ANGLICAN ARTICLES OF RELIGION. – The 39 Articles of Religion of the Anglican Church are found at the end of almost all modern editions of the Book of Common Prayer. They are the result of a slow evolution from the purely schismatic doctrines of Henry VIII to those clearly heretical doctrines of continental Protestantism, with certain special characteristics of Anglicanism. After the first 10 Articles published by Henry VIII (1509–47) in 1536, Cranmer composed in 1538, but did not publish, 13 Articles imbued with Lutheranism. A year later, in 1539, the king approved the 6 Articles known as the “whip with six cords,” which were markedly opposed to Protestant doctrines and manifested the king’s reaction against the Lutheran-Calvinist current. In 1552 Cranmer, by order of King Edward VI (1547–53), compiled 42 Articles, incorporating into them part of his 13 Articles of 1538. The Lutheran influence is clear in them, and here and there one can discern the Zwinglian-Calvinist doctrine concerning the Sacraments.
After the Catholic reaction of Mary Tudor (1553–1558), in 1563, under Queen Elizabeth (1558–1603), the 42 Articles of 1552 were revised. Some were suppressed and others newly formulated: 38 remained in all. Through the queen’s direct intervention, the addition that is still found there was made to Article 20: “The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith.” Finally, in 1571, with certain alterations, Article 29 of 1552, which denied the Real Presence and had been suppressed in 1563, was restored; and the queen officially approved the 39 Articles of Religion,
which are still in force. The attempt made by Archbishop Whitgift in 1595 to introduce into them the so-called 9 Lambeth Articles, with the Calvinist doctrine of predestination, was never approved by the queen, although the said Articles remained for several years as an appendix to the 39. The “Doctrine of the Church of England,” long prepared by a commission composed for the most part of Anglican bishops and ecclesiastics, was published in 1938. It was intended to be an official explanation of the 39 Articles, designed to calm the controversies; nevertheless, it not only failed to achieve this purpose but, on the contrary, increased doctrinal confusion.
The 39 Articles are classified by some in the following manner: the triune and one God, I–V; the rule of faith, VI–VIII; sin and salvation, IX–XVIII; the Church, ministers and Sacraments, XIX–XXXVI; the national Church, XXXVII; miscellaneous matters (property and oaths), XXXVIII–XXXIX. Some errors are common to them and to those of the continental Protestants, although expressed in vaguer terms; such are the condemnation of the Mass (XXXI), of purgatory, indulgences and the veneration of the saints (XXII), of transubstantiation (XXVIII), of works of supererogation (XIV), of the number of the Sacraments instituted by Our Lord (XXV), etc. Others are proper to Anglicanism, such as the supremacy of the king and queen of England over the Church (XXXVII), the admission of the episcopate (XXXVI), the marriage of bishops (XXXII), etc.
But what could be called the characteristic of these Articles is their ambiguity or lack of clarity. In the dedicatory epistle to Pusey, which Forbes wrote as a preface to his An Explanation of the Thirty Nine Articles, one reads: “The great German theologian Möhler claims that they are Calvinist, although he recognizes their moderation; Archbishop Lawrence, in the Bampton Lectures of 1804, seeks to demonstrate that they are purely Lutheran; F. a. Sancta Clara (Ch. Davenport) asserts that they are compatible with the decrees of Trent.”
It is known that Newman, while still a Protestant, attempted in his famous Tract 90 to interpret them in a Catholic sense, and W. Parker, in his Harmony of Anglican Doctrine with the Doctrine of the Eastern Churches, endeavored to adapt them to the catechism of the “Orthodox” Church. In fact, in most of the Articles there is a certain tendency not to define the words precisely, leaving the meaning of the sentence somewhat vague, so that each reader may interpret it according to his own taste. It is enough to know the profound doctrinal differences existing among the High Church, the Low Church and the Broad Church, all of which accept the 39 Articles, to have confirmation of what has been said. J. Keating, examining the famous “Doctrine of the Church of England,” observes that an Anglican may affirm or deny the virginal birth of Jesus Christ and his resurrection; for him it is an open question whether the Savior’s “nature” miracles were real events or not, and whether Jesus erred in his teaching.
Finally, there are many opinions concerning the value of the 39 Articles. According to S. Carter and A. Weeks (cf. Protestant Dictionary), they have for Anglicans the same value that the Augsburg Confession has for Lutherans and the Tridentine profession of faith has for Catholics. During the negotiations for the recognition of Anglican ordinations by the Russian Church, the Anglicans stated that the Articles were to be interpreted and explained according to the doctrines contained in the Prayer Book. The Russian “Orthodox,” led by I. P. Sokolov, opposed this with serious arguments (cf. C. Crivelli, Anglicani e «Ortodossi» russi, in La Civiltà Catt., 1941, IV, pp. 83 ff., 188 ff., 261 ff., 431 ff.). Others say that the Articles should be abandoned and that only the Prayer Book should be considered an expression of the true doctrine of the Church of England. To remedy the difficulty experienced by many Anglican ministers in subscribing to the 39 Articles before being ordained, it became necessary to add to the formula that assent to the Articles did not extend to every phrase contained in them. This is, as can be seen, an indeterminate clause, which may be interpreted according to the whim of the person being ordained. V. ANGLICANESIMO.
oughby, The Tutorial Prayer Book, London 1913; Fr. J. Smithen, Continental Protestantism and the English Reformation, ibid. 1927; The Book of Common Prayer with the Additions and Deviations proposed in 1928, ibid. 1928; The Book of Common Prayer... According to the Use of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the U. S. of America, New York 1929; Ch. Rodney Carter-G. E. Alison Weeks, The Protestant Dictionary, London 1933; S. L. Ollard-Gordon Grosse, A Dictionary of English Church History, Doctrine in the Church of England, ibid. 1938; J. Keating, Anglicanism self-portrayed, in The Month, 171 (1938, 1), pp. 109–118 (the extract, in French translation, was printed in Belgium).