logus, who is thought to have written about the end of the eleventh century, condemns solitary communion, as contrary both to the practice of the ancients, and to the several parts of the office.

Thus, till the twelfth century, this practice was not allowed in the Roman Church, as it is to this day excluded from every other communion in the world. The doctrines of purgatory and transubstantiaton, however, introduced the idea, that it was meritorious to say masses for other persons, whether dead or alive. Hence arose the trade of selling masses for a small piece of money, thus introducing the most profane simony, and exposing to derision the holiest of all the institutions of the Christian religion. These abuses we have corrected, and in so doing have been guided by the words of our Saviour, and the practice of the whole Church for the first ten centuries.

ARTICLE XXXII.

OF THE MARRIAGE OF PRIESTS.

BISHOPS, PRIESTS, AND DEACONS, ARE NOT COMMANDED BY GOD'S LAW EITHER TO VOW THE ESTATE OF SINGLE LIFE, OR ΤΟ ABSTAIN FROM MARRIAGE. THEREFORE IT IS LAWFUL FOR THEM, AS WELL AS FOR ALL CHRISTIAN MEN, TO MARRY AT THEIR OWN DISCRETION, AS THEY SHALL JUDGE THE SAME TÓ SERVE BETTER TO GODLINESS.

THE latter paragraph in this Article, from the word "therefore," was not published in King Edward's reign; the assertion made in the former being conceived sufficient, and the reader being left to deduce the inference. The doctrine here laid down was of considerable importance; and gave rise to the most severe debates at the time of the Reformation. For as the irregular practices and dissolute lives of both seculars and regulars had greatly prejudiced the world against the celibate of the Roman clergy; so on the other hand, the marriage of the Reformers, and of those of both sexes, who had taken vows, gave great offence; they being represented as persons who could not master their appetites,

and become involved in the common pleasures, concerns, and passions of human life.

The Article asserts, I. It is not incumbent upon the clergy to abstain from marriage; II. Nor to vow the estate of single life.

I. It is not incumbent upon the clergy to abstain from marriage. This question it will be necessary to consider, 1st. with respect to the laws of Scripture; and 2dly, with respect to the laws of the Church.

1st. With respect to the laws of Scripture. (1.) By the law of Moses, the priests were not only allowed to marry, but the priesthood was confined as a hereditary distinction to one family.

a See Wharton on the Celibacy of the Clergy, in Gibson's Preserv. tit. 1. c. 5. Jewel's Apol. par. 2. c. 8. div. 1. and Hall's Works, v. 1. dec. 2. Epist. 3.

This distinction is necessary, in order to obviate the different opinions held by the members of the Roman Church on this question. Of these there are four. 1st. That celibacy was of divine right, having been instituted by God. This opinion is by no means general. 2nd. That it is not properly of Divine, but Apostolic right, having been instituted by the Apostles, and invariably adopted by the Church since their times. This opinion is held by Bellarmine, Aquinas, and many eminent Roman Catholic divines. 3rd, That all Divine and Apostolic right may be excluded from the question, and that the Church has power to impose a vow of continence on the clergy, which being once taken, all use of marriage is unlawful. This is held by many of the canonists, and seems to have been adopted by the council of Trent. (sess. 24. can. 9.) Lastly, the moderate divines hold, that it is altogether of ecclesiastical institu

And even the High Priest, who was to perform the great duty of the annual atonement which was made for the sins of the Jewish people, was obliged to marry, and derived to his descendants that sacred office. It is evident, therefore, that it cannot be contrary to the purity of God's worship that married persons should officiate in it. (2.) When Christ chose his twelve Apostles, some of them were (Peter certainly was) married; so that he gave no preference to the unmarried. He never charged them to forsake their wives, nor did he represent celibacy as necessary to the kingdom of heaven. Nor is this contradicted by the instance he adduces of some "who had "made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of "heaven's sake." (Matt. xix. 12.) For in the first place, he leaves all men at full liberty in this respect, by saying, "he that is able to receive "it, let him receive it." Besides it is recommended not to the clergy in particular, but equally to all ranks of men, as they can bear it. (3.) St. Paul says, "marriage is honourable in all;" (Heb. xiii. 4.) and to avoid uncleanness, he says, "it is better to marry than to burn." 1 Cor. vii. 9.; and therefore desires that "every man should "have his own wife." (ver. 2.) (4.) Among all the rules which are given with respect to the qualifications of bishops or priests, there is no reference to the celibacy of the clergy, but rather plain intimations against it. That which de

sires a clergyman to be "the husband of one wife" is frequently repeated, and regulations are given concerning their wives and children. (1 Tim. iii. 2, 4, 11, 12.) Nor is it insinuated that this liberty is allowed only during the infancy of Christianity and was afterwards to cease; on the contrary "the forbidding to marry" is given as a mark of the apostacy of the latter times. (iv. 3.) (5.) We find Aquila, when he went about preaching the Gospel, was not only married to Priscilla, but she accompanied him in histravels; and St. Paul conceived he might have claimed the right "to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as the other Apostles." (1 Cor. ix. 5.)

2ndly. We must consider this question with respect to the laws of the Church. On this subject it may be observed, 1. granting that she has the power to pass a law of celibacy, such a law is not necessarily perpetual. No age of the Church can make a law to bind future ages, for whatever power the Church has at one time, she has at another, and therefore if any one age should enjoin celibacy on the clergy, any succeeding age may repeal and alter that law. But 2. The Church has not the power to pass such a law. For (1) the exercise of such a power is unauthorized by our Saviour. Christ has left all men free on this subject. To restrain the clergy therefore in the right of marriage, is a