his innumerable mercies, and to pardon thee all thy sins and offences, committed by all thy bodily senses, passions, and carnal affections . . . {First and Second Prayer Books, 264-265).

Lesson Six: The Holy Scriptures

1. Browne, An Exposition, offers a very thorough discussion of all three Articles of Religion related specifically to the Scriptures: Article VI, "Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation" (128-192); Article VII, "Of the Old Testament" (193-217); and Article XX, "Of the Authority of the Church" (478-489). Kidd's discussion is brief, but useful (Thirty Nine Articles, see under the Articles in question). Bicknell, on the other hand, is a disappointment, appearing more interested in protecting the authority of modern scholarship than the authority of the Bible. Benton's Church Cyclopaedia, published in 1883, when the claims of modernist scholarship were already well known, in contrast to Bicknell, offers a wealth of information about the Scriptures, including such matters as the text and inspiration, in a brisk, scholarly and loyal manner, in articles under the titles "Bible" and "Scriptures."

2. Because the Scriptures are so important, a number of aids are available for studying them, including textbooks on the Bible and dictionaries of Biblical places, names, and words. These have to be examined very carefully for their agreement with our Articles of Religion. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, for example, is useful in many areas of language and archaeology, but also rather technical and prone to a modernist dismissal of matters super natural. In this same cautionary category should be placed most "commentaries," books giving an interpretive reading of the entire Bible or a single book of the Scriptures. It must always be remembered that while the Bible is inspired, commentators are not, and must be weighed themselves against the Scriptures. More helpful for most new students of the Bible is a "concordance," a list of biblical words and names, and where each can be found in the Bible. The most useful of the concordances are Young's or Strong's "analytical concordances," offering the words in the biblical languages that lie behind the English translations. Even without a gift for languages, a persistent reader of the Bible, with the help of an analytical concordance, can develop an extensive knowledge of the contents and language of the Scriptures. Also interesting is Spiros Zodhiates, ed., The HebrewGreek Key Study Bible: King James Version.

3. For more on the problem of scholarship and the Bible, see Appendix III, my paper "The 'Textus Receptus,'" presented to a joint Carolinas clericus in Spartanburg, South Carolina, on June 11, 1993.

4. Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, III: in Bettenson, Documents, 68. We see our Lord take the same position in regards to faith and obedience as preconditions for understanding the Word of God. At the conclusion of the account of the beggar Lazarus and the unmerciful rich man (Luke 16:19-31), Christ says, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." No amount of evidence is sufficient to over come militant unbelief, since such unbelief is a before-the-fact determination to exclude all evidence. It is one of the wonders of our age that a refusal to consider evidence contrary to various secular theories should be deemed "scientific."

5. On the sufficiency of Scripture, William Beveridge, the seventeenth century divine, writes: Wherefore, as ever ye desire to be saved, ye must be sure to be steadfast in the doctrine which the Apostles of Christ by His order and commission delivered at first by word of mouth, and afterwards in writing, that all generations might know it, by which means we are now as fully assured of what the Apostles taught, as they could be which heard them speak it, —their doctrine being transmitted to us by the infallible testimony of the Holy Ghost, by which they spake and writ it in that Holy Book which we call the "New Testament. " So that whatsoever we there read, as taught by the Apostles, we are sure was their doctrine and therefore are bound steadfastly to believe it and diligently to frame our lives according to it; but what we do not find there written, we can never be sure that they taught it and therefore cannot be obliged to believe it or observe it (Sermon LI: "Steadfastness to the Established Church Recommended"; in More and Cross, Anglicanism, 93). Obviously, and logically, the same must hold true for the work of the Holy Ghost in the Old Testament as well.

6. On the Canon of Scripture, see Browne, 173-174; and Appendix III.

7. See Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, Ill.I.i, in Bettenson, Documents, 28.

8. For more information on the English versions of the Bible, see The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, under "Versions, English." Those interested in gaining a background knowledge of Bible versions in general should also see "Versions, ancient" and "Versions, medieval and modern (non-English)."

9. On chapters and verses, see Benton, Church Cyclopaedia, "Bible," 96.

10.For a history of the English Bible, see J. Patterson Smyth, How We Got Our Bible, revised ed. (New York: James Pott, 1912; reprint. 1922). While the conclusion of this book is given over to an apology for the Revised Version, a nineteenth century revision of the King James, Smyth offers a great deal of information and samples of the various translations, which should prove interesting to most students of the Bible.

11.Smyth, How We Got Our Bible, says that the Comfortable Words are from the Great Bible, 118. Evan Daniel, The Prayer Book: Its History, Language, and Contents, 22nd ed. (London: Wells Gardner, Darton, 1909), 371, argues that they are a separate translation. A comparison of the translations of John 3:16, which appears in both the Comfortable Words and the Gospel for Monday in Whitsun-Week in the 1549 Prayer Book; and of Matthew 11:28, which appears in the Words and in the Gospel for St. Matthias; would seem to sup port Daniel, although Smyth may be correct, if the Comfortable Words are considered a liturgical adaption ofthe then authorized translation (see The First and Second Prayer Books, 133, 184, 225).

12.See Appendix III for a further discussion of the King James Version and modern translations, and for the issue of the textus receptus (the "received text" of the Holy Scriptures).

13.In Bettenson, Documents, 28.

14.For the Muratorian Fragment, see Bettenson, Documents, 28-29. For Athanasius and other witnesses see E. F. Harrison, "The Canon of the New Testament," supplement to Young's Analytical Concordance. See also Browne, Exposition, 170-182.

15.Thomas Scott (1747-1827) gave this definition of "inspiration" in the preface to his 1788-92 commentary on the Holy Scripture, an important source of learning for the Evangelical revival of the Church of England: By 'the divine inspiration of the Scriptures' the author would be understood to mean such a complete and immediate communication, by the Holy Spirit, to the minds of the sacred writers, of those things which could not have been otherwise known; and such an effectual super-intendency, as to those particulars, concerning which they might otherwise obtain information; as sufficed absolutely to preserve them from every degree of error, in all things, which could in the least affect any of the doctrines or precepts contained in their writings, or mislead any person, who considered them as a divine and infallible 'standard of truth and duty.' Every sentence, in this view, must be considered as 'the sure testimony of God,' in that sense in which it is proposed as truth . . . They wrote indeed in such language, as their different talents, education, habits, and associations suggested, or rendered natural for them; but the Holy Ghost so entirely superintended them, when writing, as to exclude every improper expression, and to guide them to all those which are best suited to their several subjects (in Alexander C. Zabriskie, ed., Anglican Evangelicalism, Publication 13 [Philadelphia: Church Historical Soc, 1943], 94. As an aside, Dean Zabriskie's book (the source of the above quote) is a fascinating background study in Anglican Evangelicalism. It also foreshadows, in its 1943 version of liberalism and modernism, what went wrong in the Episcopal Church of the following decades.

16.Joseph Henry Blunt, in the 1906 edition of his Household Theology, once a very popular book among Anglicans, describes the process of inspiration in this way: The inspired person was actually and effectively controlled by the Divine power to such an extent, that the report or record of the communication was as substantially exact at his lips or hands as if it had been an audible word of God, or a Divine autograph. Anything thus recorded must be of the very highest authority possible, andean admit of no doubt or disbelief without calling into question the truthfulness of Godwin Zabriskie, Anglican Evangelicalism, 93-94; and note that Blunt was not a member of any Evangelical party in the Church. The view here is the ordinary Anglican view of the time, as it still should be today).

17.For "The Wicked Bible," see under "Bible" in that wonderful compendium of oddities, E. C. Brewer, The Dictionary of Fact and Fable, Intro. Alix Gudefin, Classic ed.: facsim ile of the 1894 ed. (New York: Avenel, 1978).

18.Zabriskie summarizes the key Anglican principles of Bible reading as outlined by Thomas Scott (see also note 15, above): The cardinal principles of right interpretation of Scripture, Scott says, are three: the endeavour to discover the original and simple sense of the biblical passage; the interpretation of the passage in a manner which is consonant with the meaning of Scripture as a whole; and the care which must be taken not to lay upon the passage a meaning which is foreign to its original intention. He goes on to quote Scott: In explaining the word of God, we should remember that there is in every portion one precise meaning, previously to our employing our ingenuity upon it, which it is our business with reverent intention to investigate. To discover that meaning we should soberly and carefully examine the context, and consider the portion in question in the relation in which it stands (Zabriskie, Anglican Evangelicalism, 96).

19. The imaginative guesses of the evolutionists are in their essence an effort to work backward from this fallen world to its origins, including the unfounded assumptions that nothing that is not happening now could have happened in the past, that the world has always been the way it is now, and that there is nothing that exists outside of this material world (so that there can be no supernatural explanation for anything). These are very unscientific assumptions, since the evolutionists exclude the possibility of data that does not agree with their theories even before they make any observations. Further, Darwinian theory is hampered by its formulation before the development of genetics or molecular biology, which do indicate the method of change within species, but not a method for one species to transform itself into another (or any evidence at all that such a thing has ever occurred). The Christian does not deny the existence of the phenomena (for example, the fossils) that evolutionists study, but does disagree with their interpretations and conclusions. How old would Adam have looked, five minutes after his creation? How old was he? But it is not only Christians and Biblical creationists who question evolution as an explanation for the origin of life and species. For example, W. R. Fix, basically a pantheist, examines the improbabilities of evolution in his popular book, The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution (New York: Macmillan, 1984). Michael Denton, a medical doctor and scientist, takes an agnostic position in his more technical Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Third ed. (Bethesda, Maryland: Adler and Adler, 1986). Phillip E. Johnson, a law professor and an expert in evidence, finds evolution wanting in his Evolution on Trial (Washington: Regnery Gateway, 1991). But it must not be forgotten that many physical scientists are also Christians and Biblical creationists. The Institute for Creation Research, P.O. Box 2667, El Cajon, CA 92021, publishes or sponsors books and papers at a variety of levels of technical difficulty, including books for children. Their work also examines the moral effect of evolutionary theory. For example, a recent issue of their publication Impact examines the evolutionary basis of the anti-Christian doctrine of inherent female inferiority (and in passing the evolutionary basis of racism) (see Jerry Bergman, "Darwin's Teaching of Women's Inferiority," Impact 249 [March 1994]). 20.

Philosopher Melvin Rader, The Enduring Questions: Main Problems of Philosophy, 2nd ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1969), explains in his introduction that the subject matter of science is the description of facts, and an attempt to discover verifiable regularities or laws in those facts. He reserves evaluation and judgment for philosophy (4-5). While a Christian might add that some of the facts are only available through revelation and that the principles of judgment are not manmade but originate with God, his point is an important one. So called "scientific" explanations of the meaning of life (and the claim that life is founded in random chance is a judgment about the meaning of life) go beyond the limits of genuine science and become a kind of anti-theology. Christians are under no obligation to compromise with what is itself a violation of the canons of science. More than this, Christians ought not to compromise. "Theistic evolution," for example, the claim that God creates through evolution, is such an unnecessary compromise, since it is founded in a series of unwarranted, unscientific claims. God says that he created the world in a particular way, and there is no good reason to doubt him or his power to do so. God was there, before, during, and after the beginning. Darwin was not. 21.

Many people today have no particular background in literary analysis or formal logical thinking. This lack may discourage them from more advanced work with the Bible. A useful but not overwhelming book with good sections on both logical thinking and reading and writing about literature is John Hodges, et. al., Harbrace College Handbook, 1 lth ed. (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1990).

Lesson Seven: The Book of Common Prayer

1. The study of the Book of Common Prayer is really a combined study of the history of the administrations and practices of the entire catholic Church throughout history and of the particular ministrations and forms of the Anglican branch of the Church (and its various nation sub-branches). Furthermore, it must never be forgotten that all true worship and spiritual administration must be founded in the teachings of Holy Scripture. A number of helpful books have been referred to earlier in this outline of Anglican life. These include: Procter and Frere, A New History of the Book of Common Prayer; Percy Dearmer, The Parson's Handbook; Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, Evan Daniel, The Prayer Book: Its History, Language and Contents; Massey Shepherd, The Oxford American Prayer Book Commentary; and Parson and Jones, The American Prayer Book; and Richard Mant, The Book of Common Prayer with Notes, Explanatory, Practical, and Historical, from Approved Writers of the Church of England. Charles Walker's The Ritual Reason Why discusses the rationale and background of various liturgical practices from a liturgically "high" perspective, as does Anglican Services: A book concerning ritual and ceremonial in the Church of England by The present Editor of "Ritual Notes" and "The Order of Divine Service" (London: Knott, 1953). For a more Evangelical or "low" perspective, see Nelson R. Boss, The Prayer Book Reason Why: A Text Book of Instruction on the History, Doctrines, Usages and Ritual of the Church, as Suggested by the Offices; Boston Clergy Group of the Episcopal Evangelical Fellowship, A Prayer Book Manual (Louisville: Cloister Press, 1943); and William Paret, The Pastoral Use of the Prayer Book: The Substance of Plain Talks Given to His Students and Younger Clergy (Baltimore: Maryland Diocesan Library, 1904). Also useful in the study of the Prayer Book is the examination of previous editions, especially The First and Second Prayer Books of Edward VI; the 1662 Prayer Book of the Church of England (the basis of Mant, see above); the 1789 and 1892 editions of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States; and the Prayer Book of the Reformed Episcopal Church in the United States of America. Very useful for the study of the 1928 American Prayer Book (used throughout this text) is Milton Huggett, ed., A Concordance to the American Book of Common Prayer (New York: Church Hymnal Corp., 1970). For an accessible study of the theology of liturgy and worship, see Peter Toon, Knowing God through Liturgy (Largo, FL: Prayer Book Society Publ. Co., 1992. Finally, it would be wrong to forget the use of music in the Church's worship. In 1550, John Merbecke (s.v. Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church) produced The Book of Common Prayer Noted, setting the Church's reformed English service to the ancient chants. Its modern equivalent is, Joint Commission on Church Music, The Choral Service: The Liturgical Music for Morning and Evening Prayer, The Litany, and The Holy Communion, According to the Use of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America (New York: H. W. Gray, 1927).

2. For the background of the medieval and earlier worship books (missals, sacramentaries, breviaries, pontificals, manuals, ordinals, processionals, and the "Pie" [the book to keep all the others straight]) condensed in the Book of Common Prayer, see the opening pages of F. E. Brightman and K. D. Mackenzie, "The History of the Book of Common Prayer down to 1662," in Clarke and Harris, Anglican Worship, 130-197. It is little wonder that Cranmer complained in The Preface to the 1549 Prayer Book, "that many times, there was more busines to fynd out what should be read, then to read it when it was founde out" (First and Second Prayer Books, A).

3. For a comment on the growing strength of the Commons in the history of English government under the first three Edwards, and their ultimate inclusion in a two house, rather than a three house, Parliament, see G. M. Trevelyan, History of England, Corrected 3rd ed., 3 vol. (London: Longmans, Green, 1952; reprint. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday Anchor, 1953), 257-266.

4.For a discussion of the Psalms, see "The Psalms as Liturgical Documents," in William O. E. Oesterly, "Worship in the Old Testament," in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 51-59.

5.The Daily Office Lectionary (BCP x-xlv) provides readings from the Psalms for every day of the year, but perhaps the most useful way to use the Psalms in public or private worship is the arrangement in the Prayer Book Psalter for the monthly reading of the Psalms, dividing them into thirty daily portions for morning and evening worship.

6.A brief 1914 novel, a sort of ecclesiastical science fiction story, E. M. Green, The Archbishop's Test (New York: Dutton, 1915; reprint. New York: MorehouseBarlow, 1960), demonstrates the power of the Prayer Book in Anglican life by recounting the story of a newly installed Archbishop of Canterbury who causes a religious revival in England simply by challenging his people and clergy to live the life outlined in the Prayer Book. The Prayer Book remains the embodiment of Anglican commitment and discipline today.

7.For a discussion of lex orandi, lex credendi, its history and recent abuses in liturgical revision, see Chapter 10, "Common Prayer,' in Peter Toon, Knowing God through the Liturgy.

8.While the details are far too numerous to enter into here, the provisions for worship in a book like Leviticus demonstrate God's interest in the manner and form of worship. Notice, too, St. Paul's concern for the proper administration of the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:17-34.

9.The 1789 Preface to the first American edition of the Book of Common Prayer (which was retained as the Preface to the 1892 and 1928 American Prayer Boob) explains that any differences between the English and American Prayer Books are the result of the change from life in a monarchy (with a legally established Church) to life in a republic (where establishment is prohibited). It goes on to add: It seems unnecessary to enumerate all the different alterations and amendments. They will appear, and it is to be hoped, the reasons for them also, upon a comparison of this with the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England. In which it will also appear that this Church is far from intending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline, or worship; or further than local circumstances require (BCP vi). We can see that the American Church was only invoking the authority and the limits on authority laid out in Article XX, "Of the Authority of the Church," BCP 607.

10.For more about the Prayer Book in other languages, see W K. L. Clarke, "Prayer Book Translations," in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 813-833.

11.See Dr. Toon's critique of liturgical revision in Knowing God through the Liturgy. See also T. Robert Ingram, New Liturgy, Old Heresy (Houston, TX: St. Thomas, 1981). The 1979 Book's defenders are perhaps more damning than its detractors. Aidan Kavanagh, in "'The Draft Proposed Book of Common Prayer': A Roman Catholic's Appreciation," Anglican Theological Review 58 (July 1976): 360-368, wrote: First, the Book as a whole is clearly not a mere updated revision of its predecessors since 1549. It is nothing if not a new formulary that contains some structural and phraseological traces of what has gone before but which goes quite beyond it (362). Similarly, the late Urban T. Holmes, formerly dean of the divinity school at the University of the South, in the January 1980 issue of the Anglican Theological Review wrote: A second illustration of the dilemma of an effective interaction between theology and religion in the Episcopal Church today is the debate over Prayer Book revision. After beginning in the 1950s with fervent protestations that no theological change was to be contemplated, or tolerated the Standing Liturgical Commission (SLC) grew progressively more silent in the face of the charges by the Society for the Preservation of the Book of Common Prayer (SPBCP) that this was indeed what was happening. No matter what one may think of the SPBCP, we know that they are correct. The 1979 Book of Common Prayer indicates a notable shift in theology from the 1928 Book of Common Prayer. There is no problem with changing theology through liturgical revision; it is how Anglicans do it. But whether or not the silence of the SLC before the charges of the SPBCP was a matter of strategy or not, their failure to reveal to the church the theological implications of what was happening can hardly be considered an act of reconciliation between theology and religion. . . . The alarming possibility is that in the quest for Anglican comprehensiveness, some church people have suggested that we retain both the 1928 and 1979 Books of Common Prayer.

One can understand how the SPBCP offers this as one last desperate gamble. Others should know better. How can one church hold as "official" two documents with conflicting theologies, unless theology makes no difference.

12.In the context of the disputes over doctrine and freedom in the nineteenth century, we see the same conservative motivation in the earlier development of the Reformed Episcopal Church. The details are too involved to discuss here, but a perusal of E. C. Chorley, Men and Movements in the American Episcopal Church, The Hale Lectures (New York: Scribner's Sons, 1946), especially Chapter 14, "The Passing of the Low Churchmen," 393-424, will help put the matter in perspective. While Chorley, as the historiographer of the Episcopal Church, is not very sympathetic toward the Reformed Episcopal Church, his study if read in the light of recent events and struggles will seem very familiar to today's Continuing Churchmen, and help them to understand their Reformed Episcopal brethren better.

13.See Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church, under "ritual" and "ceremonial."

14.Apart from the specific rubrical instructions in the Prayer Book, as are necessary for the service to be conducted in decency and order, there is a great amount of freedom in Anglican worship in regards to ceremonial. Some individuals (or congregations) find more ceremonial helpful, some rather less. The definitive word on this subject ought to be the instruction found at the very end of the first English Prayer Book of 1549, in a section entitled, "Certayne Notes for the More Playne Explicacion and Decent Ministracion of Thinges Conteined in Thys Book." It reads, "As touching kneeling, crossing, holding up of handes, knocking on the brest, and other gestures: they may be used or left as every mans devotion serveth without blame" {First and Second Prayer Books of King Edward VI, 288-289).

15.The examination of a fully annotated Prayer Book, such as Mant's BCP with Notes, will demonstrate the Scriptural nature of Anglican worship.

16.For information on the quotation of hymns in the New Testament, see under "Hymns" in the Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible.

17.For interesting, if rather technical, book-length studies of eucharistic rites and belief, see Yngve Brilioth, Eucharistic Faith and Practice Evangelical and Catholic, trans. A. G. Herbert (London: SPCK, 1930); and Josef A. Jungmann, The Early Liturgy: To the Time of Gregory the Great, trans. F. A. Brunner, University of Notre Dame Liturgical Studies VI (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1959). For excerpts from the Didache, see Bettenson, Documents, 64-66, or Bettenson, Early Fathers, 50-52. For Justin Martyr, see Bettenson, Documents, 66-67, or Bettenson, Early Fathers, 61-63. For Hippolytus, see Bettenson, Documents, 75-76, or the Easton edition of the Apostolic Tradition, 35-36.

18.For more on the life and work of Archbishop Cranmer, see Jasper Ridley, Thomas Cranmer (London: Oxford, 1962; Oxford Paperback, 1966).

19.William Law, an eighteenth century Anglican priest deprived of his ecclesiastical living for his inability in conscience to abjure the Stuarts and swear the oath of allegiance to George I, wrote the famous and influential A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life. Among his other works was The Spirit of Prayer, in which he gave these reasons to pray: . . . God, the only good of all intelligent natures, is not an absent or distant God, but is more present in and to our souls than our own bodies; and we are strangers to Heaven and without God in this world for this only reason, because we are void of that spirit of prayer which alone can and never fails to unite us with the One only Good, and to open Heaven and the kingdom of God within us. . . . And here lies the ground of the great efficacy of prayer, which when it is the prayer of faith, has a kindling and creating power, and forms and transforms the soul into everything that its desires reach after: it has the key to the Kingdom of Heaven and unlocks all its treasures, it opens, extends, and moves that in us which has its being and motion in and with the divine nature, and so brings us into real union and communion with God (in Anne Fremande, The Protestant Mystics, intro. W. H. Auden [New York: New American Library, Mentor, 1965], 102, 108).

20.For a discussion of synagogue services and Christian participation in them, see P. P. Levertoff, "Synagogue Worship in the First Century," in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 60-77.

21.See The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, under "hosanna" for its meaning: "save us, we beseech thee."

22.For a commentary on the collects, including their authorship and derivation, see Massey Shepherd, Oxford American Prayer Book Commentary. Shepherd also discusses the selection and the contents of the Epistles and Gospels. His pagination matches that of the 1928 BCP. More technical, but perhaps more interesting, is K. D. Mackenzie, "Collects, Epistles, and Gospels," in Clarke and Harris, Liturgy and Worship, 374-409.

23. See 1 Corinthians 16:1-3 for a Biblical record of Sunday collections, but notice the expectation that the major giving would be collected privately. The name "alms basins" for the basins we use to collect the congregation's offerings of money is, in a sense, a holdover from those ancient times. Originally the tithes were to be collected separately from alms deeds during the Communion time on behalf of the poor. Today, many have confused tithes and alms, but they are different offerings. The tithe is a flat ten percent of our income (increase), owed to God by right as our King and Creator. Alms are donations for the poor over and above our tithes. We ought to be certain to offer both, however they are collected in our particular parish (see Malachi 3:7-12). Moreover, many people get uncomfortable when a religious discussion of money begins, as well they might, given the casual obedience that they give God's commandment to worship him with the first fruits of their substance (Proverbs 3:9). But the worship of God with our substance is a holy duty. William Paret, explains in The Pastoral Use of the Prayer Book that "A Communion without giving was not the intention of the Church." He describes, in the light of Acts 20:35, a Communion without an offering as "... a mutilated Communion; the people were deprived of a blessing to which they were entitled" (120, 121). There is an essential error in the religious practice of a human being who will claim spiritual communion with God through the sacrifice of his Son, while at the same time withholding the physical tribute God commands.

24. See note 14 above.

25. About receiving the Communion: "When you approach, therefore, do not come forward with wrists outstretched, or with fingers spread open. Make your left hand, as it were, a throne for the right, since it is about to receive a king; and hollow your palm, and receive the body of Christ, adding your 'Amen'" (Cyril of Jerusalem, Cathechesis 23, in Bettenson, Later Fathers, 46-47.

Lesson Eight: The Polity of the Church

1. The text of Article XXXVII in the American Prayer Book (BCP 610) is a an edited and compressed version of the English Article of the same number. Significant differences in the English Article include the centering of authority in the Crown and a specific exclusion of the Monarch (and, thus, civil authorities) from the ministry of Word and Sacraments. The English Article ends with the following statements: "The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England"; "The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian men with death, for heinous and grievous offences"; and "It is lawful for Christian men, at the commandment of the Magistrate, to wear weapons and serve in the wars" (Browne, Exposition, 792). For a thorough commentary on this Article, see Browne, 792-834. The author of this outline would suggest that the American silence on the concluding matters of the English Article was due, not to disagreement, but to the differences between a monarchy and a republic, and the handling of such matters at the state rather than the federal level when the American Articles were adopted in 1801 (BCP 601).

2.The terms of the Declaration of Independence should be well known. After invoking "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God," the Congress accuses the King of "a long train of abuses and usurpations," insisting that there is a right and a duty to throw off such a govern ment. The signers establish their willingness to submit their cause to God's judgment by concluding, "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor."

3.In regards to Genesis 3:16, compare God's warning to Cain in Genesis 4:7, ". . . if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shah rule over him." Sin will desire to rule over Cain, but he must rule over sin ("shalt" is used as in "Thou shalt not steal"). In the same way, in the new disorder of the fallen world, Eve will desire to rule over her husband, but his duty is to rule over her for good. Compare Ephesians 5:25-29, where the limit on male authority is the nature of Christ's authority over the Church.

4.For the history of the use in English of the title "father" for spiritual pastors see under "Father" in the Oxford English Dictionary.

5.Some of the difficulties with titles of respect comes from antinomianism: a rejection of any authority or rule. This is regrettable, since God's order is a network of interlocking authorities and responsibilities. To be fair, however, some of the rejection of clerical authority has its origin in clerical failure to serve the Church. The polity of religious movements formed in reaction to clerical failure tend towards the anti-clerical, or at least to keeping the pastor under the governance of the local church board. Furthermore, those who believe that peace in inter-church relations can be achieved by the mere manipulation of terms, as in the substitution of "presbyter" for "priest," should remember the example of the radical John Milton's rejection of the Westminster Assembly's efforts to bring peace in England by the adoption of a presbyterian system of polity. He wrote, "New Presbyter is but old Priest writ large" ("On the New Enforcers of Conscience Under the Long Parliament," Milton's Works, 175-176).

6.Any study of canon law must begin with the canons of your own national Church and diocese. These are the particular rules you have agreed to follow by becoming a member of your Church and diocese. While the moral collapse of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America has made it necessary for Anglicans in this country to reorganize into a number of (one hopes) temporarily distinct jurisdictions, two historical references are very helpful in understanding American canon law. The first is a history of the early General Conventions of the Episcopal Church, and the development of the American system: Clara O. Loveland, The Critical Years: The Reconstitution of the Anglican Church in the United States of America: 1780-1789 (Greenwich, CT: Seabury, 1956). The second is a legislative history and analysis of the, American canons up to 1952: Edwin A. White and Jackson A. Dykman, Annotated!

Constitution and Canons for the Government of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America: Adopted in General Conventions: 1789-1952, 2nd ed. rev. by J. A. Dykman, 2 vol. (Greenwich, CT: Seabury, 1954). This set of books, usually referred to as "White and Dykman" is the basic, authoritative reference on Anglican canon law in America. There is also a "1981 edition" available, but this is much inferior, due to its being edited to accommodate the excessive claims of authority made by the Episcopal General Convention in the 1960s and 1970s. In general, it is fair to say that the canons of a particular Church must be understood in the light of ancient canon law, especially that of the undivided Church. A useful discussion of how this principle applies to Anglicans is: Joint Committee on Discipline of the American Church Union and the Clerical Union, The Ancient Canons and an Interpretation of the Word Discipline in the Book of Common Prayer: Together with A Comprehensive Bibliography in Canon Law (Riverside, NJ: Burlington County Pub.; for New York: American Church Union and the Clerical Union, 1952). For a look at the English background of American canon law, see John Henry Blunt, The Book of Church Law: Being an Exposition of the Legal Rights and Duties of the Parochial Clergy and Laity of the Church of England, 10th ed., revised by Walter G. F. Phillimore and G. Edwardes Jones (London: Longmans, Green, 1905). And for a discussion of the theory of Anglican canon law, see Appendix IV.

7. The importance of the congregation, as the basic unit of Christian polity, is demonstrated by Dean William Sherlock, in his A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity (1690), pp. 35f: The profession of the true Faith and Worship of Christ makes a true Church, and all true churches are the One Catholic Church, whether they be spread over all the world, or shut up in one corner of it, as at the first preaching of the Gospel the Catholic Church was nowhere but in Judea. Now as no Church is the Catholic Church of Christ, how far soever it has spread itself over the world, unless it profess the true Faith of Christ, no more is any Faith the Catholic Faith, how universally soever it be professed, unless it be the true Faith of Christ. Nor does the true Christian Faith cease to be Catholic, how few soever there be who sincerely profess it. It is downright Popery to judge of the Catholic Faith by its multitudes or large extent. . . . Were there but one true Church in the whole world, that were the Catholic Church, because it would be the whole Church of Christ on earth . . . (in More and Cross, Anglicanism, Selection 16, 40).

8.For Clement of Rome, see Bettenson, Documents, 62-63.

9.American canon law shows, as would be expected, the effects of being formulated during the same period as the organization of the American form of republican civil government. Clara O. Loveland's The Critical Years gives a detailed account of the efforts to develop a church government both Scriptural and American, but John E. Booty, in The Church in History, The Church's Teaching Series (New York: Seabury, 1979), summarizes the effect on the American understanding of the parish in this brief remark: The result of all the maneuvering in 1789 was a church government based upon local control by voluntary associations of persons in parishes. Dioceses and national convention possessed power in relation to and for the sake of parishes. The larger organizations functioned as agencies preserving and strengthening the unity of the church. [Bishop] White agreed that "the great art of governing consists in not governing too much"(71). What is so remarkable about this statement is that it comes from an Episcopalian scholar at precisely the moment when the Episcopal Church U.S.A. was reversing these principles in order to sue conservative parishes for their property in order to force them to adopt a vitiated, modernist religion. The only other comment needed here is to point out that the "voluntary" nature of association in parishes is a matter of polity only. Membership in Christ's Church is spiritually necessary for salvation, and not voluntary at all.

10. The offices of the bishop and priest are defined in the Second Office of Instruction, BCP 294. The proper relationship of the bishop and rector can be seen in 1 Peter 5:1-4. As an example of the canonical recognition of the rector's lesser ordinary authority, see Section 1 (a) Canon 45, "Of Ministers and their Duties," Episcopal Church Canons of 1952 (White and Dykman, Vol. 2, 121), which states: The control of the worship and the spiritual jurisdiction of the Parish, are vested in the Rector, subject to the Rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer, the Canons of the Church, and the godly counsel of the Bishop. All other Ministers of the Parish, by whatever name they may be designated, are to be regarded as under the authority of the Rector. White and Dykman comment, "The first section of this canon, which declares that the control of the worship and spiritual jurisdiction of the parish, and the use and control of the church and parish buildings shall be vested in the rector, is simply declaratory of the tradition of the Church (Vol. 2, 157-158).

11.The Anglican understanding of the authority of councils is demonstrated in Article VIII, "Of the Creeds," BCP 604, where the Nicene Creed is accepted, not simply for its connection with the Council of Nicaea, but because it "may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture." It was this provision about conciliar authority, among others, that allowed the American Church to omit the text of Article XXI, "Of the Authority of General Councils," BCP 607, with the notation that "it is partly of a local and civil nature, and is provided for, as to the remaining pans of it, in other Articles." The English text of Article XXI reads: General Councils may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of Princes. And when they be gathered together (forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God), they may err, and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary for Salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scriptures (Browne, Exposition, 490). Notice, however, that the American explanation of the omission of this Article does not contradict its doctrinal and spiritual content. For a commentary, see Browne, Exposition, 490-500.

12.For a list of the Seven Councils, and for the special authority of the first four in the Church of England, see Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church, under "Oecumenical Councils." The "Affirmation of St. Louis," adopted in 1977 by the Congress of St. Louis, Missouri, a meeting of faithful Anglicans in response to the doctrinal deviations of the Episcopal Church, recognized all seven of the Councils. The "Affirmation" is a foundational document for the Continuing Church Movement. Browne, on the other hand, accepts only six Councils {Exposition, 492-493; as do the authors of The Six Oecumenical Councils of the Undivided Catholic Church, Church Club Lectures 1893, 2nd ed. (New York: E. and J. B. Young, 1895). See the latter for elegant discourses on the Councils by prominent American Anglicans of the period. For a specific discussion of the Seventh Council, see C. B. Moss, The Church of England and the Seventh Council (London: Faith Press, 1957).

Lesson Nine: Moral Theology

1. Moral theology can be approached from a variety of directions: the nature and psychology of man (Christian anthropology); spiritual direction and the development of Christian character (sometimes called "ascetical theology"); and the theology of right motivation and behavior ("moral theology" or "Christian ethics" proper). Most writing on this subject will focus on one of these approaches, while including elements of the others. Secular works on psychology and ethics can also be useful to the advanced student of Christian morality, but in every case, whether a work purports to be "Christian" or "secular," the contents and method must be scrutinized in terms of Biblical revelation. Two notable Anglican general studies of moral theology are: R. C. Mortimer, The Elements of Moral Theology (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1947; reprint, with corrections, 1953); Lindsay Dewar, An Outline of Anglican Moral Theology (London: Mowbray, 1968). Also worthwhile is C. S. Lewis', "Christian Behaviour," Book 3 of Mere Christianity. Without agreeing with everything he has to say about method, or the Freudian elements of his theory, the present writer would recommend Victor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy, orig. title, From Death-Camp to Existentialism, Part one trans. Use Lasch, Preface by Gordon Allport (New York: Washington Square, 1963) for its testimony by a Jewish psychiatrist and death-camp survivor to the necessity of belief for the maintenance of life itself. Classic and influential Anglican works on the development of a Christian life and character include Jeremy Taylor (1613-1637), The Rule and Exercise of Holy Living and The Rule and Exercise of Holy Dying, and William Law (1686-1761), A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life. More modern works in this area include S. C. Hughson, Spiritual Guidance: A Study of the Godward Way (West Park, NY: Holy Cross, 1948); and F. R Harton, The Elements of the Spiritual Life: A Study in Ascetical Theology, Intro. Mark Carpenter-Gamier (London: SPCK, 1932). A very interesting modern study of character, but requiring careful reading, is Stanley Hauerwas, Character and the Christian Life: A Study in Theological Ethics (San Antonio, TX: Trinity University Press, 1975). An example of the sort of work to avoid, except for forensic or apologetic reasons, is J. L. Houlden, Ethics and the New Testament (Baltimore, MD: Penguin, 1973), where the author uses "critical" methods to set the New Testament writers against each other.

2.For a survey of historic ethical "systems," see Richard T. Nolan, Frank Kirkpatrick, et. al., Living Issues in Ethics (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing, 1982). This popular introductory textbook in ethics gives an adequate description of the competing secular systems, and a rather weak "modernist" account of Biblical ethics, a telling irony since the main authors are seminary graduates.

3.The Greek word for "superstition" is deisidaimonia, and Paul's adjective is built on it (Arndt and Gingrich, s.v.). Festus describes Christianity with the same negative word (as a "superstition") in Acts 25:19. Daimon is the word translated as "devil" in 1 Corinthians 10:20. It is unclear what the Greeks meant by this word, since they also used it to mean "god." The Christian understanding, consistent with 1 Corinthians 10:20 is "devil" (see Zodhiates, Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible, under "daimon" 1677.

4.Article XIV, "Of Works of Supererogation," BCP 605, addresses in particular the Roman teaching of a saving merit attached to good works, so that by going beyond the requirements of God's law, after sufficient merit for salvation has been obtained, a person may gain additional merits for the saving of others. This erroneous teaching completely misses the point of the Bible's teaching on salvation (see Psalm 49, especially v. 7, and review Lesson Three: Sin, Salvation, and Grace). If one listens to much of modern preaching, moreover, one will often hear the same false teaching: salvation by merit and a holiness beyond the holiness required by God's commandments, including the homey sounding notion of "doing a little something extra for God." But an error remains an error, whatever the name of the Church that teaches it. For a commentary on the Article, see Browne, Exposition.

5. It must be stressed, until it is understood by all men, that all "good works" begin in faith, not in a personal choice to adhere to abstract standards of morality. God is personal, and not an abstraction. Goodness is in relation to him personally, and not a matter of our will or of moral standards we would set for ourselves (and impose upon God). Good works do not bring salvation. They are the fruits of Faith and the action of God's grace in us, since a work is only good if it is done to please God in obedience to his revealed will in the Scriptures (see Hebrews 11:6). For a commentary on Article XII, "Of Good Works," see Browne, Exposition, 324-330. For a commentary on the related article, Article XIII, "Of Works before Justification," see Browne, Exposition, 331-340, and Appendix II of this outline of Anglicanism.

6.The Greek word for "conscience" is suneidesis. For an extended discussion of its origin and meaning, see under "Conscience" in The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible.

7.Article XVI, "Of Sin after Baptism," BCP 605-606, is meant, of course, to quiet troubled consciences, and not to encourage sin. Out of a zeal to oppose sin, the discipline of various churches has often erred in one of two directions. The first is to deny that sin is possible for the saved, thus greatly simplifying such a church's moral theology, but also inclining the average redeemed sinner to doubt his salvation. The second is to impose a discipline stricter than God's as found in the Scriptures, however foolish that may be. Both errors, however different they may appear, degenerate almost immediately into works righteousness, ignoring the fact that Christian righteousness is the righteousness of Jesus Christ imputed (granted, attributed) to the members of Christ's Church by the grace and mercy of the Father. For a commentary on the history and warrants of this important Article, see Browne, Exposition, 364-400.

8.The word translated "kill" in the King James Version is Hebrew ratsach, "to murder, pierce"

{Young's Analytical Concordance, entry 9 under "kill,"

Exodus 20:13). See also, Zodhiates, Hebrew-Greek Key Bible, under ratsach, 1639. And see The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, section C.2, "Homicide," under "Crimes and Punishments."

9.See Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, for lists under "Corporal Works of Mercy" and "Spiritual Works of Mercy."

Lesson Ten: A Church Miscellany

1. Much of the content of this lesson falls into the category of "lore." The best way to learn the lore of any organization, including any of the branches of the Christian Church, is to spend some time sharing its life, especially since the odds and ends of that life are rarely written down completely or in one particular book. Lore must almost always be gathered, in order to be taught or understood. Some places to begin gathering Anglican lore are: Cross and Livingstone, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, E. Cobham Brewer, The Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, A. A. Benton, The Church Cyclopaedia^ and Percy Dearmer, The Parson's Handbook. Interesting short works include: Frederick L. Eckel, Jr., A Concise Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Terms (Boston: Whittemore Associates, 1960); Carroll E. Whittemore, ed., Symbols of the Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1959); and Rolfe P. Crum, Foreword O. H. Hart, A Dictionary of the Episcopal Church, Sixteenth ed.

(Philadelphia: Trefoil, 1960). Also interesting is Walter Lowrie, Art in the Early Church, Rev. ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1901; New York: Revised Harper and Row ed. of 1947; New York: Norton, 1969). Development See for historical origins in great detail, Chapter 12, "The of Ceremonial," in Gregory Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy, 2nd ed.

London, Adam and Charles Black, 1945; Reprint, 1964), 397-433.

2.On liturgical lights, see Gregory Dix, Shape of the Liturgy, 416-422.

3.See Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, under "minor orders." 4.

See the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopaedia, under "Exorcism." The 1549 Prayer Book included this exorcism in the Order for Public Baptism: commande thee, uncleane spirite, in the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holy ghost, that thou come out, and depart, from these infantes, whom our Lord Jesus Christe hath vouchsaved to call to his holy Baptisme, to be made members of his body, and of his holy congregacion. Therefore thou cursed spirite, remembre thy sentence, remembre thy iudgemente, remembre the daye to be at hande, wherin thou shalt burne in fyre euerlasting, prepared for the and thy Angels. And presume not hereafter to exercise any tyrannye towarde these infantes, whome Christe hathe bought with his precious blood, and by this his holy Bapstisme calleth to be of his flocke {First and Second Prayer Books of Edward VI, 238). Mant, Book of Common Prayer, 343, cites Dr. Nicholls, who explains that this exorcism was dropped from subsequent editions to avoid superstition and confusion with the discipline of other Churches. The exorcism was replaced with the short petitions beginning "O Merciful God," found on page 278 of the American edition of 1928. A careful reading of these petitions will demonstrate that they intend the same result as the former exorcism. It should be further noted that the 72nd Canon of the Church of England requires a priest of that Church to obtain a license from the Bishop to perform an exorcism (Mant, 814).

5.For an extended discussion of processions, see Percy Dearmer, Parson's Handbook, 254-264.

6.See "Ember Days" in Benton, Church Cyclopaedia (where he uses Saxon Ymbren, a revolution or circuit, to explain the term); Brewer, Dictionary (where he derives the term from German quatember, a corruption of the Latin for the "four times"; and Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church.

7.For a discussion of the history and development of the ancient vestments, see Gregory Dix, Shape of the Liturgy, 398-410.

8.On stoles and related matters, see Gregory Dix, Shape of the Liturgy, 401-402.

For additional information, see Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church, under "stole."

9. See under "cope" in Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church.

10. See under "mitre,"

Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church. According to tradition, St. John the Evangelist and Apostle modeled the worship of the Church he led in Ephesus after the ancient worship of Israel and his vision of the Heavenly Jerusalem. According to Charlotte M. Yonge, Eighteen Centuries of Beginnings of Church History (London: Walter Smith and Innes, 1890), "He himself ministered before the Christian Altar in a mitre and robes like those of the High Priest, and these passed on as the pattern for the Christian Priesthood" (40). John's practice is especially interesting to Anglicans, since the oldest stratum of our practice is Gallican (from the Gaulish Church), which was itself an extension of the Ephesian pattern.

11.For details, see Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church, under "cassock."

12.See Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church, under "surplice." See also Gregory Dix, Shape of the Liturgy, on choir dress (408). For the appearance of ancient ministers, see Lowrie, Art in the Early Church, plates 145a and 146, mosaics from the Oratory of St. Venatius attached to the Lateran Baptistery (c. 642) and San Vitale in Ravenna (6th century), depicting clerical dress of that period.

13.See Percy Dearmer, Parson's Handbook, for a delightfully partisan discussion of ecclesiastical caps (124-125). He compares an Anglican clergyman wearing the biretta to an English soldier wearing a German pickelhaube.

14.See "High Churchmen" and "Low Churchmen" in Cross and Livingstone, Oxford Dictionary of the Church.

15.For a discussion of liturgical colors, see Percy Dearmer, Parson's Handbook, 103-117.

Editorial Notes

Source: Louis R. Tarsitano, An Outline of an Anglican Life (Classical Anglican Press, 1994). Reproduced on AnglicanWiki by permission of Classical Anglican Press.