Commissioners Petitioning for Review of Book of Common Prayer, Commentary 2 · Topic 7
CONFIRMATION.
[It is evident that the meaning of these words is,Sect. 1. Rub. 1. that Children baptized, & dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved, though they be not confirmed; wherein we see not what danger there can be of misleading the vulgar, by teaching them truth; but there may be danger in this desire of having these words wronged, as if they were false; for St. Austin says he is an Infidel that defies them to be true, Ep. 23. ad Bonif.
Rep. What, all Children saved, whether they be Children of the Promise or no? Or can you shew us a Text that saith (Whoever is baptized, shall be saved,) the Common-Prayer-Book plainly speaks of the non-necessity of Unction, Confirmation, and other Popish Ceremonies and Sacraments, and meaneth that ex parte Ecclesiae, they have all things necessary to salvation, and are undoubtedly saved, supposing them the due subjects, and that nothing be wanting ex parte sui, which certainly is not the case of such as are not Children of the Promise, and Covenant; the Child of an Heathen doth not ponere obicem, actually, quo minus baptizetur, and yet being baptized, is not saved on your own reckoning, (as we understand you) therefore the Parent can penere obicem, and either hinder the Baptism or effect, to his Infant; Austin speaks not there of all Children whatever, but those that are offered per aliorum spiritualem voluntatem, by the Parents usually, or by those that own them after the Parents be dead, or they exposed, or become theirs: He speaks also of what may be done, & de eo qui fieri non posse arbitratur: But our question is, what is done, and not what God can do: Our great question is, what Children they be that Baptism belongeth to?
[After the Catechism we conceive that it is not a sufficient qualification,Sect. 2. Rub. &c.… we conceive that this qualification is required rather as necessary, then as sufficient, and therefore it is the duty of the Minister of the place, Can. 61. to prepare Children in the best manner to be presented to the Bishop for confirmation, and to inform the Bishop of their fitness, but submitting the judgement to the Bishop both of this, and other qualifications, and not that the Bishop should be tyed to the Ministers consent; compare this Rubrick to the se…ond Rubrick before the Catechism, and there is required what is further necessary and sufficient.
Repl. 1. If we have all necessary ordinarily, we have that which is sufficient ad esse, there is more ordinarily necessary, then to say those words. 2. Do you owe the King no more obedience? Already do you contradict his Declaration, which saith, Confirmation shall be performed (by the information, and with the consent of the Minister of the place.) But if the Ministers consent shall not be necessary, take all the charge upon your own souls, and let your souls be answerable for all.
They see no need of Godf.) Here the Compilers of the Liturgy did,Sect. 3. Exc. 1. 24▪ and so doth the Church, that there may be a witness of the Confirmation.]
Repl. It is like to be your own Work as you will use it, and we cannot hinder you from doing it in your own way. But are Godfathers no more than Witnesses? &c.
[This supposeth that all children, &c.)Sect▪ 4. Ex▪ 2. It supposeth, and that truly, that all Children were, at their Baptism by water, and the Holy Ghost, and had given unto them the forgiveness of all their sins, and it is uncharitably presumed, that notwithstanding the frailties and slips of their Childhood, they have not totally lost what was in Baptism conferred upon them, and therefore adds, Strengthen them, we beseech thee O Lord, with the Holy Ghost, the Comfortes, and daily increase in them their manifold gifts of grace, &c. None that lives in open sin ought to be confirmed.]
Repl. 1. Children baptized without right, cannot be presumed to be really regenerate and pardoned. 2. We speak onelyonly of those that by living in open sin, do shew themselves to be unjustified; & these you confess should not be confirmed. O that you would but practise that! If not, this Confession will witness against you.
[Before the Imposition of hands,Sect▪ 5. p. …0 Rubr. &c.) Confirmation is reserved to the Bishop, in honorem ordinis to bless, being an act of Authority, so was it of old. St. Hierome Dialog. adv. Lucifer, says it was, Totius-Orbis-consentio in hanc partem; and St. Cyprian to the same purpose, Ep. 73. and our Church doth every where profess, as she ought to conform to the Catholick usages of the Primitive times, from which causlesly to depart, argues rather love of contention, than of peace. The reserving of Confirmation to the Bishop, doth argue the Dignity of the Bishop above Presbyters, who are not allowed to Confirm, but does not argue any excellency in Confirmation above the Sacraments: St. Hierome argues the quite contrary, ad Lucif. Cap. 4. That because Baptism was allowed to be performed by a Deacon, but Confirmation onelyonly by a Bishop; therefore Baptism was most necessary, and of greatest value; the mercy of God allowing the most necessary means of Salvation to be administred by inferior orders, and restraining the less necessary to the higher, for the honour of their order.]
Repl. O that we had the Primitive Episcopacy! and that Bishops had no more Churches to over-see than in the Primitive times they had, and then we would never speak against this reservation of Confirmation to the honor of the Bishop; but when that Bishop of one Church is turned into that Bishop of many hundred Churches, and when he is now a Bishop of the lowest rank, that was an Arch-bishop, when Archbishops first came up, and so we have not really existent any meer Bishops (such as the Antients knew) at all, but onelyonly Archbishops and their Curates; marvel not if we would not have Confirmation proper to Archbishops, no one man undertake more than an hundred can perform; but if they will do it, there is no remedy, we have acquit our selves.
Prayer after the Imposition of hands is grounded upon the practice of the Apostles,Sect. 6. Ex…. 1. Heb▪ 62. & Acts 8. 17: nor doth 25 Article say, that Confirmation is a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice, but that the 5 commonly called Sacraments, have ground partly of the corrupt following the Apostles, &c. which may be applied to some other of these 5. but cannot be applied to Confirmation, unless we make the Church speak Contradictions.
Rep. But the question is not of imposition of hands in general; but this imposition in particular: And you have never proved, that this sort of imposition, called Confirmation, is mentioned in those Texts: And the 25 Article cannot more probably be thought to speak of any one of the 5. as proceeding from the corrupt imitation of the Apostles, then of Confirmation as a supposed Sacrament.
We know no harm in speaking the language of holy Scriptures,§ 7. Ex. 2. Acts 8. 15. they laid their hands upon them, and they received the holy Ghost; and though imposition of hands be not a Sacrament, yet it is a very fit sign, to certifie the persons what is then done for them, as the Prayer speaks.
Rep. It is fit to speak the Scriptures Language in Scripture-sense; but if those that have no such power to give the holy Ghost, wil say, receive the Holy Ghost, it were better for them to abuse other Language, than Scripture-language.