28

ARABICS.

ARCHDEACON.

ARABICS, or ARABIANS. Heretics who appeared in Arabia in the third century. According to Eusebius and St. Augustine, they taught that the soul died, and was corrupted with the body, and that they were to be raised together at the last day.

ARCANI DISCIPLINA. The name given to a part of the discipline of the early Church in withdrawing from public view the sacraments and higher mysteries of our religion: a practice founded on a reverence for the sacred mysteries themselves, and to prevent their being exposed to the ridicule of the heathen. Irenæus, Tertullian, and Clemens are the first who mention any such custom in the Church. And the Disciplina Arcani gradually fell into disuse after the time of Constantine, when Christianity had nothing to fear from its enemies.-Bingham. Augusti.

ARCHBISHOP. An archbishop is the chief of the clergy in a whole province; and has the inspection of the bishops of that province, as well as of the inferior clergy, and may deprive them on notorious causes. The archbishop has also his own diocese, wherein he exercises episcopal jurisdiction, as in his province he exercises archiepiscopal. As archbishop, he upon the receipt of a king's writ, calls the bishops and clergy within his province, to meet in convocation. To him all appeals are made from inferior jurisdictions within his province; and as an appeal lies from the bishop in person, so it also lies from the consistory courts of his diocese to his archiepiscopal court. During the vacancy of any see in his province he is guardian of the spiritualities thereof, as the king is of the temporalities; and, during such vacancy, all episcopal rights belong to him.

Some learned men are of opinion, that an archbishop is a dignity as ancient as the Apostles' time, for there were primi episcopi then, though the name of archbishop was not known until some ages afterwards; and that the Apostle himself gave the first model of this government in the Church, by vesting Titus with a superintendency over all Crete. Certain it is that there were persons soon after that time, who, under the name of metropolitans, exercised the same spiritual and ecclesiastical functions as an archbishop; as for instance the Bishop of Carthage,

provincial councils, and had ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the bishops of Africa; and the bishops of Rome, who had the like primacy in Italy. Moreover, the apostolical canons, which were the rule of the Greek Church in the third century, mention a chief bishop in every province, and most of them about the eighth century assumed the title of archbishops; some of which were so in a more eminent degree, viz. those of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria, which were the four principal cities of the empire, and to these the archbishop of Jerusalem was added, because that was the capital city of the Holy Land, and these five were called patriarchs.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is styled primate of all England and metropolitan, and the Archbishop of York primate of England. They have the title of grace, and most reverend father in GoD by Divine Providence. There are two provinces or archbishoprics in England, Canterbury and York. The Archbishop of Canterbury has the precedency of all the other clergy; next to him the Archbishop of York. Each archbishop has, within his province, bishops of several dioceses. The Archbishop of Canterbury has under him, within his province, Rochester, London, Winchester, Norwich, Lincoln, Ely, Chichester, Salisbury, Exeter, Bath and Wells, Worcester Lichfield, Hereford, Landaff, St. David's, Bangor, and St. Asaph; and four founded by king Henry VIII., erected out of the ruins of dissolved monasteries, viz, Gloucester and Bristol, now united into one, Peterborough and Oxford. The Archbishop of York has under him six, viz. the bishop of Chester, erected by Henry VIII., and annexed by him to the archbishopric of York, the bishops of Durham, Carlisle, Ripon, and Manchester, and the Isle of Man, annexed to the province of York by king Henry VIII. The dioceses of Ripon and Manchester have been formed in the province of York within the last few years, by act of parliament.

ARCHDEACON.

In the Church of England and most European churches, each diocese is divided into archdeaconries and parishes. Over the diocese the bishop presides; over the archdeaconry one of the clergy is appointed by the bishop to preside, who must be a priest, and he is called an archdeacon: over the parish, the rector or vicar presides. An archdeacon was so called anciently, from being the

chief of the deacons, a most important office at a very early period in the Christian Church.

The antiquity of this office is held to be so high by many Roman Catholic writers, that they derive its origin from the appointment of the seven deacons, and suppose that St. Stephen was the first archdeacon but there is no clear authority to warrant this conclusion. Mention is also made of Laurentius, archdeacon of Rome, who suffered A. D. 260; but although he was called archdeacon (according to Prudentius), he was no more than the principal man of the seven deacons who stood at the altar. "Hic primus è septem viris qui stant ad aram proximi." (Prudent. Hymn. de St. Steph.) St. Jerome says "that the archdeacon was chosen out of the deacons, and was the principal deacon in every church, just as the archpresbyter was the principal presbyter."

But even in St. Jerome's time, the office of archdeacon had certainly grown to great importance. His proper business was, to attend the bishop at the altar; to direct the deacons and other inferior officers in their several duties, for their orderly performance of divine service; to attend the bishop at ordinations, and to assist him in managing and dispensing the revenues of the church but without anything that could be called "jurisdiction," in the present sense of the word, either in the cathedral or out of it.

After the Council or Laodicea, A. D. 360, when it was ordained that no bishop should be placed in country villages, the archdeacon, being always near the bishop and the person mainly entrusted by him, grew into great credit and power, and came by degrees as occasion required, to be ernployed by him in visiting the clergy of the diocese, and in the despatch of other matters relating to the episcopal care: so that, by the beginning of the seventh century, he seems to have been fully possessed of the chief care and inspection of the diocese, in subordination to the bishop.

Regularly, the archdeacon cannot inflict any punishment, but can only proceed by precepts" and "admonitions."

Beyond this, all the rights that any archdeacon enjoys, subsist by grants from the bishop, made either voluntarily, or of necessity or by composition. (See the case of composition made between the Bishop of Lincoln and his archdeacons, in Gibson's Codex, vol. ii. p. 1548.)

As to the divisions in England of dio

29

ceses into archdeaconries, and the assignment of particular divisions to particular archdeaconries, this is supposed to have begun a little after the Norman conquest, when the Norman bishops, by reason of their baronies, were tied by the Constitutions of Clarendon to strict attendance upon the kings in their parliaments; and thus, for the administration of their dioceses, they were obliged to grant larger delegations of power to archdeacons, who visited when they did not (de triennio in triennium). We meet with no archdeacons vested with any kind of jurisdiction in the Saxon times. Archbishop Lanfranc was the first who made an archdeacon with power of "jurisdiction," in his see of Canterbury, and Thomas, the first archbishop of York after the Conquest, was the first in England that divided his diocese info archdeaconries; as did, also, Remigius, bishop of Lincoln. Archdeacons, therefore, with us, could not have this power of jurisdiction by common right, or by immemorial custom; the power which the archdeacon has is derived from the bishop, although he himself is an ordinary, and is recognised as such by the books of common law, which adjudged an administration made by him to be good, though it is not expressed by what autho rity, because, as done by the archdeacon, it is presumed to be done “jure ordinario."

And as he has a jurisdiction in certain cases, so, for the better exercising the same, he has power to keep a court, which is called the Court of the Archdeacon, or his Commissary, and this he may hold in any place within his archdeaconry. With regard to the archdeacon's court, it was said by the justices of Common Pleas, 2 & 3 William and Mary, in the case of Woodward and Fox, that though it might be supposed originally that the jurisdiction within the diocese was lodged in the bishop, yet the archdeacon's court had, "time out of mind," been settled as a distinct court, and that the statute 24th of Henry VIII. chap. xii. takes notice of the consistory court, which is the bishop's, and of the archdeacon's court, from which there lies an appeal to the bishop's. (See Appeal.) There is an officer belonging to this court, called a registrar, whose office concerns the administration of justice, and therefore the archdeacon cannot by law take any money for granting it; if he does, the office will be forfeited to the Queen. Regarding parochial visitations by archdeacons, see "Articles and Directions to the

Incumbents and Churchwardens within the Archdeaconry of Surrey," in Gibson's Codex, vol. ii. p. 1551-1555.

By 1 & 2 Vict. c. cvi. s. 2, an archdeacon may hold, with his archdeaconry, two benefices under certain restrictions; or a benefice and a cathedral preferment.

He is also, whilst engaged in his archidiachonal functions, considered to be resident on his benefice.

ARCHES, COURT OF. The Court of Arches, which subsisted long before the time of Henry II., is a court of appeal, belonging to the Archbishop of Canterbury, whereof the judge is called the dean of Arches, because he anciently held his court in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow (Sancta Maria de Arcubus); though all the spiritual courts are now holden at Doctors' Commons. ARCHIMANDRITE. A name formerly given to the superior of a monastery: if is derived from the word Mavdpa, by which monastaries were sometimes called. The term Archimandrite is still retained in the Greek Church.

ARCHPRIEST, or ARCHIPRESBYTER. An ancient title of distinction, corresponding to our title, rural dean, revived under most unhappy pretensions among the Romanists of England, in the year 1598. These men, finding themselves without bishops, importuned the pope, Clement VII., to supply their need; but instead of sending them, as they desired, a number of bishops, he gave them but one ecclsiastical superior, Robert Blackwell, who after all was merely a priest: an archpriest indeed, he was called, but as such having no episcopal power. In the early times this title was given to the chief presbyter in each church, presiding over the church next under the bishop, and taking care of all things relating to the church in the bishop's absence. In this case however, instead of being placed in a cathedral church, or discharging the office of rural dean, under a bishop or archdeacon, he was appointed to govern all the Romish clergy of England and Scotland, without one or the other. Here then we find Rome, while preserving an old title, inventing an office hitherto unknown to the Christian world. And, when appointed, what could the archpriest do? He could merely be a rural dean on a large scale. He could merely overlook his brother clergy. He could not discharge any functions properly episcopal. He could not ordain priests, confirm children, nor consecrate chapels, should circumstances permit or require. It is plain,

ARIANS.

then, that the archpriest was a very imperfect and insufficient substitute for a bishop. -Visitation Sermon, by the Rev. L. Darwell.

ARCHONTICS. Heretics who appeared in the second century, about A. D. 175, and who were a set of Marcosians. They held a quantity of idle stories concerning the Divinity and the creation of the world, which they attributed to sundry authors; and hence they were called Archontics, from the Greek word par, which means prince or ruler.

ARIANS. (See Councils.) Heretics, so named from Arius, their first founder: they denied the Three Persons in the Holy Trinity to be of the same essence, and affirm the Word to be a creature, and that there was a time when he was not. They were condemned by the Council of Nice in 325.

The doctrine of Arius may be thus stated:-The SoN sprung not from the nature of the FATHER, but was created from nothing: he had, indeed, an existence before the world, even before time, but not from eternity. He is, therefore, in essence different from the FATHER, and is in the order of creatures, whom he, however, precedes in excellence, as GoD created all things, even time, by his instrumentality; whence he was called the Son of God, the Logos, or Word of GOD. As a creature the SoN is perfect, and as like to the FATHER as a creature can be to the creator. But as he has received all things, as a gift, from the favor of the FATHER, as there was a period in which he was not, so there is an infinite distance between him and the nature of the FATHER; of which nature he cannot even form a perfect idea, but can enjoy only a defective knowledge of the same. His will was originally variable, capable of good and of evil, as is that of all other rational creatures: he is, comparatively at least, free from sin; not by nature, but by his good use of his power of election; the FATHER, therefore, foreseeing his perseverance in good, imparted to him that dignity and sublimity above all other creatures, which shall continue to be the reward of his virtues. Although he is called Gon, he is not so in truth, but was deified in that sense in which men, who have attained to a high degree of sanctity, may arrive at a participation of the divine prerogatives. The idea then of a generation of the SoN from the essence of the FATHER, is to be absolutely rejected.

This doctrine, which must have corresponded to the superficial understandings,

ARMENIANS.

and to the yet half-pagan ideas, of many who then called themselves Christians, attacked the very soul of the Christian doctrine of the redemption; for, according to this doctrine, it was not God made man, but a changeable creature, who effected the great work of the redemption of fallen man. The devout Christian, to whom faith in the God-man, CHRIST, the only Divine Mediator, opened the way to an intimate union with GoD, saw by this doctrine that his Redeemer and Mediator was as infinitely removed from the essence of GOD as himself; he saw himself driven back to the ancient pagan estrangement from GoD, and removed to an unattainable distance from him.-See Maimbourg, Hist. of Arians, for an account of the revival of Arianism in the last century; see Van Mildert's Life of Waterland.

ARMENIANS. The Christians of Armenia. They are followers of Eutyches in his heresy, asserting that the human nature of CHRIST is swallowed up of the divine; or is no more properly human than a drop of vinegar put into the sea, can afterwards be reckoned vinegar. They do not deny the real presence in the eucharist, they do not mix water with their wine, nor do they consecrate unleavened bread. They abstain from eating blood, and things strangled. They scrupulously observe fasting; and fasts so frequently occur, that their whole religion seems to consist in fasting. They admit infants to the sacrament of the eucharist: they reject purgatory and prayers for the dead: they fast on Christmas-day, and they allow inarriage in their priests.

ARMINIANS. A powerful party of Christians, first so called in Holland, and who took the name of Remonstrants, from a writing called a remonstrance, which was presented by them to the states of Holland, 1609, wherein they reduced their peculiar doctrines to these five articles:

1. That GOD, from all eternity, determined to bestow salvation on those who, as he foresaw, would persevere unto the end in their faith in JESUS CHRIST; and to inflict everlasting punishment on those who should continue in their unbelief, and resist, to the end of life, his divine assist ance; so that election was conditional; and reprobation, in like manner, the result of foreseen infidelity and persevering wickedness.

2. On the second point, they taught, That JESUS CHRIST, by his sufferings and death, made an atonement for the sins of

mankind in general, and of every individual in particular; that, however, none but those who believe in him can be partakers of that divine benefit.

3. On the third article they held, That true faith cannot proceed from the exercise of our natural faculties and powers, nor from the force and operation of free will; since man, in consequence of his natural corruption, is incapable either of thinking or doing any good thing; and that, therefore, it is necessary to his conversion and salvation, that he be regenerated and renewed by the operation of the HOLY GHOST, which is the gift of GOD, through JESUS CHRIST.

4. On the fourth they believed, That this divine grace, or energy of the HOLY GHOST, begins, advances, and perfects everything that can be called good in man; and that, consequently, all good works are to be attributed to GoD alone; that, nevertheless, this grace, which is offered to all, does not force men to act against their inclinations, but may be resisted and rendered ineffectual by the perverse will of the impenitent sinner.

5. And on the fifth, That God gives to the truly faithful who are regenerated by his grace, the means of preserving themselves in this state; and though the first Arminians entertained some doubt with respect to the closing part of this article, their followers uniformly maintain, That the regenerate may lose true justifying faith, fall from a state of grace, and die in

their sins.

The name of Arminians was given them, because Arminius, professor of divinity at Leyden, was the first who opposed the then received sentiments in Holland, of an absolute predestination. The synod of Dort, consisting of Dutch, French, German, and Swiss divines, and held in 1618, condemned their opinions.

ARMS. Armorial bearings, whether borne by individuals or by corporate bodies and corporations sole: among which are reckoned bishops, colleges, and other ecclesiastical persons and bodies. A bishop impales his family coat with the arms of his see, to denote his spiritual marriage with his Church; but the arms of the see occupy the dexter side of the escutcheon, or the side of greater honor. When a bishop is married, he empales the arms of his wife with his own family coat, on a separate escutcheon; and this escutcheon is placed by the sinister side of the shield, empaling his own coat with the arms of the see.

32

Many of the arms of bishoprics contain allusions to the spiritual character of the person who bears them. Thus the Archbishop of Canterbury bears a pall, in right of his see; and the Archbishop of York bears two keys crossed saltierwise. Colleges often assume the family coat of their founder as their arms.

ARTICLES, THE THIRTY-NINE. The Thirty-nine Articles, based on the Fortytwo Articles framed by Archbishop Cranmer and Bishop Ridley in the reign of Edward VI., were presented hy his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Parker, to the convocation of the province of Canterbury which was convened with the parliament in January 1562, and by the convocation they were unanimously approved. In 1566 a bill was brought into parliament to confirm them. The bill passed the Commons, but by the queen's command was dropped in the Lords. In 1571 the convocation revised the articles of 1562, and made some alterations in them. In the same year an act was passed, "to provide that the ministers of the Church should be of sound religion." It enacted that all ecclesiastical persons should subscribe to "all the articles of religion which only contained the confession of the true faith and of the sacraments, comprised in a book imprinted, entitled 'Articles,' whereupon it was agreed by the archbishops and bishops, and the whole clergy in convocation holden in London, in the year of our LORD GOD 1562, according to the computation of the Church of England, for the avoiding of diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true religion, put forth by the queen's authority." In 1628 an English edition was published by royal authority, to which is prefixed the declaration of Charles I.

Some have thought that they are only articles of union and peace; that they are a standard of doctrine, not to be contradicted or disputed; that the sons of the Church are only bound to acquiesce silently to them; and that the subscription binds only to a general compromise upon those articles, that so there may be no disputing or wrangling about them. By this means they reckon, that though a man should differ in his opinion from that which appears to be the clear sense of any of the articles; yet he may with a good conscience subscribe them, if the article appears to him to be of such a

nature, that though he thinks it wrong, yet it seems not to be of that consequence, but that it may be borne with and not contradicted.

Now as to the laity, and the whole body of the people, certainly to them these are only the articles of church communion; so that every person, who does not think that there is some proposition in them, that is erroneous to so high a degree that he cannot hold communion with such as hold it, may, and is obliged to continue in our communion; for certainly there may be many opinions held in matters of religion, which a man may believe to be false, and yet may esteem them to be of so little importance to the chief design of religion, that he may well hold communion with those whom he thinks to be so mistaken.

But what the clergy are bound to by their subscriptions is much more than this. The meaning of every subscription is to be taken from the design of the imposer, and from the words of the subscription itself. The title of the articles bears, that they were agreed upon in convocation, "for the avoiding of diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true religion." Where it is evident that "a consent in opinion" is designed. If we in the next place consider the declarations that the Church has made in the canons, we shall find, that though by the fifth canon, which relates to the whole body of people, such only are declared to be excommunicated ipso facto, who shall affirm any of the articles to be erroneous, or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe to; yet the thirty-sixth canon is express for the clergy, requiring them to subscribe "willingly and ex animo," and "acknowledge all and every article to be agreeable to the word of GoD:" upon which canon it is, that the form of the subscription runs in these words, which seem expressly to declare a man's own opinion, and not a bare assent to an article of peace, or an engagement to silence and submission. The statute of the 13th of Queen Elizabeth, chap. 12, which gives the legal authority to our requiring subscriptions, in order to a man's being capable of a benefice, requires that every clergyman should read the articles in the church, with a declaration of his unfeigned assent to them. These things make it appear very plain, that the subscriptions of the clergy must be con