Besides these, there are many areas of overall general agreement between the two documents, after all, both groups hold to the most of the overall truths expressed in the creeds of the historic Church. As to be expected, because each of these documents come from a different group at a different time there will be things that one would feel convicted to include that the other did not for various and sundry reasons. This could be from a lack of belief in that particular item or maybe because at the time of the construction of the document the issue in question was not in dispute for the particular authors in question.
Read more ...
The last specific comparison to be undertaken here is the comparison of the 1689 and the Articles regarding Holy Communion. In order to understand a couple of points regarding the 1689, it is necessary to back up, as it were, and look at the differences in the document from which the 1689 was taken, the Westminster Confession, and the 1689 as it stands complete after the Baptist modifications. Thus, when dealing with Chapter 30: Of the Lord’s Supper, before launching into a comparison with Article XXVIII: Of the Lord’s Supper, a short comparison will be made between the 1689’s Chapter 30 and the Westminster Confession’s Chapter 29, also entitled “Of the Lord’s Supper,” specifically in reference to sections 1, 4, and 8.
Read more ...
Interestingly enough, in order to understand what “predestination” means in the Articles contra the 1689 we need to look back at Baptism. In Article XXVII: Of Baptism we find the language of regeneration, language wholly missing from the 1689. Understanding the meaning of regeneration yields the prize of understanding language as it pertains to predestination. For the specific differences in reference to this issue we turn again to Browne:
Another objection is drawn from the Calvinistic scheme. Baptismal grace is supposed to contradict the doctrine of final perseverance. The Calvinistic scheme teaches, that grace is always irresistible, and that grace once given always abides. The soul, once in a state of grace, is always in a state of grace. If therefore grace was given at baptism, it can never fail.
The most rigid form of Calvinism might make this inevitable. Yet, very high predestinarians have thought otherwise. Augustine held that persons might be predestined to grace, but not to perseverance; nay, that they might be ordained to persevere for a time, yet not to the end.[1]
Thus, there is a distinction among those in Baptism of those who may be in covenant for a time and those who will persevere to the end. Although they are predestined to their final state, there is, from our narrow earthly perspective, a state of flux in between. Among those whom we should remember when dealing with predestination are those predestined to eternal life who may not claim that reward until very near their end. These in an eternal sense are as elect and as sure in that election as any, but to us will often appear as heathens. These are, to coin a phrase, the “proto-elect” and a sure reason for a pastoral approach to the doctrine of election. Pastors cannot know in their congregations who are predestined to grace and who is predestined to life, neither can they know among people met on the street who among those they meet, regardless of how they appear at that specific point in time, are ultimately elect of God.
Read more ...
Baptism has already been mentioned in regards to overall worship context and how the 1689, being a sole clarifying statement of belief, had a far greater burden to explain in detail regarding Baptism much of which the Articles did not. This was for several reasons, including the Articles’ systemic context that included the other supporting structures of the Book of Common Prayer’s Order of Baptism, the early Church Fathers, and Tradition. Homilies could be added generally but in speaking specifically of Baptism there is no Homily of Baptism mentioned in the Articles. Having looked at the systemic context and form of Chapters 28 (Of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper) and 29 (Of Baptism) of the 1689, the time has come to look at the next level, content.
Read more ...
Before engaging in a more in-depth look at the Articles and the 1689, there are some global similarities and differences that should be addressed, so that a proper basis for comparison exists. This is partly needed because even though the average 21st Century man looks back at the Reformation as a more or less uniform time, it was really not. Although some of the same issues were being dealt with at the beginning of the Reformation, 100+ years later (even today in several cases) the emphasis regarding which issues were most troublesome or of primary concern varied. Influences and issues of the early Reformation are seen heavily figured in the Articles and the issues of the later Reformation are just as in evidence in the 1689.
Read more ...
