But altho the primate's moderation failed of its effect abroad, it had fuller scope among the sectaries at home.

When the bible was first opened, after men had so long been deprived of it, they were satisfied with reading it simply, and gathering from it a rule of life and manners; overlooking questions of difficulty in the general comfort derived from its promises; and troubling nobody with their particular opinions. This is ever the golden age of religion. But men soon begin to look higher. The vulgar can read their bibles; and learn their duty. The learned must do something more. They must unravel knotty points: they must broach novel-doctrines; which the people must be made to receive, as points of importance: they must contradict, and oppose: they must shew themselves, in short, to be able champions of religion; and fit to appear at the head of sectaries.

Much of this spirit had already gotten abroad in England; and a variety of causes concurred in stirring it up. Besides the different tenets, which began to appear among the English protestants themselves; disgusted papists artfully threw in their subtleties, and distinctions; and a multitude of religionists from Germany, Switzerland, and Holland, led by their pastors, brought over with them multifarious and contradictory creeds. It was then as common for men to migrate for the fake of religion, as it is now for the fake of trade. In a word, all this mass, digesting together, began to ferment.

If sectaries (united in leading principles, and differing only in a few indifferent forms, or speculative points) would keep their opinions to themselves; their differences, as Calvin seemed to think, might serve the cause of religion, instead of injuring it. But the forwardness of teachers in imposing all their own whimsical dogmas on others, instead of keeping to the great truths of religion, is the grand mischief. It is this, which distracts the people; who being thus accustomed to hear a different doctrine every day, begin to think of religion itself, which appears so variable an object, with less reverence.—Much of this intemperate zeal had at this time possessed the teachers of religion; and it became very evident, that practical christianity had loft ground; in proportion, as the science of theology was more studied.

To provide for the peace of the church, in opposition to this growing evil, the council appointed the archbishop to draw up a set of articles. The affair was delicate. The liberty of private judgment being the basis of the late secession from the church of Rome, every restraint upon it seemed an opposition to the leading principle of the reformation. A restraint however on the clergy seemed to be no breach of liberty. It was only what every church might justly impose. Nothing more therefore was intended on this occasion, but to draw such a line, as would keep pastors within the pale of their own congregations; or at least prevent their disturbing the established church.

Among the various opinions, which distracted men at this time, besides the tenets of popery, which were yet far from being silenced, were those concerning justification, faith, good works, free will, and predestination.

The doctrine of supererogation, and the scandalous sale of indulgences, had brought good works into such discredit, that many well disposed teachers, with a view to oppose this evil the more effectually, laid the chief stress on faith. The Antinomian pastors, refining on this, denied the benefit of any works at all. This again gave just offence to others; who to rid themselves of this mischief, ran into the other extreme; and not content with shewing the necessity of good works, they inculcated their meritorious, and sufficient efficacy.

Again, on the topics of free will, and predestination, the same variety of opinions distracted the people. Some teachers left the will at perfect liberty. Others thought it more scriptural to allow it only free to sin; while good works, they conceived, proceeded merely from the grace of God. Others again, and in particular a sect stiled the Gospellers, would admit no qualifying at all in the doctrine of predestination; but resolved all into the absolute decrees of God.

Amidst this variety of doctrine, the archbishop endeavoured to draw up such a set of articles, as would best provide for the peace of the church. It was a nice affair, and he thought it prudent on this occasion, as he had done before on a similar one, to use such moderation, perhaps such well-timed ambiguity, as might give as little offence as possible.

Such was the origin of that celebrated test of orthodoxy, which is now known by the name of the 39 articles of the church of England. Those framed by the archbishop indeed consisted of 42: but in all succeeding settlements of the church, what was now composed on this head, was not only made the groundwork; but was, in many parts, almost verbatim retained.

In this work it is not known that the archbishop had any coadjutor. It is improbable however that a man of his candour and modesty would engage in a work of this kind without many consultations with his friends: and it is commonly supposed, that Ridley, bishop of London, was particularly useful to him. Ridley was a man of exemplary piety, and learning; and what was still more necessary in the present work, a man of sound judgment, and great moderation.

The chief objection, at this time of day, against the articles, seems to be their treating at all of matters of such mysterious import. Let us endeavour, to settle, as we please, the doctrines of foreknowledge, predestination, and other points, equally abstruse; we shall find ourselves, at the close of the argument, only where we began. As these deep questions however were the chief points debated at that time, the archbishop was under a necessity of taking notice of them. At this day it is less necessary; and therefore articles accommodated to the present times, would probably be formed on a different plan. Few will think the articles thus framed by archbishop Cranmer, in the infancy of the church, are compleat, and perfect: tho every candid person will see many difficulties, that would follow an attempt to make them more so. If such an attempt could be successfully prosecuted, no doubt all good men would rejoice in it. In the mean time, they will admire the wisdom, and moderation of that person, who framed them, as they are, in the midst of so much prejudice, confusion, and contrariety of opinion.

One of the most offensive articles, to subscribers in general, is the 17th on predestination and election. But its title is its most offensive part. It is certainly to be wished, that such doctrines had been left untouched; as they seem to be matters only of private opinion. But whatever were the archbishop's real sentiments on this subject, he seems to have been very hesitating, and perhaps intentionally ambiguous, in the imposition of them on others. The severe doctrine of reprobation seems to be strongly disavowed under the pointed terms of a most dangerous downfall, leading to desperation, or unclean living. And how it is possible to hold an absolute election, without mixing with it the doctrine of reprobation, is not easy to conceive. Yet still, as if the article, in the matter of election, had gone too far, it concludes with asserting, that we must receive God's promises, in such wise as they be generally set forth in holy scripture. So that, in fact, the article, fairly analyzed, seems to assert nothing, after all its circumlocution, but that the doctrine of reprobation is very pernicious; and that as to God's election, and promises, whatever may be said about them, we must resolve all at last into a belief of what is generally said in scripture.

But whatever imperfections the articles may really have; they have been charged with many, which they certainly have not. Of one very great instance of disingenuity I cannot forbear taking notice. It is contained in a celebrated writer on English history, whose acrimony on all occasions, in which religion is concerned, I have already remarked. After throwing out many severe things against the spirit of the reformers at this time, and giving his reader an idea of the articles, which archbishop Cranmer now composed.

The article alluded to in this passage, he tells us, is the 18th. Now the truth of the matter is, that this article has nothing at all to do with the heathen world, either here, or hereafter. It does not in any shape even hint at them. The early reformers most probably supposed, as all charitable christians do now, that the heathen world were as much the objects of God's mercy, as christians themselves; and that Christ, who is called the lamb slain, from the foundation of the world, died for their sins, as well as ours: The article barely asserts, that no religion can promise salvation to mankind, except the christian; which is so far from damning pagans, that it virtually implies, Christ died for them, as well as for us.