Introduction to Anglican Theology - Articles Twenty-One Through Thirty-Nine

Lesson Three
In the previous lessons we studied the first twenty of the Articles of Religion. In this lesson we will study the remaining nineteen.

My written lesson for this class will give you some background information on each of the articles. This will enable us to understand each article a bit more fully. As in the previous lesson, I have consulted the excellent book by W.H. Griffith Thomas, Principles of Theology. We will begin with Article 21. As we study these articles, please read each of them carefully. Also, I suggest you do your review questions as you read my comments and the article together.

Article 21: This article was originally written in 1553, and then, with only a few alterations, was adopted in its final version in 1573. In 1545, the pope called a general council to decide on the truth of Protestant doctrines. None of the Reformers were invited to this conference. This Roman conference produced a number of decrees that were not accepted by the Protestant Reformers including the Anglican Reformers.

From the earliest days of the church, when the church faced divisive issues, a conference was called to decide these issues. A description of the first Christian council is found in Acts 15.

The article refers to a “general council,” that is, a council of the entire church. In the early centuries of the church there were a number of general councils, all of them summoned by emperors. One of the first such councils was the Council of Nicea called by Emperor Constantine. None of them were fully representative of all the Christians living at the time, but once they met and issued their decrees, the teachings of each of the first six councils were universally accepted by the whole church at the time. For this reason, and since they conformed to Scripture, Anglicans accept the decrees of the first six general councils. The last of these six was the third council of Constantinople which met in 680. Since then, there have been no general councils accepted by the entire church, and therefore, Anglicans do not accept any but the first six councils. Of these, the first four have been considered the most important as they laid the foundation of Christian doctrine. None of these early councils were summoned by popes. Nor did the popes preside at any of these early councils.

Why does the article say that general councils must be summoned by rulers? In the earliest centuries of the church there was a single ruler, the emperor, who governed Christian lands. A council summoned by a ruler was intended to be representative of all Christians everywhere, rather than a council called by a small group of Christians who sought to impose their will on the universal church. Further, at that time there were no universally accepted bishops who were the head of all Christians.

There has been no general council since 680 accepted by the universal church, and therefore, it is unlikely there will be another general council. An important reason for this article is to deny the validity of the council called by the Roman pope to condemn Protestant doctrines. This council, unlike the early universally accepted councils, was called by a pope rather than a ruler, its decrees were not accepted by the church universal, and it was, unlike the early general councils, presided over by a pope.

Article 22: This article denies four doctrines taught by the Roman Church.

First, there is the doctrine of purgatory. Purgatory is a place where, after death, a soul suffers for sins, and once the suffering has paid the price, the soul is then admitted into heaven. The Anglican Reformers rejected this belief because the sacrifice of Christ for sin is the only payment acceptable to God as described in previous articles. Further, neither Scripture nor the church for a number of centuries supported such a doctrine.

Second, by “pardons,” the article refers to indulgences, the belief that masses could be said for the dead, and that these masses allowed the dead to escape more quickly from purgatory and enter into heaven. Clearly, if the concept of purgatory is rejected, so are indulgences since only the blood of the Lamb, his full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, makes payment for sin. The Roman Church still affirms purgatory and indulgences as can be seen in its new Catechism of the Catholic Church published in 1992, paragraphs 1471 and following.

Third, the article rejects the Roman practice of worshipping and adoring images and relics. This article has its basis in the second of the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:4-7, which states that visible representations of the divine are not to be worshipped or adored. Neither Scripture nor the practice of the early church accepted such a practice. Anglicans permit images of biblical subjects, such as the cross, pictures, stained glass windows, and so forth, but Anglicans do not worship them. Nor do Anglicans worship relics, such as, for example, bones of the saints. At the time of the Reformation, it was thought by many Roman worshippers that such bones had spiritual power.

Fourth, the article rejects the invocation of the saints. At the time of the Reformation many Roman believers called upon the saints, attributing to them an authority that belongs to the Lord Jesus and only to the Lord Jesus. This practice is not sanctioned by Scripture or the practice of the early church.

Article 23: This article was written against the extreme Protestants who claimed that the only requirement for entering the ministry was the inner illumination of the Holy Spirit. In their view, God called a person and the church had no authority in the matter.

Article 24 was written against the Roman practice of worship being in Latin, a language the people did not understand. This practice has no foundation in Scripture or in the history of the church for centuries.

Article 25: This is a very important article, and in a future lesson we will study it more carefully. In this lesson, however, I will provide a few background ideas, and then in the review questions, ask you to notice several features of this article.

At the time of the Reformation, an understanding of the sacraments was one of the most intensely debated issues. This article was written to affirm the Anglican position on the sacraments over against two other alternatives. We are, at this point, especially interested in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. First, there was the Roman position which tended to believe that when the bread and wine of Holy Communion were consecrated, they became, in a rather material sense, the very body and blood of Christ himself. This way of expressing the matter is somewhat over-simplified, but in actual practice, there were many who thought they were actually looking at the very body of Christ when the sacrament was lifted up and gazed upon. This way of understanding the sacrament made it an automatic process as if grace could be received by simply eating the sacrament. Active faith was not required for the sacrament to be effective.

Against this view the Anglican Reformers believed that bread and wine were signs of God’s good will toward us when received in faith, that is, by trust in God’s promise that he would bless us through the sacrament. The signs, the bread and wine, could not bless, only God can bless, although the bread and wine signify that God is effectually working as believers come to the Lord’s Supper in faith. This view is indicated by saying that the bread and wine are “sure witnesses and effectual signs of God's grace and good will towards us.”

The other view rejected by the Anglican Reformers is that the bread and wine are only “badges or tokens of the profession of Christians” and nothing in addition to that. In this view, the participants believe that celebrating the Lord’s Supper is a form of professing one’s faith, namely, that Christ died for sinners. Beyond that, the Holy Communion means nothing. The Anglican Reformers agreed that it is a profession of faith, but it is also an event in which God works effectively in the life of those who come to Holy Communion in faith. In other words, God acts in Communion and changes those who come to him in faith.

Article 26: At the time of the Reformation, certain extreme Protestant groups maintained that baptism and the Lord’s Supper were not valid unless the minister was a holy person. This view has often been held throughout the history of the church, one of the first occasions being in the fourth century when certain priests and bishops abandoned the faith during persecution. Then, when the persecution was lifted, they wished to resume their sacramental duties. This view was rejected by the church which stated that the sacraments are valid regardless of the moral life of the minister.

In previous articles we learned that the Reformers held a very strong doctrine of sin. According to their teaching, all persons are deeply afflicted by a tendency to sin from birth onward. All ministers are unholy. None lead sinless lives. If the power of the sacraments depended upon the holiness of the minister, there would be no sacraments.

Even so, as the article states, some ministers lead such unholy lives that they need to be deposed. This discipline, unfortunately, has not always been exercised by the church.

Article 27: Baptism, for the Reformers, was understood as a covenant. Essentially, a covenant entailed three aspects. First, it had its basis in God’s saving acts, above all, the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Second, there was a sign of the covenant, which in the case of baptism was the washing with water, and for Holy Communion, it was the bread and wine. Third, there were mutual promises and commitments.

The word “instrument,” as used in the article, does not mean an instrument like a tool, but rather, a legal instrument such as a will on a contract. This reflects the covenant nature of baptism in which God promises to incorporate the baptized into the church, to forgive and adopt the baptized as a child of God, to confirm faith, and to increase grace. All these are covenant promises of God, and as seen in Article 25 on the sacraments, these promised blessings only come true as they are received in faith. In other words, baptism does not automatically, apart from the response of faith, create the forgiveness of sins or regenerate one as a child of the living God. The article states that faith is confirmed, that is, there was faith before the baptism.

Who exercises this faith? Some would say that only adults can be baptized since little children or infants do not have faith prior to their being old enough to hear the gospel. The Anglican Church insists that it is the faith of the church, in particular, the faith of the sponsors or parents of the child that reflects belief in the promises of God. When the child grows up, he or she will need to exercise faith to believe and receive the blessings promised to them by God in their baptism.

Anglicans believe in infant baptism for many, many reasons, and space at this point does not permit a full treatment. We may list the following:

a. Under the Old Covenant given first to Abraham and his descendants, circumcision was the sign of the covenant and was administered to male children on their eighth day of life. Similarly, water baptism is the sign of the New Covenant and can be administered to children.

b. When non-Jews converted to Judaism, the entire family was baptized and the males circumscribed. Early converts to Christianity, with their roots in Judaism, would adopt the same approach, baptizing the entire family. A number of New Testament texts state that a person and his household were baptized.

c. If the faith of a parent is not sufficient to bring God’s blessings to a child, Jesus would never have healed the children of parents who came seeking his healing.

d. The church fathers accepted infant baptism and it was known as a common practice by the second century.

e. At the time of the Reformation, certain groups in the West, influenced in part by the individualism of the Renaissance, began to only baptize adults. Prior to the sixteenth century, there is no record of anyone denying baptism to children. The Eastern Church has retained the ancient tradition of baptizing children followed by the Holy Eucharist.

f. The primary Protestant Reformers, Cranmer, Luther, and Calvin affirmed infant baptism because they affirmed the priority of God’s promises which cannot be broken although they can be ignored or rejected.

g. Children know when they are included and loved. They can exercise faith in response to goodness, although their response does not possess the strong cognitive element of a mature mind. However, it still is faith, where faith is defined as trust and openness to love.

Article 28. We have already covered some of the ideas in Article 28 in our discussion of Article 25. However, we need to consider the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation. The term refers to the substance of the bread and wine being transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ. It entails making a philosophical distinction that all things are composed of substances with their accidents. For example, the substance of diamond is the particular matter which comprises it (diamond matter so to speak), while its accidents are things you can see and touch -- such things as its shape, its hardness, its brilliance, its color, its specific heat, and so forth. Transubstantiation states that the accidents of the bread remain the same after they are consecrated, such things as the texture of the bread, its color, its shape, and so forth, but the inner essence, the substance of the bread, becomes the literal, material body of Christ. The same holds for the wine, its inner substance becoming the blood of Christ while its accidents remain that of wine.
Anglicans rejected this teaching for many, many reasons. First and foremost the doctrine was not taught in Scripture, nor was it believed for centuries in the church. Also, the doctrine led to many superstitions, such as worshipping the bread as if the body of Christ were literally the substance of the consecrated bread. Further, it led to the belief that receiving consecrated bread and wine meant that one physically ingested the Lord Jesus, and this would happen whether or not one personally came to Holy Communion with faith in the goodness and grace of God. In other words, it made the relationship with God given by Holy Communion a mechanical one of simply eating, rather than a dynamic, personal relationship with a living God in which bread and wine are signs of God’s effectual grace.

Article 29: Please read and think about this article.

Article 30: At the time of the Reformation, the Roman Church did not give the cup to the laity. This was contrary to Scripture and the practice of the church for centuries.

Article 31: This article was written against the Roman conception that every mass (Holy Communion) was itself a sacrifice of Christ, that is, Christ was sacrificed repeatedly with every repetition of the mass. Rome also believed that these masses atoned for pain (punishment for sin) and guilt, both for the living and the dead. Roman priests said masses for the dead, believing that these masses shortened their time in purgatory. The Anglican Reformers rejected these beliefs and practices because there was only one sacrifice for sin, namely, the one carried out by Christ upon the cross. To say that further sacrifices are required, detracts and diminishes the one sacrifice of Christ.

Article 32: Neither Scripture nor the Church for centuries taught that the clergy could not marry.

Article 33: Both Israel and the church of the New Testament exercised discipline. Specifically, the article refers to Matthew 18:15-18 where it is stated that those who refuse to be reconciled are to be treated as a “Gentile and a tax-collector,” that is, as one who does not belong to the community.

Historically, discipline was connected to the Eucharist, with the disciplinary penalty being exclusion from the Eucharist or even exclusion from the fellowship of the community. For this reason, Anglican Prayer Books connect discipline with Holy Communion. The Anglican Prayer Book of 1662, for example, states that communion is to be refused to one who is in “malicious and open contention with his neighbours, or other grave and open sin without repentance …” All persons are sinners, but open and grave sins are very serious sins that are publicly known in the church. When open sin continues without repentance, it wounds the spiritual life of the congregation unless the sinner is publicly denounced and excluded from Communion.

Excluding a person from the congregation, however, is a very serious matter. It requires discernment and spiritual maturity and the 1662 Prayer Book instructs the minister to bring the matter to the bishop who will give his judgment once the facts of the matter of been ascertained.

The aim of this exclusion is repentance on the part of the open sinner followed by reconciliation. In other words, the spiritual health of the sinner is at stake, as well as the spiritual health of the congregation.

For Anglicans, excommunication cuts one off from the visible church, but not necessarily from the invisible church. As stated in Article 19, churches can err, and sometimes persons who are leading a faithful life in the eyes of God can be cut off by an unfaithful church. For example, the pope excommunicated the Reformers, and without needing to claim that the pope was mistaken, since such final decisions belong to God, it can be said that the Reformers did not think the pope had the authority to exclude them from the invisible church.

Finally, any society that fails to exercise discipline will be spiritually wounded, and if the lack of discipline persists, will eventually fragment or collapse.

Article 34: Very early in the history of the church traditions and ceremonies came into existence. These rites were used for worship, ordinations, and other formal aspects of their common life. Anglicans follow this ancient tradition because, as the final line of the article indicates, these forms enable the body of Christ to be edified, that is, building up the people of God.

The article assumes that those who develop these forms of worship are those who have immersed themselves in Scripture, are theologically sound, know the historical liturgies of the church, have an appreciation and gift for language, have a feel for the life of the people who worship, and finally, have a sense of the glory of God. In other words, God gives many gifts and capacities to his people for the varied ministries of the church, and not all are called to develop liturgies. Further, once a church has developed liturgies that best reflect the glory of God in its particular time and place, members of the church are not free to worship as they please, but rather, use the rites and ceremonies given to them by the church.

Article 35: At the time of the Reformation in England, there were ministers who were poorly educated and confused by the many changes in doctrine and practice, while some still held to Roman doctrines not approved by the Anglican Reformers. To aid in the education of the clergy and laity, two books of homilies were developed to be read in the place of a sermon. As the Reformation proceeded in England, and as new generations of clergy arose steeped in Anglican practice and doctrine, the need of the homilies lessened. Even so, they are an invaluable resource for anyone who wishes to study Anglican theology.

Article 36: When Anglicans ordain persons to the ministry they use an ordinal, a book that prescribes the rite to be used. According to Rome, Anglican ordinations were considered invalid because the ordinal did not reflect what Rome considered sound teaching. For example, the Roman ordinal gave the newly ordained priest the authority to offer Christ in sacrifice upon the altar for the sake of the living and the dead. As we have seen, Anglicans rejected this concept, and therefore, did not include it in their ordinal. As a result, in the eyes of Rome, the preaching, the sacraments, and the pastoral ministry of ordained Anglicans were invalid, meaning that their ministries did not convey the grace of God.

On the other hand, some of the extreme Protestants, later known as the Puritans, claimed that the ordinal contained superstitious and ungodly ideas. Article 36 states that the ordinal used by Anglicans “contains all things necessary to such consecration and ordination.” In other words, Anglican ordinations are valid and the early Anglicans believed this because they based their ordination services on the understanding of the ministry found in Scripture.

Article 37: This article was written to affirm the Anglican position over against two contrary views. First, there was the Roman view which held that the pope was not only the head of the Roman Church and all Christians, but also, was the head of every national government. In other words, it was believed by Rome that she not only possessed absolute spiritual authority, but political authority as well. As a result, Rome was willing to intervene in the political affairs of nations and the article states that the pope does not have this authority in England.

As always, the Anglican position was based on a study of Scripture as well as the history of the church. For example, Rome based her spiritual authority on Matthew 16:18 which supposedly authorized Peter as the spiritual head of the church. It was further claimed that Peter founded the church in Rome and that he appointed successors who would carry on his supreme spiritual authority. The Anglican Reformers, through a study of Scripture and church history, showed that these claims were without foundation. Further, it was not until the time of the twelfth century pope, Innocent III, that a full-blown belief in the spiritual supremacy of the papacy was developed. Such claims were not made in the early centuries of the church.

Similarly, in regard to political power, the early bishops of Rome claimed no such power. The popes of the late Middle Ages began to claim this power, basing their claims in part upon documents that supposedly granted them authority over the nations. The most important of these documents was the Donation of Constantine which proclaimed that Emperor Constantine had given temporal authority to the pope. This document, as well as similar documents, were later shown to be forgeries.

At the same time, certain extreme Protestant groups denied that the monarch, in this case Queen Elizabeth I, could be the head of a church, Anglican or otherwise. In many lands there is a separation of church and state, but in England of the sixteenth century, church and state were understood as identical though seen from two different viewpoints. Against this extreme Protestant view, the article refers to Scripture as showing that monarchs can exercise authority over all persons in the realm. The reference here is to the Old Testament where kings ruled, while at the same time, priests and prophets nurtured the spiritual life of the people. In light of this, the article states that rulers are not given the authority to minister the Word or the sacraments.

Further, some Protestants, in light of certain biblical verses, claimed that Christians could not fight in wars nor should persons be put to death for heinous crimes. Article 37 reflects the majority view of the universal church through the centuries that wars must at times be fought. The Articles were written in both Latin and English, and the Latin version can sometimes bring out meanings not apparent in the English. In this case, the article states that Christians can fight in “justa bella,” that is, in just wars. This phrase indicates a distinction between wars of aggression and legitimate defense. It does not claim that Christians must fight in all wars undertaken by governments, recognizing that some states pursue wars of aggression and conquest.

Article 38: As this article teaches, the claim of the Anabaptists (the extreme Protestants) that all material goods must be held in common is rejected by the early Anglicans. The Anabaptists based their position on Acts 2:44-45. According to Article 20, the church must not “expound one passage of Scripture so that it contradicts another passage.” There are many passages of Scripture, such as 2 Corinthians 9, which indicate that God expected his people to give generously from what they owned, but were not commanded to hold all possessions in common. Even in the community of Acts 2, it was understood that their generosity was not commanded, but voluntary (Acts 5:4). Nor did the church of the earliest centuries require that their members hold all possessions in common. The early Anglicans interpreted each verse of Scripture in light of the whole, and did not rush to conclusions in the light of a few verses.

The position of the Anabaptists, however, did contain an element of truth – Christians are all responsible to God and each other with our possessions and thereby enjoined to give freely to the poor.

Article 39. In reference to Article 39, certain Anabaptists were claiming that Matthew 5:33-37 prohibited the swearing of any kind of oath, including testimony given in courts of law. For reasons similar to those given in Article 38, Anglicans affirmed that certain types of oaths are allowed, but did recognize that rash and vain swearing was forbidden.

Some Conclusions

In the fourth century, Christianity became the religion of the empire, and as a result, many, many nations and peoples were assimilated into the church. Sometimes entire tribes and territories would become Christian overnight as decided by their rulers. As the church assimilated these many peoples, many superstitious and non-biblical beliefs and practices entered into the Western Church over the centuries. As this process unfolded, the Roman Church came to believe that she herself was a fountain of revelation, so that a number of unbiblical beliefs and practices absorbed into the church were justified as continuing revelation given to the Roman Church. Fundamentally, this is the issue that separates Anglicans from Rome. Is the Lord Jesus only the beginning of God’s revelation, a revelation that continues beyond Christ with new truths given to the Roman Church? Or is Jesus Christ himself the final and decisive revelation?

In the early years of the Christian faith numerous persons came forward claiming to reveal a revelation of Jesus Christ. In response to this proliferation of supposed revelation, the church developed the canon of Scripture, the body of documents that revealed the Truth of Jesus Christ. The criteria of whether or not a writing belonged to Scripture was whether or not it was apostolic, that is, did or did not conform to the witness of those who had seen and heard the Lord Jesus. New revelations, additional truths, were not accepted into Scripture, so that Scripture became and still is the Truth of the Christian faith as affirmed in Article 6. That is the difference between Anglicanism and Rome.

A second perspective that confronts us as we consider the Articles is whether or not individuals have the right to interpret Scripture on their own apart from teaching of the church, to receive direct illuminations from the Holy Spirit and thereby start new churches apart from the decision of the larger body of Christians, to worship according to their own opinions and not by the authorized forms of worship, to insist on doctrines long ago rejected by the church such as not taking oaths, or fighting in wars, or insisting that only the most holy preside at Holy Communion, and much, much more. At the time of the Reformation, these sorts of beliefs were held by the extreme Protestants. All of these beliefs have their root in the idea that individuals, apart from the authority of the larger church, have the freedom to live as God presumably directs them. In other words, such groups reject the idea that the church is an organism with lines of authority, patterns of worship, traditions and practices, and they further reject the idea that each Christian in obedience to Christ is called to live within the authority of the church. Anglicans rejected this position because Scripture, from one end to the other, shows that there is order and authority in the life of the people of God, and further, this individualistic notion of the church had not been accepted by the universal church through the centuries.

Review Questions

1. Article 21: Why do Anglicans accept the decrees of the first six general councils?

2. Give three reasons the Anglican Reformers rejected the decrees of the council called by the pope in 1545?

3. Article 22: Give three reasons the Anglican Reformers rejected the doctrine of Purgatory.

4. What were indulgences?

5. Why did the Anglican Reformers reject the adoring of images and the belief in intercession by the saints?

6. Article 23: State in one sentence the teaching of this article.

7. Article 24: State in one sentence the teaching of this article.

8. Article 25: What two sacraments are accepted by Anglicans?

9. Why do Anglicans not consider the other five rites mentioned in Article 25 to be sacraments?

10. What happens to those who do receive the two sacraments in a worthy manner, and what happens to those who receive the sacraments in an unworthy manner?

11. In regard to the two sacraments, Article 25 states that God works invisibly within us, “both bringing to life and also strengthening and confirming our faith in him.” Write in three or four sentences what this means to you.

12. According to the notes on Article 25, what two views did the Anglicans reject in their view of the sacraments?

13. What understanding of the sacrament of Holy Communion would bring some people to carry the sacrament around in processions and gaze upon it?

14. Article 26: Why are the sacraments effectual even though they are celebrated by sinful ministers?

15. What was the occasion when some Christians first believed that only the holy could administer a valid sacrament?

16. What does Article 26 say about evil ministers?

17. Article 27: According to the notes, what are the three parts of a covenant?

18. According to Article 27, what four things does God promise in baptism?

19. The lesson gives several reasons why Anglicans practice the baptism of infants. List the three that seem the best reasons to you.

20. Can God’s promises given in baptism be rejected?

21. Article 28: What is the doctrine of transubstantiation?

22. The notes on Article 28 stated that the doctrine of transubstantiation made the relationship with God given in Holy Communion something mechanical rather than a response of faith. Write in three or four sentences how you see the doctrine of transubstantiation harming the relationship with God as known in Holy Communion.

23. Article 29: A previous article, Article 25, says that the sacraments need to be received in a worthy manner. Article 29 warns against carelessly receiving the body and blood of Christ. In three or four sentences, describe how one can prepare oneself for receiving Holy Communion in a worthy manner.

24. Article 30: Why did the Anglican Reformers need to put this article in the Articles of Religion?

25. Article 31: What were sacrifices of the mass for the living and the dead, and why was this practice rejected by the Anglican Reformers?

26. Article 32: Why did the Anglican Reformers need to put this article in the Articles of Religion?

27. Article 33: What passage of Scripture speaks specifically of church discipline?

28. Given that all persons are sinners, what sorts of persons need to be subject to church discipline? What is the purpose of this discipline?

29. Who has the final authority in regard to church discipline?

30. Do Anglicans believe that excommunication automatically cuts a person off from the invisible church?

31. What happens to churches where there is no church discipline?

32. What is the normal penalty for those under church discipline?

33. Article 34: This article gives three reasons why those who do not worship according to the approved rites of the church need to be openly rebuked. What are those three reasons?

34. Considering the notes on Article 34, why do Anglicans have rites and ceremonies rather than allowing pastors to worship as they please?

35. Article 35: Why did the early Anglicans feel it was important to have homilies read in the place of sermons?

36. Article 36: Why did the Roman Church not accept the Anglican Ordinal, and how did they regard the ministry of those who were ordained under the Anglican Ordinal?

37. Why did Anglicans consider their ordinations valid?

38. Article 37: At the time of the Reformation, what did the pope believe in regard to his spiritual and political authority?

39. The lesson gives at least three reasons the Anglicans rejected the pope’s claim to absolute spiritual and political power. List these reasons.

40. What evidence did the Anglican Reformers use to show that the monarch could be the head of both the state and the church?

41. Although the monarchy was the head of the church, the English monarch could not exercise certain spiritual functions. What were they?

42. Who was making the claim that Christians could not fight in wars, and further, that the government should never punish persons with death? Does Article 37 say that the state must punish certain persons by death for heinous crimes?

43. Article 38: What did certain Anabaptists believe in regard to common possessions, and what was the grain of truth in their view?

44. Article 39: What did certain Anabaptists believe in regard to swearing, and what was the grain of truth in their view?

45. According to the first two paragraphs of the final three paragraphs of Lesson Three, what is the decisive difference between Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism?

46. Why were certain documents included in Scripture and others were not? How is the answer to this question relevant to the decisive difference between Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism?

47. According to the final paragraph of Lesson Three, what is the decisive difference between Anglicanism and the extreme Protestants?

47. Why, in the final analysis, do Anglicans not accept the views of the extreme Protestants?

Discussion Questions

Once you have found several people, share with them the teaching of Articles 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 32, and 34. If you do not have time to introduce all of them, make sure you include articles 23, 26, 29, and 34. After you have introduced these articles, ask them two questions. First, how, in light of these articles, does the Anglican Church differ from other churches in your area? Second, are there some ways they and the church where they worship could more faithfully follow the teaching of these articles? Ask them to discuss these two questions.

The Rev. Robert J. Sanders, Ph.D.
February, 2015