Majesties' Protestant subjects" was hastily dropped, and the agitation in favour of a change in the forms of subscription died away. In practice, the subscriptions required by the terms of the 13th Act of Elizabeth and the Thirty-sixth Canon were combined, the form generally used being as follows: "I, A. B., do willingly and from my heart subscribe to the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of the United Church of England and Ireland, and to the three Articles in the Thirty-sixth Canon, and to all things therein contained." In spite of the stringency of the tests required it was found early in the last century that a considerable number of clergy of Arian and Socinian opinions had crept into the ministry of the Church. These men, when confronted with the terms of the declaration to which they had set their hands, boldly declared that it was "an avowed principle among them that these Articles (viz. the Thirty-Nine) may lawfully and conscientiously be subscribed in any sense in which they themselves, by their own interpretation, can reconcile them to Scripture, without regard to the meaning and intention, either of the persons who first compiled them, or who now impose them." They were thus ready to evade their plain meaning and make short work of their "literal and grammatical sense." This dishonest and disingenuous manner of subscribing was denounced with great energy by Daniel Waterland in his "Case of Arian Subscription Considered,"2 and other works, and its advocates soon found that their position was an 1 See Waterland's "Case of Arian Subscription Considered," Works, vol. ii. p. 264. Dr. S. Clarke in his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, published in 1712, had laid it down as a maxim that "every person may reasonably agree to such forms, whenever he can, in any sense at all, reconcile them with Scripture." 2 Published in 1726. utterly untenable one. Then began an agitation for the removal of all tests, headed by Archdeacon Blackburne, the author of the notorious Confessional, a work in which "he denies that churches have any right to make confessions of faith, and asserts that the inalienable privilege of every one to believe as he pleases ought not to be interfered with. That these objectionable confessions, every one of which, according to Blackburne, contains " very material decisions from which an intelligent Christian may reasonably dissent," should be imposed as terms of qualification for office, and formal subscription required to them, is contended to be an abominable injustice and tyranny." A petition was, accordingly, prepared, setting forth the views of the Latitudinarian party, and introduced into the House of Commons on February 6th, 1772. Its rejection was moved by the member for Oxford, Sir Roger Newdigate. Edmund Burke spoke strongly against it, and in the end the proposal to receive and consider the petition was rejected by 217 to 71. After this decisive defeat a considerable time elapsed before any further attempt was made to alter the terms of the declaration required from the clergy, and the forms of assent given above remained unchanged until the year 1865. A few A few years previously an abortive bill had been introduced into the House of Lords, for the purpose of abolishing the oaths and declarations required. Shortly after this a royal commission was appointed to consider the whole subject. Their report showed that the forms in use were unnecessarily numerous and complicated, and the commissioners were unanimous in recommending the substitution of a single declaration of assent to the Prayer-Book and Articles together, in place of the cumbrous forms till then in use. An Act of Parliament was passed in 1865 to give legal 1 Perry's English Church History, vol. iii. p. 101. effect to their recommendations, and, at the same time, Convocation obtained leave from the Crown to revise the Canons so far as was necessary. An amended version of Canon XXXVI. was made and published by the Convocations of Canterbury and York, and confirmed by royal letters patent,1 and since that time the declaration of assent made by all candidates for orders, as well as by all persons admitted to any benefice or licensed to preach has run as follows: “I, A. B., do solemnly make the following declaration. I assent to the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, and to the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons; I believe the doctrine of the [United] Church of England [and Ireland], as therein set forth, to be agreeable to the word of God: and in public prayer and administration of the Sacraments, I will use the form in the said book prescribed, and none other, except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority." Thus it is from the clergy and the clergy only that the Church demands subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles. It is, of course, well known that at one time laymen were also required to subscribe them in the universities, at the time of matriculation at Oxford, and before proceeding to a degree at both Oxford and Cambridge. This was first required at Oxford by the Puritan Chancellor Leicester, in the sixteenth century, in order to exclude Romanists from the university. Cambridge followed during the reign of James I. But the legislation of 1854 and 1871 has entirely removed any such 1 The history of the agitation that led to the appointment of the commission is told in the Life of Archbishop Tait, vol. i. p. 487 seq. See also the report of the Commissioners themselves. 2 The words in brackets were of course disused after the Irish Church was disestablished in 1869. requirement. Nor can the Church fairly be held responsible for it while it lasted. It was really due to the authorities of the universities as such, and to the Crown.1 The Thirty-sixth Canon of 1604, it is true, stated that no person should be suffered to preach, to catechise, or to be a lecturer or reader of divinity in either university without subscribing the "Three Articles." But as if those who were responsible for it were conscious that in making this demand they were exceeding the rightful limits of their jurisdiction, they added that "if either of the universities shall offend therein, we leave them to the danger of the law and His Majesty's censure." But though the Church of England has never asked for any formal act of subscription to the Articles from the lay members of her communion, it cannot be denied that the Fifth Canon of 1604 makes some approach towards regarding them as terms of communion. 1 The following are the material facts in the history of subscription to the Articles at the universities. It was first required from candidates for degrees at Oxford by authority of the university in Convocation assembled, in October 1576. A few years later (Nov. 1581) in consequence of a suggestion from the Chancellor, Leicester, it was also required by the university from all persons at matriculation. In 1587, during the Chancellorship of Hatton, a declaration of assent to the Prayer-Book, as well as subscription to the Articles, was demanded from candidates for degrees; and in the reign of James I., in consequence of an edict of the King (dated Jan. 18, 1616), a decree of the university (March 31, 1617) required from all candidates for degrees (except in music) subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles, the "Three Articles" of the Thirty-sixth Canon, and the Oath of Supremacy. At Cambridge subscription to the "Three Articles" was for the first time required from candidates for all degrees by edict of James I., dated December 4, 1616, confirmed by decree of the heads of houses in 1623. In 1772 for the degree of B.A., and in 1779 for B.C.L., M.B., and M.D., there was substituted by a grace of the senate a simple declaration of membership of the Church of England: "I, A. B., do declare that I am, bonâ fide, a member of the Church of England, as by law established." But at Oxford the old forms of subscription were still required, though we learn from the report of the Oxford University Commission of 1852 that different interpretations were usually given, though without authority, by " Impugners of the Articles of Religion, established "Whosoever shall hereafter affirm, That any of the Nine-and-Thirty Articles agreed upon by the archbishops and bishops of both provinces, and the whole clergy, in the Convocation holden at London, in the year of our Lord God one thousand five hundred sixty-two, for avoiding diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true religion, are in any part superstitious or erroneous, or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe to, let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored, but only by the archbishop, after his repentance, and public revocation of such his wicked errors." The Canon, however, strong as its language is, was apparently intended to prohibit the laity from impugning and attacking the Articles rather than to require a different vice-chancellors or pro-vice-chancellors at the time of subscription for matriculation. "Sometimes the person matriculated is told that 'he hereby expresses his assent to the Thirty-Nine Articles, so far as he knows them'; sometimes that 'he probably has not read them, but that he has no objection to them'; sometimes that 'he thereby declares himself to be a member of the Church of England.' Sometimes, however, no observation is made.”—Report, p. 55. Further, there was much justice in the following remark of the commissioners: "It certainly is singular that a lay corporation should require from laymen, simply as a condition of membership, that which the Church of England does not require for participation in its most sacred ordinance."—Report, p. 55. Accordingly, the Oxford University Act of 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. lxxxi.) made unnecessary any declaration or oath in regard to religion at matriculation. It also enjoined that it should be unnecessary for any person taking the degrees of B.A., B.C.L., B.M., or B. Mus., to make or subscribe any declaration or take any oath. But such degree was not to constitute a qualification for holding any office formerly held by members of the Church of England, unless the person had taken the oaths and declarations required. Finally, the Universities Test Act of 1871 (34 Vict. c. xxvi.) laid down definitely that no person on taking any degree other than a degree in divinity, or holding lay, academical, or collegiate offices should be required to subscribe any formulary of faith |