, Of 
 
 fir i 
 
 JUL 2 1968 
 
 iBxms 
 
 .C8T1 
 

 BISHOP DOANE vs. BISHOP M'lLVAINE 
 
 ON 
 
 <£rforUf &9*oloflg; 
 
 EXHIBITED IN EXTRACTS FKOM THE WRITINGS OF THE DIOCESANS 
 OF NEW JERSEY AND OF OHIO. 
 
 BT 
 
 A PRESBYTERIAN. 
 
 " One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism." — Eph. iv. 5. 
 " I hear that there be divisions among you ; and I partly believe it." 
 
 1 Cov. xi. 18. 
 
 JJuvUnjjton: 
 
 J. L. ruwKLL, rmsTEii. 
 
 1843. 
 
THE CONTROVERSY IS FORCED UPON US. 
 
 " At length, however, it was thought expedient by some, that the 
 controversy should be set up in the Church of this land, and that 
 the publications on one side, viz: that of the Oxford Divines, should 
 have a re-print here. Hence the far-famed " Tracts for the Times" 
 were issued from the press of New York, preceded by the promise 
 of the re-print of a large selection of other English publications on 
 the same side of the question. During the progress of these works, 
 the most zealous efforts have been made to commend the peculiarities 
 of Oxford divinity to the diligent reading and confidential reception 
 of the clergy and laity of this country. Thus has the contro- 
 versy been forced upon those, who, while the publications were con- 
 fined to a transatlantic Church, and only introduced among us by 
 scanty importations, would have been content to leave it with those 
 to whom it especially belonged, however deeply convinced them- 
 selves, that Oxford divinity was most justly accused." — Bishop 
 3fllvaine, p. 10. 
 
 " I feel the importance of that Litany • That it may please thee to beat down 
 Satan beneath our feet.' The signs of the times seem to indicate that the Church 
 of England, as it has always been the strong hold of truth, is now the grand ob- 
 ject of a special effort, in these last days, of the Ruler of the darkness of this 
 world." — Bishop M'llvaine, p. 23. 
 
 "The time seems at hand, when we shall have to retreat upon the strong- 
 holds of our faith; when they that teach, and they that learn, and they that 
 keep the watch-tower, or go forth to the battle-field, will be compelled to do for 
 a. declining Church, what for an advancing one the Apostle forbids to be done: 
 to maintain 'the principles of the doctrine of Christ' instead of 'going on 
 unto perfection ;' to ' lay again the foundation of repentance from dead works, 
 and of faith towards God ;' in order to preserve and strengthen and encour- 
 age those -who stand, if -we may not renew again unto repentance those that 
 have fallen away.'" 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I. The occasion of this Compilation on Oxford Theology. 
 
 The Compiler of these extracts having recently had occasion to examine 
 Bishop M'llvaine's work on Oxford Theology, (one of the ablest, most inter- 
 esting and instructive works of the age) was struck at once with the total and 
 irreconcilable dissimilarity between his views and those of Bishop Doane. This 
 led to a re-perusal of Bishop Doane's large pamphlet, ("Brief Examination") 
 in connection with Bishop M'llvaine's book; and the result was the marking 
 of a large number of parallel* passages. These are collected together in the 
 following pages. 
 
 II. The object of this Compilation. 
 
 1. To exhibit. Oxfordism and Romanism in contrast with evangelical doc- 
 trine — a matter of great importance in these times of Popish effort, and of 
 crafty, Tractarian theology. 
 
 2. To beseech those prelates and others, who boast of "one church," " one 
 faith," " one Apostolic succession," &c, not to chaunt their plea of " UNITY " 
 with notes of discord. Silence would be far more becoming, during the con- 
 tinuance of " divisions^" among them, which are as serious as ever afflicted any 
 Church, in any age. 
 
 3. To urge Christians of all " denominations " to renew their efforts to pre- 
 sent the spread of Popery, or its equivalent, within the limits of the commu- 
 nities in which Providence has placed them. 
 
 III. The manner of this compilation. 
 
 1. The sentences are generally given verbatim et literatim from the two wri- 
 ters. In a few instances, abbreviations are made, without affecting the sense. 
 
 2. In some cases, the words of authors, whom the writers quote -with appro- 
 bation, are inserted in connection with their own. This is done to bring out 
 their respective views more fully, and is always made known to the reader. 
 
 3. The quotations are taken from passages, which discuss the same subject ; 
 and consequently the passages quoted are truly *' parallel passages." 
 
 4. The works quoted are "Bishop Doane's Brief Examination," and "Bishop 
 M'llvaine on Oxford Divinity," unless otherwise mentioned. 
 
 In conclusion, the writer may be permitted to state that the compilation is 
 made without intending the slightest disrespect, personally, towards either of 
 the two divines, thus placed in antithetical juxtaposition. Although the Com- 
 piler very decidedly agrees with one, and "dissents" from the other, he con- 
 siders himself (as the moderator of the Presbytery) quite impartial in the man- 
 agement of the discussion. 
 
 The remarks inserted by the Compiler, to illustrate various topics, are print- 
 ed in different type, and run across the page. 
 
 Burlington, J\". J., January 12, 1813. 
 
 *" Parallel " may be understood here in its original sense. The views of the 
 the two writers, however indefinitely extended, never meet. 
 
to the citizens op burlington, n. j. 
 
 of "all denominations" op christians, 
 
 these pages, 
 
 containing extracts from the writings 
 
 of bishof doane, the gifted and distinguished " rector of 
 st. mary's church," 
 
 AND 
 
 OF BISHOP M'lLVAINE, WHOSE BIRTH-PLACE WAS OUR CITY, AND 
 
 WHOSE FAME IS " IN ALL THE CHURCHES," 
 
 — DIOCESANS, BOTH WELL KNOWN IN THIS COMMUNITY — 
 
 ARE RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 " My confidence in the doctri- " Their mode of representing 
 nal integrity of the Oxford vvri- the way of Salvation is " ano- 
 ters continues unshaken." — Br^f ther gospel " to us ; another to the 
 Ex. p. 183. Church to whose doctrines we are 
 
 pledged."— Ox. Div. p. 509. 
 
OXFORD THEOLOGY. 
 
 In ihe following pages, the reader may expect to find a brief view 
 of the Roman, Oxford and Protestant systems of religion, in refer- 
 ence to various fundamental points. The comparatively little dif- 
 ference between the Roman and Oxford systems, and the vast dif- 
 ference between both and that of the Reformers, will abundantly 
 appear from Bishop M'llvaine's remarks, during the progress of the 
 
 discussion. The opinions of the two distinguished divines, from 
 
 whose writings extracts are made, are classified under the theologi- 
 cal divisions, characteristic of the Popish controversy. Their gene- 
 ral opinions in regard to the " Oxford movement" and its Popish 
 tendencies are first given, as introductory to the survey of the sys- 
 tem. 
 
 (Keucral cpfmou ot the #pfortr arractttrfmrs. 
 
 Bishot Doane. 
 
 "As Mr. Palmer says, 'the learned 
 and religious authors of the Tracts for 
 the Times need no advocacy but their 
 own-' " p. 17. 
 
 There is a " vast amount that is 
 most timely and most excellent in these 
 calumniated writings." p. 10. 
 
 " The Oxford writers are such, for 
 piety, integrity, holiness, heavenly- 
 mindedness, charity, as would adorn 
 the purest age the Church has ever 
 known." p. 5. 
 
 " Before the Oxford Tracts had been 
 read at all, the Trojan horse was not 
 regarded as a more pernicious por- 
 tent." p. 158. 
 
 " A portion of them were reprinted ; 
 and the well-informed said at once 
 ' This is not new ! We knew all this 
 before! These are the old Church 
 principles, stated with fairness, and 
 carried out to their just conclusions !' " 
 p. 158. 
 
 " I am distressed by the unworthy 
 fears, and premature misgivings, and 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 " I am fully persuaded that with a 
 truly Protestant communion, the most 
 direct refutation of Oxford divinity is 
 itself." Pre/, p. 1 1 . 
 
 "It would be singular indeed if 
 works so voluminous should not con- 
 tain a great deal of useful knowledge. 
 Read Cardinal Bellarmine's Defence 
 of Popery ! May not as much be said 
 of that learned champion of the De- 
 crees of Trent?" p. 12. 
 
 " The whole history of the Church 
 warns us against forgetting that very 
 good and sincere men may set on foot 
 great errors — and thus inflict an injury 
 of which worse men would not be ca- 
 pable." p. 25. 
 
 " Ten years of open attack around 
 the walls of Troy effected nothing. 
 But one day's delusion among the 
 wardens at her gates ; the not exam- 
 ining what lay concealed under an ap- 
 pircnt act of religion betrayed the 
 city." p. 30. 
 
 " What the Articles and Homilies 
 so distinctly teach, that system directly 
 denies, most earnestly condemns, and 
 most indignantly casts away." p. 343. 
 
 " I am deeply impressed with the 
 grave importance of the errors, and 
 
Bishop Doank. 
 equivocating censures of those, whose 
 indolence has kept them ignorant, and 
 whose timidity distrusts the truth." p. 
 181. 
 
 " The summons to the ancient faith, 
 the ancient discipline, the ancient wor- 
 ship ; the impulse given to ancient 
 piety, and ancient holiness, and an- 
 cient charity — these will remain as 
 blessings to mankind, when every 
 name that has been mixed up in this 
 strife of tongues shall be forgotten." 
 English Sermon, p. 39. 
 
 "To the multitude of honest Chris- 
 tians, who love the truth, and who are 
 naturally anxious at the appearance of 
 division and disquiet, it may suffice to 
 say that there is no ground for anx- 
 iety." p. 182. 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaiwe. 
 
 probable evil consequences to the 
 Church, of Oxford divinity." p. 1. 
 
 " We must take heed : there may 
 be much restoration of what is old in 
 this system, but it may be old error, 
 wearing a venerable aspect to some, 
 because antiquated; and speaking 
 words of wisdom to some, because, 
 like the prayers of some, in an «?«- 
 known tongue.''' p. 104. 
 
 " In view of the tendencies of Ox- 
 ford divinity, I cannot question that 
 its certain results, if time and room be 
 allowed, will be the driving of true ho- 
 liness from God's house, and the sur- 
 rounding of its altars and crowding of 
 its courts, with the ' wood, hay and 
 stubble ' of a dead formality, which the 
 Lord, when he cometh, will destroy 
 with the breath of his mouth." p. 537. 
 
 Whoever reads the preceding quotations will begin to suspect that 
 one of these divines sympathises with the Tractarians, and that the 
 other is determined to bear a strong testimony against them. 
 
 <©« the 3|opisfi tentoncg of ©pfortofsw. 
 
 The blessings of the Reformation, brought about, under God, by 
 Luther, Cranmer, Calvin, &c, are so great and inestimable, that 
 any system, which tends to Popery, will be generally discounte- 
 nanced by Protestants, as a fearful and calamitous retrogradation. 
 Hence, the only way to encourage the progress of Oxfordism in 
 Protestant communities is to deny, or conceal, its Papistical affinities. 
 This denial, however, does not always succeed. 
 
 "For the Oxford writers, nothing "I have devoted a long time and a 
 need be asked, but that they bo read. great deal of pains to the study of the 
 
 Just in proportion as this is done, 
 the outcry against them will be dimin- 
 ished. Not that all agree with them. 
 
 system. 
 
 And I am constrained to say that 
 every further step has produced but a 
 deeper and deeper conviction on my 
 
 Far from it ! But that the charge of mind, that (whatever the intention or 
 
 Popery, or heresy, is seen at once to 
 be EnnoNF.ous, or malicious." p. 158. 
 
 " The impression is produced on (he 
 minds of the truculent on the one hand, 
 and of the timid on the other, of some 
 great overwhelming crisis, as if the 
 Reformation was about to retrograde I" 
 p. 181. 
 
 supposition of those who maintain it) 
 it is a systematic abandonment of the 
 vital and distinguishing features of the 
 Protestant faith, and a systematic adop- 
 tion of the very root and heart of Ro- 
 manism." p. 14. 
 
 " The difference between this divi- 
 nity and the true divinity, for which 
 our Reformers gave themselves to 
 death, is a difference of great vital doc- 
 trine, not of one doctrine merely but 
 of the sy«tem of doctrine, from corner- 
 
Bishop Doane. 
 
 " Oxford broadsides have demolished 
 the supremacy of the Pope, and trans- 
 substantiation (as she holds it, with an 
 anathema on all who do not see it just 
 as she does) and made her out to be in 
 6chism, in her relation to the Anglo- 
 Catholic Church ! A pretty Popery 
 indeed without supremacy and tran- 
 substantiation ! A very harmless mon- 
 ster truly ! A Popery without a Pope!" 
 p. 24.i 
 
 " This alone must quite suffice to do 
 away forever the suspicion of Popery," 
 p. 22. this outcry against the Oxford 
 writers, as teaching Popery !" p. 29. 
 
 " Would it not be better to agree 
 with the Quarterly Review, that they 
 who condemn the Oxford writings, as 
 favoring Popery,' ' are speaking in ut- 
 ter ignorance.' " p. 35. 
 
 " Their general tendency was not 
 (as some have imagined) to establish 
 the dominion and superstitions of 
 Rome, but to purify and invigorate the 
 Church of England, and to edify the 
 whole Catholic Church." p. 16. 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvainf. 
 
 stone to roof — a difference which 
 makes so great a gulf between, that 
 according to the Oxford Divines them- 
 selves, it makes the one side, or the 
 other, 'another gospel.' " p. 178. 
 
 " The fact that these divines have 
 written with learning against some of 
 the more offensive and inconvenient 
 developments of Popery, (for the claim 
 of Papal Supremacy would certainly 
 be quite inconvenient to the clergy of 
 England, if allowed) puts them in the 
 precise condition, from which, if they 
 be wrong .... they will operate the 
 more covertly and dangerously upon the 
 Protestant community around them." 
 p. 29. 
 
 " It is little else than Popery re- 
 strained ;" Pre/. 12 — "essentially Ro- 
 mish divinity ;" p. 18 — "it is of the 
 house and lineage of Popery ;" p. 15 — 
 " not only Romanism in its essence, 
 but will become Romanism in full man- 
 ifestation." p 18. et passim. 
 
 " With great truth, I can say that I 
 have diligently studied the system." 
 p. 14. 
 
 " A more singular pretence was 
 never conceived, than that such repre- 
 sentations of Christian truth are capa- 
 ble of being squeezed into any thing 
 but a perfect contradiction of the plain- 
 est and most repealed declarations of 
 our own Church." p. 343. 
 
 1 The worthy Bishop of the Diocese o/*N. J. seems to think that almost all 
 the abominations of Romanism [how very " inconvenient " to kiss the foot of an 
 Italian ecclesiastic] may be condensed into that one frightful word — POPE ! 
 But there can be a great deal of " pretty Popery " without having a Chief Bi- 
 shop at Rome. Although the Pope raised himself above the Bishops, just as 
 the Bishops did above the Presbyters, it is very possible for the three to hold oven 
 worse errors in common. The reader will find, as he goes along, that this 
 " Pretty Popery " has a very strong resemblance to her less comely twin-brother 
 
 at Rome. " Popery without 'a Pope !" Yes ; " mutato nomine " — the name 
 
 being changed, there is no scarcity. 
 
 The following quotation from Rev. Mr. Palmer (whose work on "the Church" 
 Bishop Whitiingham has edited in this country, and the notes in which indicate 
 that the Bishop is even higher Church than the Deacon, a thing not uncom- 
 mon) will show that some, engaged in the Oxford " movement " have no objec- 
 tion to kissing the Pope, provided it be in the right place. Says Mr. Palmer 
 •'I should like to see the Patriarch of Constantinople and our Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, go barefoot to Rome, and fall upon the Pope's neck, and kiss him, 
 and never let him go till they had persuaded him to be reasonable." After such 
 long and " Catholic" salutations, it is a Bupposable case that the two divines 
 would have no objection to the "bare foot" of the Pope. 
 
Bishoi' M'Ilvaixk. 
 
 " If men have cried " Popery," when 
 there was no danger, it does not follow 
 that whenever the cry shall be raised 
 again, we should remain at our ease. 
 Many groundless alarms of fire are 
 heard in our cities. Incendiaries 
 would be glad to persuade us hence, 
 that all future alarms are so likely to be 
 groundless that we need not heed them. 
 
 So would Satan rejoice in his work, 
 and have free course to inflame the city 
 of God with his fiery darts, could he 
 only persuade us that because such men 
 as Hooker and Whitgift, &c, were 
 falsely accused of Popery, therefore 
 we need be under no apprehension of 
 Popery from the men of Oxford." — 
 p. 527. 
 
 Bishop Doane. 
 
 " Who has not heard the sweeping 
 charge of Popery brought, not only a- 
 gainst the Church of which Hooker 
 was a Presbyter, and its American Sis- 
 ter, but against all and singular their 
 doctrines, rules and usages ? Did they 
 believe and teach Apostolic Succes- 
 sion ? It was rank Popery. Popery 
 was thus a matter of history. — Did 
 they maintain Baptismal Regeneration? 
 Still it was Popery. Then Popery 
 was a doctrine. Do they use a Litur- 
 gy ? Popery! Popery is a form of 
 prayer. — Do they kneel at the com- 
 munion ? Popery ! Popery is a pos- 
 ture. — Do they wear a Surplice] 
 Popery ! Popery is a garment. Do 
 they erect a Cross upon a Church, or 
 private dwelling? Popery! a bit of 
 wood is Popery." p. 156.* 
 
 " This calumny of " Popery" has 
 been thrown upon the greatest lights 
 
 of the Church It was the cry a- 
 
 gainst Jewell, Whitgift, Hooker," &c. 
 p. 2. 
 
 Both writers express their opinions of the Popish tendency of Ox- 
 fordism, with sufficient decision and earnestness. We shall now, as 
 we proceed to view the system, be able to determine its true charac- 
 ter, and to decide which of the two Bishops is right. The prospect 
 now is that " the contention will be so sharp between them, that they 
 will depart asunder one from another" — the one to verge towards 
 Rome, and the other to pass on to Geneva and the countries of the 
 Reformation. 
 
 Let us attend first to the doctrine of Justification, which was 
 the lever that upheaved the Roman " world of iniquity." 
 
 " We are not to be put to sleep by 
 such opiates, nor blinded by such dust. 
 Popery is on the alert. Satan is about 
 his work." p. 527. 
 
 "With great deference, we suggest that these lively figures of speech be 
 converted into Presbyterian language, and applied to that "mixed multitude" 
 whom " the Rector of St. Mary's Church" considers as under the " malign in- 
 fluences of Calvinism ?" Do they believe in Presbyterian ordination? Cal- 
 Tinism ! Calvinism is Scripture history. — Did they believe in regeneration by 
 the Spirit? Still it is Calvinism ! Calvinism is Bible doctrine. — Do they pray 
 extempore? Calvinism! Calvinism is prayer without a Service Book. Do 
 they sit at the Communion table? Calvinism ! Calvinism is an Apostolic pos- 
 ture. — Do they wear decent apparel ? Calvinism ! Calvinism is a fisherman's 
 garment. — Do they oppose "man's feasts and fasts in God's Church ?" Cal- 
 vinism! Calvinism is pure Anti-Popery. — Do they hold fellowship with "other 
 denominations?" Calvinism! " Catholic charity" is Calvinism. We think 
 there is more Gospel in our version than in the episcopal text. The attention 
 of the reader is directed to Bishop M'llvaine's commentary on these same 
 words. 
 
I. JusMffcnUou- 
 
 "The doctrine of a sinner's justification in the sight of God, is fundamental. 
 .... This is a central and a cardinal point in theoretical as well as practical re- 
 ligion ; and the degree of error on other articles, may be inferred from the de- 
 gree of departure from the truth, in regard to this. The history of the Christian 
 Church, from the days of the Apostles, confirms the statement now given. Was 
 any heretic ever known to hold a sound doctrine on justification!" Dr. Alex- 
 ander's Tract on Justification, p. 4. 
 
 Do the Diocesans of New Jersey and of Ohio agree with Dr. Al- 
 exander in this estimate of the importance of the doctrine of Justi- 
 fication? Iftheydo.it will be highly auspicious of the soundness of 
 their general theology. Let us, then, hear their opinions. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bisuop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 " Men lay the sacred platform out in "The doctrine of justification by 
 
 triangles and parallelograms, and take faith was the master-principle of the 
 
 their stand on this or that, as taste or Reformation " l'ref. p. 5 — " that same 
 
 fancy shall direct." Leeds Sermon, great doctrine, so mighty in the war of 
 
 p. 6. the Keformation, so feared and hated 
 
 and libelled at Rome — Justification." 
 
 " With one school, this is the great "It was in precise accordance with 
 doctrine; that with another. One is the view of Hookkr that Luther spake 
 extolled as fundamental. Others dwin- of the doctrine of justification as ' the 
 die into non-essentials. A single truth Article of a standing or falling- 
 is set up as the test of a standing or Church;' — that Calvin maintained 
 falling Church: while integral por- that " if this one head were yielded safe 
 tions of the same ' faith once delivered and entire, it would not pay the cost to 
 to the saints ' serve but to breed sus- make any great quarrel about other 
 picions of their advocates; and bring matters in controversy with Rome.' In 
 on those who dare not to separate 'what this prominence of justification, there 
 God has joined together,' the name of was a perfect agreement among tho 
 bigots and formalists." do, p. 7. Protestant divines, as well of England, 
 
 as of the Continent." p. 23. 
 
 The great importance of the doctrine of Justification by faith is 
 thus fully acknowledged by Bishop M'llvaine, as indeed it is through- 
 out his whole work; 1 whilst the Diocesan of New Jersey has no idea 
 of setting up a "single truth," particularly justification [possibly the 
 apostolic succession?] as " the test of a standing or falling Church." 
 
 We now proceed to inquire about the nature of justification. 
 
 <©pfortr JusUfieatfou, iffce Homatr, fs SmtcUffcatfon. 
 
 The true nature of Justification is a fundamental point in the dis- 
 pute with the Tractarians, as it was at the Reformation with the Pa- 
 pists. Oxford and Rome unite in denying the distinction between 
 
 1 Take as another specimen, the following: " It was Justification by faith 
 that went into the temple of the Lord, — after Romish corruptions had turned it 
 into a market-house of masses, indulgences, relics and ' slaves and souls of men ' 
 — and overturning the tables of the money-changers and the shrines of images, 
 drove out ' the merchants of the earth,' and said ' make not my Father's house 
 a house of merchandize.' None of these profane intrusions into the sanctuary 
 of God can stand the stern rebuke of that doctrine." p. 292. 
 
 2 
 
10 
 
 justification and sanctification, so carefully made by the Reformers 
 and all evangelical divines. The evangelical view of the nature of 
 justification is thus briefly stated by Dr. Alexander: 
 
 "The common, popular sense of the word Justification is exactly the same 
 as its scriptural and theological meaning. When we speak of a person being 
 justified, we never think of an internal change, but a declaration of the condi- 
 tion of that person in relation to some law or rule. The word justify is uni- 
 formly the opposite of the word condemn. When a man is condemned, no 
 change is effected by the act on his moral character, but he is declared to be a 
 transgressor, and obnoxious to the penalty of some law ; so when a person is 
 justified, no new moral qualities or dispositions are communicated by that act, 
 but he is merely declared to be acquitted from every charge which may have 
 been brought against him, and to have complied with the requisitions of the 
 law by which his conduct is tried." p. 6. 
 
 According to this view, scriptural justification implies no change 
 of character, no infusion of personal holiness, but a change of slate, 
 a change relative to the law, — the sinner being delivered from a 
 state of condemnation and declared through the merits of Christ, to 
 be in a state of justification. 
 
 It must be distinctly borne in mind that sanctification, according 
 to the evangelical view, always follows justification. It is distinct 
 from it in nature, although an invariable attendant upon it in fact. 
 Moreover, this view of justification imperatively demands sanctifica- 
 tion, as its legitimate fruit and evidence. Indeed no other view can 
 authoritatively enjoin it. The distinction between the two doctrines 
 is the only true basis from which to enforce scripturally their prac- 
 tical operation upon the hearts of men. 1 Oxford and Rome unite 
 in rejecting this distinction. 
 
 1. Oxfoud, with Rome, confounds Justification and Sancti- 
 fication. 
 
 Bisuop Doane. Bishop M'Ilyaine. 
 
 " Is it easy to draw, in the mere "It is a distinction which the Church 
 
 words of inspiration, the exact distinc- of Rome denies ; and which the Church 
 
 tion between justification and sanctifi- of England, with all the Churches of 
 
 cation V p. 69. the Reformation, has most earnestly 
 
 maintained, as fundamental in the 
 Gospel plan of salvation." p. 65. 
 "The present broad separation of "The whole of Oxford Divinity is 
 justification and sanctification, as if founded upon a denial of that' distinc- 
 they were two gifts, is technical and tion. . . . And this is the key to all the 
 unscriptural." p. 69. Quoted by Hi- labyrinth of Oxfordism, precisely v as it 
 shop Donne. is also to all the sinuosities of Roman- 
 
 ism." p. 65. 
 " Is it not possible that theological "The great matter is to keep clear 
 statements on this controverted sub- the essential diflercnce between justifi. 
 
 " i No sinner, since the fall, has ever been justified without being sanctified, 
 or sanctified without being justified. But this does not warrant their being 
 confounded; any more than we should be warranted to call justice mercy, and 
 mercy justice, as they subsist in the divino nature, because the two are never 
 found there in separation from each other." — Dn. Waudlaw. 
 
11 
 
 Bishop Doank. 
 }ect, may become technical, beyond the 
 warrant of scripture!" p. 69. 
 
 " What is the Popish error in re- 
 gard to justification? Is it taught at 
 Oxford." p. 63. 
 
 " In truth, Scripture speaks of but 
 one gift, which it sometimes calls re- 
 newal, sometimes justification, accord- 
 ing as it views it — passing to and fro 
 from one to the oilier, so rapidly, so 
 abruptly, as to force upon us, irresisti- 
 bly, the inference, that they are really 
 one." Quoted, page 68. 
 
 "Justification and sanctification are 
 substantially the 6ame thing." p. 67. 
 
 "This is really and truly our justi- 
 fication, not faith, not holiness (with 
 the Romanist) not — much less — a mere 
 imputation (with the Lutheran) but 
 through God's mercy the very presence 
 of Christ." p. 75. 
 
 BlSUOP M'll.VAlNK. 
 
 cation and sanctification ; between the 
 lormer as a restoration to favor, the lat- 
 ter to purity." p. 62. 
 
 " The first capital error of the Pa- 
 pists is that they confound justifica- 
 tion and sanctification. . . . Oxford Di- 
 vinity confounds justification and sanc- 
 tification ?" p. 145. 
 
 " When we ask the great question 
 ' What is that righteousness whereby 
 a Christian is justified?' the answer 
 of Oxford Divinity can be nothing 
 else than that the righteousness of re- 
 newal or sanctification, is that righte- 
 ousness." p, 66. 
 
 " It is the fundamental principle of 
 Oxford divinity that justifying righte- 
 ousness .... is iden'.ical with sanctifi- 
 cation — a righteousness in us and not 
 in Christ — personal as opposed to im- 
 puted — a righteousness infused and in- 
 herent — and therefore our own righte- 
 ousness as much as our souls, our intel- 
 lects, our affections are our own." p. 77. 
 
 The last quotation of Bishop Doane develops in peculiar phrase- 
 ology the Oxford view of Justification. It is "a presence!" This 
 "presence" — if any where — is " present " with our thoughts and 
 feelings; that is, it must be ours; something in us truly our own. 
 It is in reality nothing more than sanctification concealed under a 
 new name; as is evident, and as we shall further have occasion to 
 notice. 
 
 The Tractarians themselves call this divine presence, or gift, 
 sometimes justification and sometimes sanctification. When pressed 
 for an explanation they do not always like to be " exact and logical." 
 
 "Is it the office of the Holy Ghost 
 to be exact and logical ? Are we not 
 rather taught in it to choose the mean 
 between what seem to be opposing pro- 
 positions! As when St. Paul says 
 (Rom. 3,28) 'a man is justified by 
 faith;' and St. James (2, 24) "by 
 works a man is justified ?' "' p. 69. 
 
 " One would suppose that a coast, eo 
 undefined would afford but little guid- 
 ance in keeping the middle -way, except 
 as when mariners, under fear of hidden 
 shoals and currents on an unseen shore, 
 keep as far away at possible, p. 36. 
 
 1 This is extraordinary language to be used by a theologian. Justification by 
 a " mean"? And what does this mean ? we respectfully ask. Is it that a man 
 is justified partly by faith, and partly by works? If so, it is an "exact and 
 logical " contradiction of the 1 lib. Article of the Bishop's own Church, " on the 
 Justification of man," which says: "we are accounted righteous before God, 
 only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for 
 
 onr own works." Or is this " mean " that which, according to Oxford, it 
 
 " not faith, not holiness," but " the very presence of Christ ?" If so, the lan- 
 guage is equally contrary to the Articles and the Scriptures, which know nothing 
 of justification by a " presence," or by a " m*an." They arc very " exact" la 
 
12 
 
 Bishop Diiave. Bishop M'Ilvaise. 
 
 "In the 17th century, the theology "This Via Media (qu. Via Appia?) 
 
 of the divines of ihe English Church may he an old path, and yet it may not 
 
 was suhstantially the same as ours he so old as that Via Striata, that nar- 
 
 [Fusey] i6. It was the true Via Me- row way that leadeth Hnto life, of which 
 
 dia." p. 27. the Saviour spoke, in which one walks 
 
 "The Via Media, even Ovid knew by faith, and of which it is written: 
 
 was safest. "Medio ttitissi?)ius ibis." ' Few there be that find it.'" p. 105. 
 p. 16. 
 
 " Will any one still say, that on the "The doctrine of Oxford divinity 
 
 subject of justification, Oxford teaches and that of Home, as to what justifica- 
 
 after Rome ?" p. 92. tion consists in, is precisely the same." 
 
 p. 164. 
 
 It appears from the preceding that Bishop M'llvaine has a full con- 
 viction of the identity of Oxford and Roman justification. Even 
 Bishop Doane has to contend that on this fundamental point, the 
 Bible is not very "exact and logical "[!] in order to vindicate the 
 Tractarians for moving off into the mist. And he is obliged to re- 
 sort to the invisible Via Media, as the only refuge from the argu- 
 ments of his friend, who wisely prefers the Via Stricta of Christ and 
 His Apostles. 
 
 2. Oxford Justification, like Roman, is progressive ; or 
 in the language of Bishop M'llvaine, "Justification, according to this 
 divinity, is progressive, increasing as sanctification increases." p. 77. 
 
 " First, justification and sanctifica- "According to this doctrine, some 
 
 tion are substantially the same thing ; are more justified than others; the same 
 
 next, viewed relatively to each other, person at various periods may be in 
 
 justification follows on sanctification. various stages of justification." p. 88. 
 That we are first renewed and then 
 and therefore accepted — the doctrine 
 which Luther strenuously opposed — 
 is true in one sense, but not in another; 
 — true in a popular sense, not true in 
 an exact sense." Quoted, p. 67. 
 
 "Justification is a state into which "Dr. Pusey expressly declares that 
 we are brought of God's free mercy he and those who bear him company, 
 alone, without works, but in which, do 'exclude sanctification from having 
 having been placed, we are to " work any place in our justification' Where 
 out our salvation with fear and trcm- the line runs, and what it is, he does 
 bling " — a state admitting of degrees, not say. But he does tell us with sin- 
 according to the degree of sanctifica- gular contradiction, that ' the state of 
 tion." Pusey, quoted by Doane, p. 79. justification admits of degrees accord- 
 ing to the degree of sanctification.'" 1 
 p. 94. 
 
 ascribing justification to faith alone, and the evidence of a living faith to works. 
 In the passages quoted by Bishop Doane, Paul refers to the former; and James 
 to the latter. The " mean " between the two, no " logic," or rhetoric, of the 
 mo«t profound Scholasticism can ever analyze, without detecting Popery in ele- 
 mentary abundance. 
 
 i Bishop M'llvaine aptly compares the Tractarians to " mistified mariners 
 turning round and round." " So much [he adds] for losing sight of the true 
 cross ! There is all the difference in the world between steering by an object 
 on shore, and an object in the boat" p. 100. 
 
13 
 
 The occasion of this contradiction is explained by Mr. Newman's 
 language. " Justification (says ho) viewed relatively to the past, is 
 forgiveness of sin ; for nothing more it can be; [there is no room for 
 progress here] but considered as to the present and future, it is more; 
 it is renewal, wrought in us by the Spirit of Him, who washes 
 away its still adhering imperfections, [now it can make progress] 
 as well as blols out what is past." (Doane p. 70.) Or in the lan- 
 guage of Dr. Pusey, "It is a state admitting of degrees (although the 
 first act did not.") In other words, justification is progressive, ex- 
 cept at its beginning ! 
 
 3. It may be objected against our view of Oxford justification which 
 confounds it with sanctification, that the Oxfordists make distinc- 
 tions which separate their tertium quid from the errors of Popery. 
 Let us then attend to this line of separation. In the language of 
 Bishop M'llvaine, " Can it be expected that such a point of resem- 
 blance between them and Rome could be given up, without at least 
 an attempt at some different showing V p. 92. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaive. 
 
 Dr.Pusey say s "Justification, though " Of course Dr. Pusey denies it, and 
 productive of renewal, is distinct from attempts to make such distinctions be- 
 it in idea." p. 65. tween their indwelling righteousness 
 
 and what in all theology is called sanc- 
 tification, as will enable them to hold 
 to the former, without feeling convicted 
 of going back to Rome." p. 93. 
 
 "This laborious distinction is un- 
 scriptural, unreal, mystical ; in so seri- 
 ous a matter, it is mere trifling, and to 
 all pretence of sober, biblical theology, 
 disgraceful. It speaks for itself. Sha- 
 dowy as it is, however, and vain, it 
 shows to what straits these divines are 
 driven, if they would even seem to 
 keep clear of the downright charge of 
 Popery." p. 97. 
 
 " 13y the very using of this attempt- 
 ed distinction (which is no other than 
 
 "This justifying principle, though 
 •within us — as it must be, if it is to 
 separate us from the world — yet is not 
 of us, or in us, not any quality or act 
 of our minds, not faith, not renovation, 
 not obedience, not any thing cogniza- 
 ble by man, but a certain divine gift in 
 which all these qualifications are in- 
 cluded." 1 Quoted by Doane, p. 66. 
 
 " Neither the imputed righteousness 
 of Christ, nor inherent righteousness is 
 
 that in which a justified state consists ; an old device of scholastic Romanism) 
 
 but the actual presence in a mysterious 
 way, or indwelling in the soul, through 
 the Spirit, of the Word incarnate, in 
 whom is the Father." Quoted by 
 Doane, p. 89. 
 
 " Our justification, or our being ac- 
 counted righteous by Almighty God, 
 
 their doctrine is identified with that of 
 Popery. When sick men begin to 
 pick at the air, it is a mournful evi- 
 dence that sight is failing, and that the 
 darkness of death is at hand." p. 97. 
 " In Hooker's view no righteousness 
 can be within us, whether called ' the 
 
 consists in our being grafted into the presence of God by His Spirit,' or 
 
 1 Oxford Justification is a very marvellous quod libel. It is within us. but 
 not in us — it is not one thing, not another thing, not any thing, but something 
 
 that includes all things ! The reader, by this time, will perhaps agree with 
 
 Bishop Doane, that Oxford writers arc not very "exact and logical." The 
 days of scholastic puzzles have returned ; and it is high time time to restore 
 St. Duns Scotus and St. Thomas Aquinas to the calendar. Bishop M'llvaine 
 says that "Thomas Aquinas is an Oxford man." p. 223. 
 
14 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 ' a divine glory,' or ■ gift,' or 'Sheki- 
 nah," without being inherent in the 
 same sense in which our souls are in- 
 herent ; or without being our own in 
 the same sense in which our souls are 
 our own." — p. 168. 
 
 Bishop Doane. 
 body, or made members of Christ, in 
 God dwelling in us, and our dwelling 
 in God, and that the Holy Ghost is the 
 gracious agent in this wonderful work 
 — all this has been argued from Scrip- 
 ture in various ways." Quoted by 
 JDoane, p. 72. 
 
 The language of Hooker represents in its true light, the vain 
 effort of Oxford to escape from Popery. Bishop M'llvaine shows, 
 in one of the ablest chapters of his work, that this distinction of Ox- 
 ford (whatever it be) dates from the schoolmen, and was never con- 
 sidered a departure from the Romish doctrine, being merely the trans- 
 lation of a quiddity into an unknown tongue. 1 
 
 4. No one who reads Bishop M'llvaine's work, can resist the evi- 
 dence, that Oxford, like Rome, places our justifying righteousness 
 in ourselves and not in Christ. 
 
 Dr. Pusey says "the source of our 
 acceptance is our union with Christ ; 
 and the Father looks on us as accepta- 
 ble, as being in Him." p. 72- 
 
 " Can there be more explicit refer- 
 ence of all to God 1 of all to grace? 
 How cleaily is it taught that all we 
 are, or have, that ventures to present 
 itself before the Holy One, is not only 
 through, by, and of, but — more endear- 
 ing far — in Christ." 2 p. 90. 
 
 " There are no passages in Oxford 
 writings in assertion of salvation only 
 through Christ's merits, stronger than 
 those in the writings of the leading di- 
 vines of Home." p. 165. 
 
 " Let them say that they attribute 
 all to the merits of Christ and nothing 
 to their own workings or devisings; it 
 is nothing more than Romish writers 
 have often done; nothing more than 
 the Council of Trent has done." p. 
 170. 
 
 In the words of Bishop M'llvaine, " Like Rome, the Oxford di- 
 vines ascribe the ma-itorious catise of justification only to Christ; 
 
 1 Bishop M'llvaine remarks: " this distinction, instead of being a dissent from 
 Romanism, is of Romish origin. Mr. Newman himself assures us that it was 
 a subject of debate in the Council of Trent, and was left undecided, and is 
 therefore perfectly consistent with its established creed." p. 158. 
 
 2 Mr. Newman, in his "Lectures on Justification," calls the righteousness of 
 Christ, imputed to us for justification, " an unreal righteousness and a real cor- 
 ruption," " bringing us into bondage to shadows ;" — " another gospel." In re- 
 gard to these mystical Lectures, there is some difference of opinion : 
 
 " Mr. Newman's Lectures on Justi- "Oh this sad, misty divinity, far too 
 Jication is a book, which would en- scholastic for the pulpit, far too vague 
 
 and unphilosopbic for the study." Bi- 
 shop M'llvaine, p. 97. 
 
 gage and well reward the careful study 
 of such minds, so trained, as Horace 
 Binney's, John Sergeant's, George E. 
 Badger's, and David B. Ogden's," Bi- 
 shop Doane, p. 159. 
 
 It may be well to mention here that Oxford has taken the Platonic philoso- 
 phy under its special patronage. According to Bishop M'llvaine, " Platonism 
 and the Middle Ages are quite hobbies in the Oxford school. Mr. Newman 
 cannot account for " the close parallelism " between the Republic of Plato and 
 the Church, without adverting to the idea of a " species of inspiration from the 
 same Being who formed the Church!" Much of the mysticism of the Oxford 
 Rohool may be accounted for by its love of Plato. Enthusiasm, mysticism, and 
 fanaticism have been the extravagancies of Platonism." 
 
15 
 
 the efficient to the Holy Spirit; the instrumental to Baptism; and 
 the formal (constituent or essential) cause only to a righteousness 
 in us." p. 170. "The merits of Christ are applied to the sinner, 
 according to this new v. ay, without any knowledge or application 
 on his part, except as he comes to the sacraments or uses other 
 4 sacred symbols' and ' effectual signs of grace.' And this applica- 
 tion consists in the communication of inherent righteousness ; so 
 that we are justified, not by the merits of Christ, but by an inherent 
 righteousness of our own, which is given for his sake." p. 85. 
 
 5. The reader may now perhaps ask, where is the great danger in 
 adopting the Oxford view? Why is this distinction (which Oxford 
 and Rome reject) between justification and sanctification, be- 
 tween the justifying righteousness of Christ and inherent righteous- 
 ness, so strongly and yerseveringly vrged by all evangelical Pro- 
 testants? The following extracts from Bishop M'llvaine's work will 
 assist in throwing light upon this important subject: 
 
 "Now the moment a system of religion gets thus to rest in works for justifi- 
 cation before God, its strong tendency, unless fortuitously directed otherwise, is 
 to run to reliance on external works, because they are tangible, appreciable; 
 they can be counted and distinctly grasped for refuge, while internal holiness 
 is just the reverse. Hence, while all corrupt systems of Christianity, have 
 talked much of inherent righteousness, inward holiness, <fcc, their real working 
 in the long run has been most grossly to neglect the inward work of religion, 
 and make the whole business of salvation consist in external observances ; and 
 the more they have resulted in this, the more has the outward show of devotion 
 increased, and the power and efficacy of external symbols and gestures been 
 magnified. All this is natural. We could make the whole aspect of our con- 
 gregations at once as devout and prostrate in the dust, as that of a Romish Mo- 
 nastery, or a Mohammedan Mosque, or a Hindoo temple, were we only to make 
 them thoroughly believe, as Papists, Mohammedans and Hindoos, that by our 
 works we are making ourselves acceptable. But what, in such an experiment, we 
 should gain in outward exhibitions of devotion, we should lose in that inward 
 holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord." p. 212. 
 
 "Since the age that was distinguished by the bringing in of this doctrine of 
 inherent righteousness for Justification, was also so remarkable for the intro- 
 duction of all the other chief corruptions of Romanism, such as image worship, 
 transubstantiation, purgatory, indulgences, &c; and since the very men, who 
 were foremost in the former, were also eminently distinguished as patrons of the 
 latter, as Aquinas and Bonoventura (the latter the chief devotee of the Virgin 
 Mary) what are we to anticipate from the introduction of precisely the same 
 doctrine of Justification among Protestants 1 Is its natural strength abated ! 
 Call it by a Protestant, or a Romish name, set it up at Oxford or at Trent, is it 
 not the same; — the old righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, and as able 
 as ever, to lead men to go about ' establishing their own righteousness, not sub- 
 mitting themselves to the righteousness of God '! This tendency seems lo be 
 at present quite as strong and active, and is doing its work quite as fast, consid- 
 ering the differences of age and circumstances, as in the days of Aquinas." 
 p. 131. 
 
 "From imputed righteousness to inherent, for Justification, is a great step; 
 but once accomplished, it makes many others easy. It would be a wonderful 
 leap to cross at once, from imputed righteousness to Purgatory; but the middle 
 ground of inherent, once gained, the rest is soon accomplished. From the 
 righteousness of Christ imputed to me to the righteousness of saints imputed 
 to me, is indeed a great gulf, which no leap of reforming agility could cross at 
 a bound ; but the half-way position of man's righteousness, for justification, 
 takes half the difficulty away, so that under a sense of one's need of some bet- 
 
16 
 
 ter righteousness than his own, the leap of the sinner is easy into the midst of 
 the righteousness of All Saints,' living and dead, deposited under the keys of 
 St. Peter, for the convenience of the Church, and the benefit of the system of 
 indulgences." p. 105. 
 
 " If men work more and more (according to Rome) grace doth more increase, 
 and they are more and more justified. To such as diminish it by venial sins, it is 
 supplied by Holy water, Ave Marias, crossings, papal salutations, and such like : 
 which serve for reparations of grace decayed. To such as have lost it through 
 mortal sin, it is supplied through the Sacrament of Penance: which Sacra- 
 ment hath force to confer grace anew .... and change the punishment eternal 
 into a temporal satisfactory punishment here, if time do serve, if not, hereafter 
 to be endured ; except it be lightened by masses, works of charity, pilgrimages, 
 fasts, and such like ; or else shortened by pardon by term, or by plenary pardon. 1 
 .... The Church of Rome, in teaching justification by inherent Grace, doth, 
 pervert the truth of Christ." Hooker, as quoted by Bishop JY1 'Ilvuine, pp. 20, 21. 
 
 "A man who can never know whether his amount of inherent righteousness 
 is sufficient, will always be excogitating some device or other by which God 
 may be the more effectually propitiated and satisfied. In such righteousness, 
 there is something that seems tangible, measurable, appreciable. A man can 
 count his penances, measure his pilgrimages, weigh his gifts, and thus keep an 
 account of his righteousness. Sinners of various descriptions will resort to dif- 
 ferent modes to establish such a righteousness ; the rich will purchase what they 
 are not willing to work out, by the prayers of priests and the merits of saints, 
 and the virtue of indulgences, to save themselves the pains of austerities. Thus 
 will arise the monster of Supererogatory Merit, &c." 
 
 " It is the Romish doctrine of Justification [by inherent righteousness] that 
 gives value to Indulgences, need to Purgatory, use to the sacrament of Penance, 
 motive to the invocation of Saints, credence to the existence of the sacred trea- 
 sury of Supererogatory Merit, that makes Auricular Confession tolerable, and all 
 the vain inventions of meritorious will-worship precious. Next come devices 
 for the defence of these ; and hence the Romish doctrine of tradition, and^of in- 
 fallibility, and of implicit faith." p. 22. 
 
 Such being the natural consequences of Roman and Oxford justifi- 
 cation, who can embrace, or endorse such a system, and yet be con- 
 sidered an evangelical theologian? 
 
 II. JFatth. 
 
 " Next to an enquiry," says Bishop M'llvaine, » as to the nature 
 of the righteousness in which the sinner is to be justified, is the ques- 
 tion, by what means he is to become possessed of that righteousness. 
 The plain answer of the Scriptures is by faith." p. 178 The Ox- 
 ford writers also speak of faith; but they mean a very different 
 thing, and assign to it a very different office. Faith before Baptism 
 is, according to them, a mere historical knowledge and naked assent 
 — a condition of justification, but not its instrument. At Baptism, 
 Faith is regenerated and made living; but even then it is not trust 
 
 1 The reader is requested to note that the sale of these indulgences or pardons, 
 led to the Reformation, and was the means under God, of restoring to the 
 Church the Apostolic doctrine of justification by faith through the imputed 
 righteousness of Christ. 
 
17 
 
 in the righteousness of Christ, but is one of the graces of sanctifica- 
 tion, and as such, in connection with the other graces, it sustains the 
 justification received in Baptism. 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 " In truth what Hooker and the Ho- 
 mily mean by the righteousness of 
 Christ, made ours by imputation 
 through the instrumental agency of 
 faith alone, has no place in Oxford 
 divinity." p. 79. 
 
 Bishop Doane. 
 
 According to Dr. Pusey, whom Bi- 
 shop Uoane freely quotes, it is wrong 
 to " consider faith, as the proper in- 
 strument of justification ; faith 
 
 being but the sine qua nun, the neces- 
 sary condition on our parts of receiving 
 it." p. 53. 
 
 " This is truly and really our justi- 
 fication, not faith." Newman, quoted 
 by Bishop Doaue, p. 75. 
 
 "True faith may be called colour- 
 less, like air or water; it is but the me- 
 dium through which the soul views 
 Christ. The soul as little really rests 
 upon it, and contemplates it, as the 
 eye can see the air." do. p. 75. ' 
 
 "To think of being justified by faith 
 is to look from Christ and to fall from 
 grace." do. 75. 
 
 " Christ's cross does not justify by 
 being looked at, but by being applied; 
 not by being gazed at in faith, but by 
 being actually set up within us, 2 and 
 
 " Faith, before Baptism, is in this 
 divinity, no instrument at all, because 
 dead." 203. " Such, according to this 
 system, was the dead faith of Paul, 
 the converted, before he was baptized; 
 of the three thousand, who were con- 
 verted at the Pentecost, before they 
 were baptized : of Cornelius and his 
 household and friends, although on all 
 of them fell the Holy Ghost. Still 
 their faith must have been dead, unre- 
 geuerate, needing to be converted by 
 Baptism, because it was faith before 
 baptism ; and so says Dr. Pusey." p. 
 187. 
 
 In this divinity, " faith, when rege- 
 nerate and justified by baptism, is not 
 such a trust in the divine mercy as 
 lays hold on the righteousness of 
 
 1 Bishop Andrews calls faith "the eye of our hope;" and Leighton " the see- 
 ing faculty of the soul;" but the Tractarians degrade it from all such special 
 agency in salvation, and consider it as a mere "medium.'' Their faith has lit- 
 tle to do with the living organ ; it is much more like the inanimate element. 
 
 2 The Oxford writers talk much of " the cross within," a kind of phraseology 
 with which Bishop Doane seems to sympathize. For example, in one of his 
 last sermons (at Troy) he says, " So shall the Cross imprint its saving sigiia- 
 ture on your hearts and lives." p. 34. And again," While he proclaimed the 
 Cross as that in which alone St. Paul might glory, he was most careful to show, 
 that not the Cross on which the Saviour died for us -was sufficient, but the 
 Cross on which we die with Him." p. 24. Exactly so does Mr. Newman ex- 
 press himself: "The Cross in which St. Paul gloried was not the actual sacri- 
 fice on the Cross; but it is that sacrifice coming in power to him who has 
 faith in it, and converting his body and soul into a living sacrifice. It is the 
 Cross realized, present, living in him, sealing him sanctifying him, afflicting 
 him." Far differently docs Bishop M'llvaine express himself: "God grant 
 they may abundantly rejoice in Christ, in spite of the lamentable substitution 
 of a crucifxiou within them, as the object to be looked to for justification, in- 
 stead of the sacrifice upon the cross, in which alone we are permitted to glory." 
 p. 172. And again, "The Cross of Christ, lilted up or. high for every soul to 
 be ever looking at, as the single object of his justifying faith and foundation of 
 his only hope, is borne away from its central position in the grand panorama 
 of Gospel truth, and baptism is set up in its stead, having for its symbol a name 
 of faith, and for its virtue a cross within, Christ crucified, only in the sense of 
 self-mortification." — M'llvaine, p. 521. 
 
 3 
 
18 
 
 Uisiiop Doase. Bisuop M'Ilvaihe. 
 
 that not by our own act, but by God's Christ, and thus justifies the seul be- 
 invisible grace. Men sit, and gaze, fore God." p. 196. " All this is di- 
 and speak of the great atonement, and rectly denied of faith in Oxford divi- 
 think this is appropriating it. Men nity. " It would seem (says Mr. New- 
 say that faith is an apprehending and man) that Luther's doctrine now so 
 applying; faith cannot really apply popular, that justifying faith is trust, 
 it." Newman, quoted by Doane, p. 65 comes first, justifies by itself, and then 
 
 gives birth to all graces, is not tenable; 
 such a faith cannot be, and if it could, 
 ■would not justify." p. 198. 
 
 Bishop M'llvaine has a long and able chapter, in which he shows 
 in detail that Oxford and Roman faith are the same, and concludes 
 in the following words: " Faith before baptism, is, in this divinity, 
 no instrument at all, because dead. In baptism, it is no instrument 
 at all, because not made alive till baptism is completed. After bap- 
 tism, it is an instrument of justification, only as it sustains what 
 baptism has already effected, 1 and which, when lost, it cannot re- 
 new. And even in that instrumentality, it is not a sole instrument, 
 but is instrumental only as all other graces are also ; and it is only 
 said to be the sole instrument, 3 as a reward for something peculiar 
 to itself, which we do not pretend to understand. Such is the whole 
 internal and sole instrumentality of that faith, which St- Paul speaks 
 of when he says : "Being justified by faith, we have peace with 
 God, through our Lord Jesus Christ." p. 209. 
 
 It thus appears " that justifying faith, like justifying righteousness 
 in this system, is a matter of works altogether ; that the latter [righte- 
 ousness] is sanctification, and the former [faith] is justifying only as 
 it works by love and other graces ; that is, as it works by sanctifi- 
 cation." p. 211. — " Justifying faith is literally nothing in this system 
 but a name, a pretence to something which it is not." p. 510. 
 
 "Such honor, then, has faith in Oxford Divinity" 
 
 in. Sacraments. Baptfem. 
 
 " It is notoriously the doctrine of the Trent Decrees, that Baptism is '-the 
 only instrumental cuuse " of justification ; so absolutely necessary thereto, that 
 without it, justification is obtained by none. This is precisely the doctrine, 
 and a great distinguishing doctrine, of the Oxford School. . . . Justification in 
 
 » Precisely in accordance with these Oxford views is the language of Bishop 
 Doane : " His first care was to graft them in, by holy baptism, into the living 
 vine ; and then to keep them there, by grace through faith, unto salvation." 
 Troy sermon, p. 25. Christians are first united to Christ by baptism, and then 
 this union is sustained by faith ! Here is more " pretty Popery." 
 
 2 "This symbol, faith, [Mr. Newman adds] is said to justify [the italics are 
 his] not that it really justifies more than other graces; but it has this peculi- 
 arity, that it signifies in its very nature, that nothing of ours justifies us ; or it 
 typifies the freeness of our justification. Faith heralds forth divine grace, and 
 
19 
 
 Baptism, and only there, is the sole subject of a whole volume of Oxford 
 Tracts, called "Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism." Bishop M'llvaine, p. 213. 
 " The reader is now requested to observe that what is called the opus opera- 
 tum, in the Romish doctrine of the Sacraments, is found in all its offensive 
 substance in Oxford Divinity." 1 p. 215. 
 
 The opus operatum doctrine of Oxfordists is proved by their 
 making Baptism the only instrument of justification. 
 
 Bishop Doank. 
 
 "Indeed this may be set down as 
 the essence of sectarian doctrine to 
 consider faith, and not the sacraments, 
 as the proper instrument of justifica- 
 tion and other gospel gifts; instead of 
 holding that the grace of Christ comes 
 to us altogether from without (as from 
 Him, so through the externals of his 
 ordaining.") 2 Pusey quoted by Doane, 
 p. 53. 
 
 " The question is, whether the Ox- 
 ford religion is a sacramental religion 
 in such sense as to convict itself of Po- 
 pery." p. 54. 
 
 "Peter taught" (Acts 2. 38,) with 
 Dr. Pusey, that " by baptism an indi- 
 vidual receives the forgiveness of sin, 
 and a new nature, and is made a real 
 child of God, and a real member of 
 Christ." — "It is what Paul constantly 
 taught, (Titus 3: 5.— Gal. 3: 27.— 
 I Cor. 12: 13.) Nay, it is the very 
 teaching of our blessed Lord himself." 
 (John 3: 5.— Mark 16: 16.) p. 79, 
 80. 
 
 " So it was understood by Archbish- 
 op Cranmer." p. 80. 
 
 Bishop M'Iltaine. 
 " Without a doubt, Baptism is con- 
 sidered, in Oxford divinity, as effica- 
 cious to justification in the adult re- 
 cipient, without any faith except such 
 as Devils may have, as well as we. He 
 is made righteous by baptism, from be- 
 ing, up to the time of baptism, un~ 
 righteous." p - 217. 
 
 " A living faith, working by love, is 
 begotten in baptism, and is expressly 
 said not to precede, but to follow it. 
 Further evidence cannot be needed 
 than this, that in the opus operatum of 
 Baptism the two schemes of Rome 
 and Oxford are one." p. 217. 
 
 "Nothing could more plainly or 
 more impressively display the " great 
 gulf fixed" between this Divinity and 
 that of the Scriptures, than simply 
 this — that while the evidence of justi- 
 fication which the Scriptures refer to 
 continually is that of faith, and never 
 to our having been baptized ; on the 
 contrary, the evidence of Oxfordism, 
 like that of Romanism, is simply and 
 exclusively our baptism." p. 389. 
 
 " Now if Cranmer did hold literally 
 and strictly, that justification cannot 
 take place until we are baptized, how 
 is it that he writes the Homily on Jus- 
 
 its name is a sort of representative of it, as opposed to works. Hence it may 
 well be honored above the other graces, and placed nearer Christ than the rest, 
 as if it -were distinct from them, and before them, though it be not. It is suit- 
 ably said to justify us, because it says itself, that it does not— so to speak, as 
 a 6ort of reward to it." p. 205. 
 
 ' The opus operatum doctrine is, that the sacraments are efficacious as in- 
 struments of salvation, without regard to the preparation of the recipient. 
 Thus, Tract 32 says "the gifts of grace are deposited in mere positive ordi- 
 nances, as if to warn us against dropping the ceremonial of Christianity !" 
 
 2 If the Oxford view be the true one, what is to become of the members of the 
 Societt of Fuiends, who do not use the sacraments'! Tract No. 41, speak- 
 ing of the Quakers, says a churchman " must consider such persons to be mere 
 heathens, except in knowledge.'" This is a precious illustration of " Catholic 
 charity." 
 
20 
 
 Bishop Doawb. 
 
 " So it was understood by Bishop 
 Hooper." p. 83. 
 
 "So it was understood Ly Bishop 
 Jewell." p. 84. 
 
 "Such is the teaching of the Homi- 
 lies." p. 85. 
 
 " Such is the teaching of the Arti- 
 cles." p. 86. 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 lification — and yet baptism, as having 
 any such relation, is not hinted all" 
 p. 378. 
 
 " Bishop Hooper writes a sermon on 
 justification, in which he speaks freely 
 and very strongly of faith as the only 
 mean of justification. In this sermon, 
 the good Bishop gets so near to bap- 
 tism as to speak of Nicodemus (whose 
 case is associated with baptismal rege- 
 neration) and yet not a word about 
 baptism occurs in the whole sermon." 
 p. 379. 
 
 "According to Jewell, the Church 
 has always held a baptism of the Spi- 
 rit, independently of the outward sac- 
 rament of baptism by water." p. 386. 
 
 " In the Homilies, Justification is 
 expressly limited to faith, as its only 
 instrument of reception, p. 374. 
 
 "The Article of Justification con- 
 tains not a -word about baptism. The 
 only instrument it knows in faith." p. 
 372. 
 
 " In the Catechism it is never hint- 
 ed that justification is limited to bap- 
 tism, as its only instrument." p. 374. 
 
 " We positively assert that it is the 
 doctrine of our church, that whenever 
 a sinner repents and believes in the 
 Lord Jesus Christ, before baptism, at 
 baptism, or after baptism, his sins are 
 perfectly and freely remitted, he is free- 
 ly and completely justified, through 
 the righteousness of God by faith." p. 
 370. 
 
 "The opus operation has ever been 
 considered among Protestants, a dark 
 and deadly plague-spot of Popery. But 
 is not this precisely the doctrine of Ox- 
 ford divinity as to the efficacy of bap- 
 tism V p. 217. 
 
 " Such is the teaching of the Cate- 
 chism." 
 
 § . 9 
 
 " It ia to be feared that we have 
 
 been over-near certain celebrated Pro- 
 testant teachers, Puritan and Latitudi- 
 narian, and have suffered in conse- 
 quence. Hence we have almost em- 
 braced the doctrine that God conveys 
 grace only through the instrumentali- 
 ty of the mental energies, that is 
 through faith, prayer, active spiritual 
 contemplation, or (what is called) com- 
 munion with God, in contradistinction 
 to the primitive view, according to 
 which the church and her sacraments 
 are the ordained and the direct visible 
 means of conveying to the soul what 
 is in itself supernatural and unseen." 
 Pusey, quoted by Doane, p. 53. 
 
 This High Church view of the Sacraments, held by Dr. Pusey 
 and his confederates is justly characterized by Bishop M'llvnineas a 
 " dark and deadly plague-spot." Bishop Burnet, on the 39 Articles, 
 also maintains " we have just reason to detest it as one of the depths 
 of Satan ;" and " that it looks more like the incantations of Hea- 
 thenism than the purity and simplicity of the Christian religion." 
 
 Another evidence of the opus operatum doctrine at Baptism, ap- 
 pears in the entire DIFFERENCE made by Oxfordism and Roman- 
 ism BETWEEN THE SACRAMENTS OF THE Old AND New TESTA- 
 MENTS in regard to saving efficacy. 
 
21 
 
 «' Nothing is more notorious than the fact that the old, as well as the mod- 
 ern, divines of the Church of England, have regarded the sacraments of the 
 two dispensations, Circumcision for example, as standing upon precisely the 
 same footing with Baptism in regard to the spiritual part of the covenant seal- 
 ed ; in other words that the only vital difference was in the sign; the inward, 
 spiritual grace, being precisely the same in both. . . . But there is great incon- 
 venience in this identity of circumcision and baptism, to those who hold the 
 latter to' be the only instrument of justification. Abraham was justified, being 
 vncircumcised, says Paul. Consequently, if Circumcision and Baptism be the 
 same, a sinner may be justified being unbaptized. Hence results a most in- 
 convenient argument against baptismal justification ; and how is it to be obvia- 
 ted ? Very easily. Our Oxford divines deny that Circumcision and Baptism 
 do bear the spiritual resemblance mentioned above; and holding fast the exclu- 
 sive instrumentality of Baptism, they maintain that since the Old Testament 
 Saints were not baptized, they were not justified, but were in bondage, under 
 the law and not under grace, and received not justification, until Christ came, 
 and with him, the grace and gift of baptism. To this general rule, Mr. Newman 
 makes Abraham and Elijah exceptions." Bishop M'llvaine, p. 223, 24. 
 
 Bishop Doane. 
 [Bishop D., after alluding to the "sa- 
 craments" of the ark and the rainbow, 
 Bays:] " Was not the covenant made 
 with Moses sacramental ? The rite of 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 " The Flood and the Red Sea are, 
 by Dr. Pusey, put on a level, as ordi- 
 nances, with circumcision, in point of 
 grace. [Just as the ark, rainbow, daily 
 
 circumcision established as its seal; sacrifice, &c. are by Dr. Doane.] All 
 the Paschal Lamb, thai bleeding pic- are mere types. . . . From this it is 
 lure of * our Passover ;' the daily sac- manifest not only that the sacramental 
 rifice, the blood of atonement, all ful- character is denied to circumcision, 
 filled and realized, when He 'entered which St. Paul says was 'a sealof the 
 in once' 'by his own blood;' 'the righteousness of faith, which Jlbraha?n 
 manna, which was spiritual meat,' the had being uncircumcised ;' but that 
 water in the wilderness, their 'spirit- all those who lived before the gospel, 
 ual rock.' . . . Not that any of these from Adam downwards, with some fa- 
 were, in the true sense, sacraments vored exceptions, were without regene- 
 of SALVATION, which the txuo sa- ration, without justification, -without 
 craments of the Gospel are; but that any promise or acceptance of Heaven, 
 they were all ' figures of the true.' " and did not receive any, till Christ 
 p. 50. came." 1 p. 226. 
 
 •"The reader [says Bishop M'Ilvaine] may very reasonably enquire here 
 what, in view of those who thus think concerning the Old Testament Saints, 
 did become of their souls after death — did they go to Heaven ? Romish di- 
 vinity answers Nay — and reasonably, because they were not regenerated nor 
 justified, since Christ had not died, and Baptism was not given. Where then ! 
 To Limbus Patrum, answers Romanism. Whether that Limbus is distinct 
 from that in which infants that die without Baptism, are now believed by the 
 Romish Church to be received, the divines do doubt, says Maldonat. The more 
 common opinion, says Usher, is that these be two distinct places, — that of the 
 Fathers 'now being emptied of its inhabitants.' That our Oxford divines have 
 said any thing directly on this subject, we know not. But how they can es- 
 cape a Limbus Patrum, substantially the same as that set apart for the accom- 
 modation of the Romish doctrine of Baptismal regeneration, we cannot con- 
 ceive. ... As to the multitude of Old Testament Saints that believed — all 
 those, for instance, who are mentioned in Heb. 1 1, the ' great cloud of witness- 
 es ' who 'all died in faith,' it must follow that they did not enter Heaven. 
 But certainly they did not go to a place of torment. It remains that they must 
 have gone to some place intermediate between that of the impenitent, and that 
 of the justified, waiting the coming of Christ, and from which they were de- 
 livered when he had accomplished that, of which all their religion had been, in 
 view of this system, but an inoperative, inefficacious shadow." p 232-234. 
 
22 
 
 The Oxford Tractarians clearly teach, with the Romanists, the 
 regeneration of the sinner by Water Baptism. The Baptismal Font 
 is their gate of Heaven. Bishop Doane appears to agree with them 
 fully in their views of the sacraments. In what mode this wonder- 
 ful efficacy is conveyed, the Tractarians have some " reserve" in de- 
 claring. "Our Lord joined the two together — the high, mysterious 
 and spiritual doctrine of the Trinity, with the no less mysterious 
 communication of grace by water baptism." In the dispute at the 
 Council of Trent between the Dominicans and Franciscans, whether 
 the sacraments operated by a grace-conferring efficacy that was in- 
 herent in the elements, or by an efficacy supernaturally attached to 
 them of God, the Oxfordians would have probably given the casting 
 vote in favor of their brethren of St. Francis; — unless, indeed, by 
 their tact at distinctions, they had cut out a " Via Media," which 
 passed straight up through antiquity to the Apostles. 
 
 It is evident that these Divines have very mistaken views of the 
 nature of a Sacrament. Baptism, according to the view of Protes- 
 tants generally, is a sign, or seal, of regeneration. But Dr. Pusey 
 resolutely declares that " Baptism is not a sign but the putting on of 
 Christ — wherefore Baptism is a thing most powerful and effica- 
 cious" In other words, Baptism is not the sign, but regeneration 
 itself. This is near enough to Rome ; but far away from Scripture! 
 
 The texts which Bishop Doane and others quote to sustain their ex- 
 travagant views, will be readily understood in a different sense, if we re- 
 member that " the language of the New Testament was constructed 
 with reference to adult baptism, which was almost exclusively wit- 
 nessed in the first conversions to Christianity;" and moreover, that the 
 persons, who became the subjects of baptism, were clearly understood 
 to profess a change of heart. Baptism was to them " the sea I of the 
 righteousness of faith" — the covenanted pledge, that — if truly God's 
 children, as they professed to be — their sins were forgiven, and they 
 should be made partakers of the eternal inheritance. The opus 
 operatum hypothesis is utterly irreconcilable with Scripture, and 
 tends to death rather than to life. 
 
 With Bishop M'llvaine, we "conclude with a solemn caution 
 against such an idolatry of the Sacrament of Baptism, such a resting 
 on the outward seal, such identification of the spiritual grace with the 
 invisible sign, such a losing of the real nature of spiritual regenera- 
 tion in our zeal for the honor of its type and shadow, as is shown 
 in Oxford Divinity — to the great peril of immortal souls." p. 441. 
 
 iv. scu after ttaqptfew. penance. 
 
 Having examined the fundamental doctrine of Oxfordism (justifi- 
 cation by inherent righteousness) and seen its effects upon the doc- 
 trine of Faith and of the Sacraments, " we proceed (says Bishop 
 M'llvaine) to further ramifications; — in evidence that the tree of Ro- 
 manism, planted in the classic soil of Oxford, is bringing forth Ro- 
 
23 
 
 mish fruit, and is going on to do so more and more, and may thus 
 be known to be good or evil, according as any one may consider the 
 spreading shade of Popery to be good or bad. Tendinitis in La- 
 tium." Bishop M'llvaine. p. 237. 
 
 In the Roman Catholic Church, sin after baptism can only be re- 
 mitted through the "Sacrament of Penance." This is consistent 
 ground. Sins before baptism are remitted, or taken away, by the 
 infusion of grace at baptism. But sin after baptism, how shall that 
 be remitted? The true Protestant says "Repent and believe in the 
 Lord Jesus Christ." No, says the Romanist ; remission can come 
 again only through some Sacrament, as it came at first. But what 
 sacrament? The Romish Church invents one, called Penance, com- 
 prising contrition, confession, satisfaction and absolution. When 
 the Priest says " I absolve thee in the name of the Father" &c, then 
 the sin after baptism is remitted." p. 245. 
 
 How does Oxfordism get along in this emergency? 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 Bishop Doane. 
 " The Church has no second baptism 
 to give, and 60 she cannot pronounce a 
 man altogether free from his past sins. 
 There are but two periods of absolute 
 cleansing. Baptism and the day of 
 Judgment." 1 Pusey, quoted by Doane. 
 p, 95. 
 
 "This modern [evangelical] system, 
 which by an artificial, wrought-up 
 peace, checks the deep and searching 
 agony, whereby God, as in a furnace of 
 fire, was purifying the whole man by 
 
 "Allow this darkness about the re- 
 mission of sin after baptism, and we 
 take leave of all the consolation of 
 Christ. Grant it, then welcome Po- 
 pery ! One thing or other — the Sacra- 
 ment of Penance for relief, or else to be 
 all our lives subject to bondage, wait- 
 ing for the judgment!" p, 248. 
 
 " Blessed be God, who has spared us 
 such bondage, and showed us a more 
 excellent way, even the 'new and liv- 
 ing way,' whereby we have ' boldness 
 of access ' to his mercy-seat, and re- 
 the Spirit of Judgment and the Spirit joice in the certainty that ' the blood of 
 
 Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all 
 sin.' " p, 256. 
 
 of burning — this is altogether a spuri- 
 ous system." 2 do. p, 94. 
 
 " This system" [the evangelical, 
 which removes the burden of sin by 
 " repentance and faith"] " is searing 
 men's consciences now, as much as 
 the 'Indulgences' of the Romish sys- 
 tem did before." do. p. 99. 
 
 " Hear what comfortable words our 
 Saviour saith: ' Come unto me, all ye 
 that labor and are heavy laden, and / 
 will give you rest." p. 250. 
 
 i The Oxford divines make no provision for the remission of sins after Bap- 
 tism. They say " the fountain (of the Redeemer's blood) has indeed been 
 opened for sin and for uncleanness ; but it were to abuse the power of the keys 
 entrusted to us, again to pretend to admit them thus; now there remains only 
 the baptism of tears." On which the (Episcopal) "Christian Observer" re- 
 marks: "May God forgive men who thus awfully presume to limit the virtue 
 of the Redeemer's atonement, who substitute the penance of tears for the blood 
 of Christ." 
 
 * The attention of the reader is requested to the following, from Owen's works, 
 vol. It, p. 105. "The contest of the Reformers with the Roman church, was 
 about the way and means whereby the consciences of convinced, troubled sin- 
 ners might come to rest and peace with God. For at that lime, they were no 
 otherwise instructed, but that these things were to be obtained, not only by 
 works of righteousness which men did themselves, in obedience unto the com- 
 
24 
 
 Bishop Doane. 
 
 " Even while holding out the most 
 solemn form of absolution, as a means 
 of relieving the troubled conscience, our 
 Church confesses the incompleteness 
 of her own act." do. p. 9G. 
 
 "If the Romish church had but the 
 dregs of the system of the ancient 
 Church, stale and unprofitable though penances — what he elsewhere calls 
 they were, they yet had something of ' the bitterness of the ancient med- 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 " Oh, calumniated Church ! that 
 one of thine own children and pastors 
 should teach such doctrine for thine !" 
 p, 250. 
 
 "Dr. Pusey's eye is upon degrees 
 and continuance of external bodily 
 
 the strength of the bitterness of the an- 
 cient medicine ; they, at least, testified 
 to a system, when men made sacrifices 
 for the good of their souls, accused and 
 condemned themselves . . were grieved 
 and wearied .... turned to God in 
 weeping, fasting and praying, . . . ac- 
 knowledged and confessed their offen- 
 ces, and sought to bring forth worthy 
 fruits of penance; and in cases of no- 
 torious sins, were put to open penance 
 and punishment in this world, that 
 their souls might be saved in the day 
 of the Lord." 1 do. p, 9 ( J. 
 
 Ox ford ism is thus in full pursuit of Penance. It robs the Chris- 
 tian of his " peace and joy in believing," and turns him out into the 
 desert of Roman mortifications, without a star to guide him, from 
 Baptism to the Judgment ! 
 
 icine.' . . A broken heart, with faith 
 in the blood of Christ, are not enough. 
 The grand question in Dr. Pusey's 
 sight, is how much penance, as distinct 
 from repentance, is necessary for par- 
 don .... The mind that fully sympa- 
 thizes with such views, is penetrated 
 with the essential virus of Romanism, 
 and only needs an exciting cause, to 
 break out all over, with a full erup- 
 tion of Romanism in active develop- 
 ment." p, 319. 352. 
 
 mands of God, but also by the strict observance of many inventions of what they 
 called the church ; with an ascription of strange efficacy unto the same ends, 
 unto missatical sacrifices, sacramental absolutions, penances, pilgrimages, and 
 other the like superstitions. Hereby they [the reformers] observed that the 
 consciences of men were kept in perpetual disquietments, perplexities, fears and 
 bondage, exclusive of that rest, assurance and peace with God through the blood 
 of Christ, which the Gospel proclaims and lenders. And when the leaders of 
 the people in that [Roman] church had observed this, that indeed the ways and 
 means which they proposed and presented, would never bring the souls of men 
 to rest, nor give them the least assurance of the pardon of sins, they made it a 
 part of their doctrine, that the belief of the pardon of our own sins, and assu- 
 rance of the love of God in Christ, were false and pernicious. For what should 
 they else do, when they kveiv well enough, th.it in their -way, and by their pro- 
 positions, they were not to be attained? Hence the principal controversy in 
 this matter, which the reformed divines had with those of the Church of Rome 
 was this, whether there be according unto, and by the Gospel, a state of rest and 
 assured peace with God to be attained in this life. And having all advantages 
 imaginable for the proof hereof, from the very nature, use, and end of the Gos- 
 pel, from the grace, love and design of God in Christ, from the efficacy of his 
 mediation in his oblation and intercession, they assigned these things lobe the 
 especial object of justifying faith, and that faith itself to be a fiduciary trust in 
 the especial grace and mercy of God, through the blood of Christ, as proposed 
 in the promises of the Gospel." 
 
 1 The " Christian Observer " remarks : " The doctrine of the church of Rome, 
 though it is in the spirit of" these Tracts, is less terrific, because it makes repent- 
 ance a sacrament; so that an authorized avenue of 'sacramental grace ' is 
 still afforded for the solace of the trembling penitent. The Tract doctrine is 
 
 PllOTI.STANTlSM 11EJECTED AND PoPEItY SPOILED." 
 
25 
 v. ittoital cmtt ©en (a I &U\b. 
 
 " It is a well known doctrine of the Romish Church that sins are divisible 
 into mortal and venial. JMortul sins are those 'which are done willingly or 
 are of any magnitude. To these eternal punishment is due ;' and they can be 
 remitted only through the Sacrament of Penance. Venial tins are such 89 
 arise from mere * concupiscence ' and are so light as not to destroy grace, or to 
 deserve eternal punishment. Hence all that is necessary to remit venial sin is 
 a little Holy Water, a Pater Noster, a Bishop's blessing, or a knock on the 
 breast, &c." Bishop M'llvaine, p. 257. 
 
 This distinction of mortal and venial sins arises from the Roman 
 view of Baptismal Regeneration. In this operation, ("opus opera- 
 turn ") the " supernatural grace" whereby Adam was justified, and 
 which he lost by mortal sin, is restored to the sinner in the shape of 
 infused righteousness. Original sin, according to this scheme, con- 
 sists only in the loss of this " supernatural grace ;" and as this 
 grace is restored in Baptism, so also is original sin removed. The 
 motions of the flesh, the remnant of the carnal man, are, there- 
 fore, not properly of the nature of sin, but are the comparatively harm- 
 less impulses of " concupiscence." 
 
 44 The reader is requested to consider wherein lies any substantial 
 difference between this doctrine and that of Dr. Pusey and Mr. New- 
 man." 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaixe. 
 
 " The church has no second baptism " Do the Oxford men mean that eve- 
 to give, and so she cannot pronounce ry man (for all have sinned after bap- 
 a man altogether free from his past tism) is beyond Justification till the 
 6ins. There are but two periods of day of Judgment] Incredible! Cer- 
 absolute cleansing, baptism and the day tainlynot! What then 1 Why when 
 Judgment." 1 Pusey, quoted by Doane, they speak of sin after Baptism, they 
 p. 95. mean not such sins as are thus confes- 
 
 sed, l'u t moutal sins. Hence, such as 
 the Christian daily confesses are vk- 
 nial sins." p. 264* 
 
 It thus appears, says Bishop M'llvaine, " that, although the sins 
 of the Christian's daily course are expressly called sins by the Scrip- 
 tures, yet so little do they seem to Dr. Pusey to have the " true and 
 proper nature of sin," that when he uses the expression " Sin after 
 Baptism" he does not mean to include them therein, and does not 
 think it worth while to hint that they exist." p. 264. The Oxford 
 men cannot help making the distinction between " mortal and ve- 
 nial" sins, inasmuch as they adopt the Romish view of Baptismal 
 regeneration, which takes away all sin, original and actual, and by 
 
 ' Dr. Pusey has the following, which is an index to his system : " A ques- 
 tion will probably occur to many, what is the distinction between lesser and 
 greater — venial and moiital sins 7 Or if mortal sins be sins against the dec- 
 alogue, as St. Augustine says, are they only the highest degree of those sins, 
 or are they the lower also] This question, as it is a very distressing one, J 
 ■would gladly answer if J could or dared .'" — This impossibility of distinguish- 
 ing between mortal and venial sins must be at least as distressing to the groat 
 mass of humble believers, as it is to the more enlightened Dr. Pusey. 
 4 
 
26 
 
 the infusion of inherent righteousness, leaves every one to the work- 
 ings of " concupiscence," which is a sort of defective innocence. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilyainb. 
 
 "The reader will do well, [Bishop "When our 16th Article speaks of 
 
 Doane himself volunteers the remark] 'deadly sin after baptism,' it means 
 
 before he enters final judgment against no such distinction between sins mor- 
 
 Dr. Pusey, to bear in mind the terms of tal and 'venial. 'Every deadly sin " 
 
 the 16th Article: JVot every deadly in the Article means 'every sin, for ev- 
 
 sin, willingly committed after baptism ery sin is deadly.' " p. 264. 
 is sin against the Holy Ghost, and un- 
 pardonable." p. 93. > 
 
 [Bishop D. r in reply to a remark that [Bishop M'llvaine could not antici- 
 
 " all sin is deadly," comes to the aid pate that this text would be brought for- 
 
 of his Oxford friends, and says], " and ward by the Diocesan of New Jersey to 
 
 yet St. John hath said ' If any man sustain the Roman distinction between 
 
 6ee his brother sin a sin which is not mortal and venial sins ; and so he has 
 
 unto death, he shall ask, and he shall no "parallel" passage. The reader, 
 
 give him life for them that sin not unto however, is requested to look, at the 
 
 death. There is a sin unto death : I do note. 2 ] 
 not say that he shall pray for it." p. 95. 
 
 In conclusion, says Bishop M'llvaine, "it is an immense matter 
 for the enquirer to settle in his mind, if he would drink of the con- 
 solations of this [Oxford] Divinity, to which class his sins belong. 
 If they have all been venial — lhatjs, if they have not been mortal, 
 then they say to him, " go in peace." p. 512. 
 
 If his sins are mortal, he must " do penance" till the day of 
 Judgment. 3 
 
 •It looks ominous for a Bishop of the " Scoto-Anglican succession " to give a 
 Roman interpretation to an Article of the "Protestant Episcopal Church." 
 
 Bishop M'llvaine quotes the Bishop of Exeter: "Let us beware of harden- 
 ing our own hearts, and of corrupting the hearts of our brethren — by whispering 
 to ourselves or them which sin is more or less deadly than others." — p. 265. 
 
 2 This attempt of the Bishop of New Jersey to come to the aid of his "Cath- 
 olic" friends, indicates that he does not always interpret scripture according to 
 " primitive tradition." For this passage in John's Epistle is not claimed even 
 by the Romans to support their distinction between mortal and venial sins! 
 " A sin unto death is another thing than a mortal sin ; for it is that mortal sin 
 only whereof a man is never penitent before his death, or in which he continu- 
 eth till death, and dieth in it. So likewise " a sin not unto death " is not that 
 which we call a venial sin, but any that a man committeth, and continueth not 
 therein till death." See Rhenish Annotations. — Protestants commonly interpret 
 the "sin unto death" to mean an apostacy from Christianity connected with 
 blasphemy against the Spirit. Doddridge adds "where it was most difficult to 
 distinguish, the gift of discerning spirits might infallibly decide; where it was 
 dubious, charity would incline to the milder extreme; and conditional prayer 
 might however be offered." 
 
 3 John Rogers, of the Society of Friends, remarks : " The distinction between 
 venial and mortal sin is dangerous. Men will be apt to imagine nearly all their 
 sins to be venial, or nearly none to be mortal. Moreover, men will be liable 
 to fancy that there are no great sins ; for having deemed them venial, they will 
 quickly deem them small. Moreover, men will be too prone to go on from judg- 
 ing their sins to be venial and small, to judge them to be few ; for if great can 
 be squeezed into small, manycan be squeezed into few. Venial— small— few." 
 Anti-popcry, p. 240. 
 
27 
 
 vi. $urfl«rtorB. 
 
 Romanism maintains a Purgatory, where the souls of the depart- 
 ed are detained for fiery purification. Their condition is aided by 
 masses, prayers, alms, and other works of piety, " which believers 
 living perform for believers dead." "This (says Bishop M'llvaine) 
 is consistent. The Oxford system must admit as much. And here 
 follows the reason in its own words: •■ The Roman Church holds 
 that the great majority of Christians die in God's favor, yet more or 
 less under the bonds of their sins. And so far [says Tract No. 79] 
 we may unhesitatingly allow to them, or rather we ourselves hold 
 the same, if we hold that after Baptism, there is no plenary pardon 
 of sins in this life to the sinner, however penitent, such as in Bap- 
 tism, were once vouchsafed to him," Tracts, vol. 3, p. 517. — M 'li- 
 vable, p. 266. 
 
 Bishop Doane. 
 " Purgatory — Do the Oxford wri- 
 ters teach it? To say, Yes, sticks in 
 the throat. To say, No, would be to 
 lose the benefit of a most pregnant 
 prejudice. Hence such sentences ' a- 
 bout it and about it.'" p. 104. 
 
 "The Oxford theory,' it is said, 
 • lacks but one feature of Purgatory, 
 namely, suffering or discipline' — as the 
 old lady's gun wanted nothing to make 
 it dangerous, but a lock, a stock and a 
 barrel!" p. 104. 
 
 " But wherein a man's penitenoe 
 should consist; whether continued re- 
 pentance [or something else] would ef- 
 face the traces of 6in in himself; whe- 
 ther he might [Cj*] ever in this life 
 look upon himself as restored to the 
 state in which he had been, bad he 
 not committed it ; whether it affect the 
 degree of his future bliss, or its effects 
 be effaced by repentance; whether ces- 
 sation of his active repentance [Pen- 
 ance] may not bring back degrees of 
 6in upon him ; whether it shall appear 
 •gain in the day of Judgment : these 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 " The decree of the Council of Trent 
 determines ' That there is a Purgato- 
 ry, and that souls there detained are 
 aided by the suffrages of the living, 
 and above all by the acceptable sacri- 
 fice of the Altar.' Now of this dire 
 Romish corruption, do the Oxford wri- 
 ters, in Tract No. 79 on Purgatory, 
 say ■ Taken in the mere letter, there 
 is little in it against which we shall be 
 able to sustain formal objections.' This 
 is consistent. The Oxford system must 
 admit as much." p. 266. 
 
 " Now the only difference pretended 
 to between Oxford and Romish doc- 
 trine, is that whilst both maintain a 
 purgation from sin, or Purgatory, in the 
 future world, the Romanist makes a 
 definite place for it, and makes that 
 place to be one of pain; whilst the 
 Oxfonlist contents himself with say- 
 ing that it is a purification from sin, 
 not determining, but not denying, that 
 there is pain in it, and a place for it, 
 such as Romanists speak of." p. 266. 
 
 " No leaning towards Purgatory dis- 
 coverable in these words ! If we de- 
 part this life with sin not 'entirely ef- 
 faced ;' if it is to meet us at the 'day of 
 Judgment,' then what can be our 
 hope ? Nothing remains but the in- 
 lervul between death and the Judg- 
 ment. Here, if any where after death, 
 must the remaining traces of sin be 
 effaced. How 1 By the efficacy of 
 purgatorial discipline, of course." p. 
 25 1". 
 
 " Grave questions indeed for Protes- 
 tant divines, with the Articles and Ho- 
 
23 
 
 Bishop M'Iltaiwr. 
 
 milies of the Church of England and 
 ihe Word of God in their hands, to 
 be divided about! Go, and learn the 
 alphabet of the Gospel ! 
 
 " Connecting all this with what ha9 
 been shown under the head of Sin af- 
 ter Baptism, one would suppose that 
 the Jiames of Purgatory could hardly 
 be prevented from soon bursting out in 
 open day, from the " wood, hay and 
 stubble" of Oxfordism, seeing it has 
 such a preparatory funeral-pile of com- 
 bustibles." p. 267. 
 
 [When a Bishop in a "Protestant" 
 Church can quote such words as these 
 and the preceding ones, quoted by Bish- 
 op Doane, without an expression of his 
 indignation, or even of his dissent, but 
 rather his approbation, he ought to re- 
 member, in the spirit of "the bitterness 
 of the ancient medicine," the Articles 
 of his Church, of which the 21st con- 
 tains the following: "The Romish doc- 
 trine x concerning purgatory is a fond 
 thing, vainly invented, and grounded 
 upon no warranty of Scripture, but ra- 
 ther repugnant to the -word of God."] 
 
 The doctrine of Purgatory is not only condemned by the Bible 
 and the Articles, but by " primitive tradition." Archbishop Usher 
 remarks : " For extinguishing the flames of Purgatory, we need not 
 go far to fetch water. And if we need the assistance of the ancient 
 Fathers, behold they be here ready with full buckets in their hands." 
 Tout au contraire at Oxford. " When the Articles sound the alarm 
 to put out the fire, these divines come up to the work with buckets 
 that " hold no water." 
 
 Bishop Doaxk. 
 and the like are questions," &c. Pu- 
 sey quoted by Doane, p. 98. 
 
 [Bishop D. quotes as "calm words 
 and Christian-like" the following from 
 Tract 79.] "The pictures of Purga- 
 tory, the existence of Purgatorial soci- 
 eties, ckc, afford a strange contrast to 
 the simple wording, and apparent in- 
 nocence of the Decree (of Trent) by 
 which it is mado an article of faith," 
 p. 105. 
 
 [Calm, but qu. Christian-like 1] 
 Again. " If we would consider Pur- 
 gatory as confined to the mere opinion, 
 that that good which is begun on earth, 
 is perfected in the next world, the idea 
 is tolerable. The word detentas (used 
 in the Decree) indeed expresses a 
 stronger idea ; yet after all, hardly more 
 than that the souls in Purgatory would 
 be happier out of it than in it, and that 
 they cannot of their own will leave it; 
 which is not much to grant." [ ! ! ! ] 
 JVeioman, quoted by Doane, p. 205. 
 
 1 The Tractarians, with the characteristic subtlety of all crrorists, endeavor 
 sometimes to reconcile Popery with the 39 Articles, by making the latter mere- 
 ly condemn Roman practice and not Roman doctrine. This distinction cannot 
 entirely avail them here, for the Article expressly says "The Romish doctrine, 
 &c. is repugnant to the word of God ;" and therefore Tract 90 reconciles Pur- 
 gatory with the Article, by maintaining that it condemns Roman doctrine, not 
 primitive. The primitive, Apostolic doctrine of Purgatory ! 
 
 Tract 81 maintains that the sacrifice offered by the Church on earth, for the 
 whole Church, in the Eucharist, obtains for those, who have passed into the 
 unseen world additional joys and satisfactions. This is " ugly Popery" — 
 real Purgatory. — Indeed the Romanists differ from the Oxfordists chiefly in ma- 
 king Purgatory a place of so much suffering. The Oxfordists admit that " the 
 great majority die in God's favor, yet more or less under the bonds of their 
 sins ;" and that " penitents, from the time of baptism up to the day of Judg- 
 ment, may be considered in that double state, of which Romanists speak, their 
 persons accepted, but certain sins imca?2celted." If a person is " more or less 
 under the bond of his sins," and if "certain of his sins are uncancelled," he 
 must be more or less of a sufferer, n.ore or less under a course of purgatorial 
 discipline. 
 
29 
 
 vii- Erasers for the &ca*. 
 
 " We have seen, thnt in the injunction of the Trent Decree con- 
 cerning " sacrifices, masses, alms, and other works of piety which 
 the living are wont to perform for dead believers," " there is little in 
 the letter " against which the Oxfordists think themselves " able to 
 sustain a formal objection." — Bishop JWllvaine, p. 268. 
 
 Hence Mr. Newman likens the intercession of the Christian to 
 that of Christ, and calls it a propitiation. 
 
 " The Christian is plainly in his fitting place when he intercedes. He is 
 made after the pattern of Christ. He is what Christ is. Christ intercedes 
 
 above, and he below." Again. " Shall not prayers be both a propitiation 
 
 for the world of sinners, and for his purchased Church V p. 268. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 1 Dr. Pusey, in Tract 77, has shown " Oh no ! Prayers for the dead, &c, 
 
 that the usage alluded to [prayers for 
 the dead] was not connected with the 
 doctrine of Purgatory." p. 107,' 
 
 " It has been justified by such di- 
 vines as Archbishop Wake and Usher 
 and Bishops Bull, Taylor, and An- 
 drews, to mention no more names." p. 
 107. 
 
 which are already attained in the race 
 of this divinity, must soon cross the 
 invisible line that separates from Po- 
 pish Purgatory." p. 535. 
 
 " Nor do I assent to their opinion 
 thai our Church does not discourage 
 prayers for the dead ; — on the contrary, 
 I can hardly propose to myself any 
 more decisive mode of discouraging 
 the practice." p. 269. 
 
 " I lament the encouragement given 
 by the same writers to the dangerous 
 ptactice of prayers for the dead." £x- 
 eter quoted by M 'Ilvaine, p. 268. 
 
 " If any, understanding in a primi- 
 tive sense a primitive prayer, " most 
 humbly beseeching thee to grant that 
 WO and all thy -whole Church may ob- 
 tain remission of our sins,' should thii.k 
 that those emphatic words all thy -whole 
 Church were not restrained to the 
 Church militant, but included that por- 
 tion of the Church also -which is at 
 
 rett — WHT SHOULD HE BE HINDERED?" 2 
 
 Pusey quoted by Doane, p. 111. 
 
 The reader will find in Bishop Doane's pamphlet, six closely 
 printed pages in defence of prayers for the dead. 3 If it had not been 
 for Bucer and Calvin, par nobile fratrum, the prayer for the dead 
 would not have been omitted in the revision of the Liturgy. Under 
 
 1 Prayer for the dead implies that the happiness of the departed is defective, 
 and that it may be promoted by the intervention of others. Purgatory needs 
 no better "hay and stubble" to build upon than such vagaries; and accord- 
 ingly in practice, prayers for the dead and purgatory are harmonious parts of a 
 corrupt system. The two cannot long be separated even by what Bishop M'Il- 
 vaine denominates "an invisible line." 
 
 1 This doctrine of Oxford, quoted by Bishop Doane, goes much beyond Usher. 
 The latter had no idea that the " faithful departed " needed " remission of sins." 
 He expre66ly calls it a " private conceit " that "an augmentation of glory " 
 may be procured for the dead by the prayers of the living. 
 
 3 What the worthy Bishop's object is in urging this matter, we know not. 
 Certain it is that this doctrine is as strong an " entering wedge " to split in pieces 
 the 6ystem of the 39 Articles as could be well driven by the Episcopal staff. — 
 Without Eome kind of Purgatory, prayer for the dead is little else than an ab- 
 surd superstition. For, if the departed are not in Purgatory, but in the enjoy- 
 
30 
 
 existing circumstances, however, the Bishop must betake himself to 
 extemporaneous prayer [!] or else be satisfied with " the admirable 
 provisions of the Book of Common Prayer." When Protestants 
 want to pray for the dead, is it not a sad evidence of a (Roman) 
 "Catholic" partiality towards the theology of men, who, although 
 within the pale of the Anglican Church, are " irreverent dissenters " 
 from her Articles ? 
 
 vin. Xntoocatfon oC safnts. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilyaine. 
 
 "These ominous words, (invocation " The invocations to the saints are 
 of saints) seem 'confirmation strong' called in a late number of the British 
 that these writers must be far gone in Critic, by the modest name of 'unca- 
 Popery. But it is not half so bad as tholic peculiarities.' p. 270. ' The 
 it appears." 1 p. 114. seminal principle of Invocation of 
 
 saints affords too much ground for the 
 fear ' of further progress.' " p. 533. 
 
 If prayers for the dead are lawful, then the dead may of course 
 
 ment of the pure happiness of the redeemed, what can be the object of pray- 
 ers in their behalf! Scripture gives no support to the doctrine of prayers 
 
 for the dead. Solomon, (a very wise man) declares of the dead : " Neither 
 have they any more a portion forever in any thing that is done under the sun." 
 Eccles. 9: 6. Least of all, do the dead who are " in Paradise" and "present 
 •with the Lord" need a " portion " in the prayers of imperfect mortals. Bishop 
 Doane, ourselves and others have enough to do with the living. The dead are 
 beyond our sphere. " The field is the ■world," not the intermediate state. 
 
 Anne Hyde, the Duchess of York, who died a convert to her husband's re- 
 ligion (Popish) says: "I spoke severally to two of the best Bishops we have 
 in England, (Dr. Sheldon, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Blanford, Bishop 
 of Worcester,) who both told me there were many things in the Roman Church 
 which it were very much to be wished we had kept; as confession, which was, 
 no doubt, commanded by God: that prating for the dead was one of 
 
 THE MOST ANCIENT THINGS IN ChR ISTI ANITY ; THAT FOR THEIR PARTS THEY 
 
 did it daily, though they wouli) not own it. [!] And afterwards pressing 
 one of them (Dr. Blanford) very much upon the other points, he told me, that 
 if he had been bred a Catholic he would not change his religion; but that be- 
 ing of another church, wherein he was sure, were all things necessary to salva- 
 tion, he thought it very ill to give that scandal as to leave that church wherein 
 he had received his baptism." — Shuttleivorth on tradition, p. 57. 
 
 1 If it be not " half so bad as it appears," it is very remarkable ; for Oxford- 
 ism is usually a great deal worse than it would t /am be. That it is sufficiently 
 bad, however, appears from the following " re-appropriated " prayer, found in 
 Tract 75, which contains "selections from the Roman Breviary, prepared and 
 recommended for Protestant use:" And, "Therefore I beseech thee, Blessed 
 JWary, Ever Virgin, the blessed Michael Archangel, the blessed John Baptist, 
 the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, All Saints, and thee, my Father, to pray 
 the Lord our God for me." See Christian Observer, 1838, p. 745; where it 
 is shown that such acts of idolatry are insidiously scattered up and down the 
 Breviary Tract, No. 75, which is intended to "suggest matter for our private 
 devotions." Of this prayer, the Oxfordians say, " It is not a simple gratuitous 
 invocation made to them, but it is an Address to Almighty God in His hea- 
 venly court, as surrounded by his Saints and Angels, answering to St. Paul's 
 charge to Timothy 'before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect an- 
 gels.' " Doubtless these things do not "appear half so bad" to some as to others ! 
 
31 
 
 pray for themselves ; and if they can pray for themselves, they can 
 pray for others too. Hence it is practicable to obtain an interest in 
 their prayers. Hence the Invocation of Saints. Hence " ora pro 
 nobis!" — Mr. Newman says that the Invocation of Saints is a ques- 
 tion which "the Articles left open'"! although the 22d Article con- 
 demns it distinctly and by name. He also admits that " the ora 
 pro nobis was not on my showing necessarily included in that invo- 
 cation of saints which the Article condemns." p. 18. The Tracta- 
 rians make open doors or holes all round the ramparts of the 3f> 
 Articles. Nothing can resist their " primitive" battering-ram. 
 
 ix. ^icto Safins' Bass- 
 
 The Oxford men have a strong desire to carry out what they 
 call " the spirit and the principle of those inestimable forms of de- 
 votion which are contained in our authorized Prayer Book," by 
 adding new Saints' days to the English Calendar. They are not 
 satisfied with one " All Saints day," but wish to be more particu- 
 lar in their admiration and honor. 
 
 Bishop Duane. 
 
 " There is no evidence at all that the 
 authors of this system are trying the 
 experiment of instituting new Saints' 
 days. p. 112. 
 
 " Neither have they set apart a day 
 to the religious commemoration of Bi- 
 shop Ken." p. 1 12. 
 
 " Their sketches of services (« one 
 of them for March 21st, the day on 
 which Bishop Ken was taken from the 
 Church below ') are nothing more 
 than exercises in liturgical composi- 
 tion." 1 p. 1 14. 
 
 " They are not in imitation of the 
 Papists ; since the models on which 
 they are formed are older far than the 
 corruptions of the Church of Rome." 
 p. 114. 
 
 " They aim not at canonising Bishop 
 Ken, or in any way intruding upon the 
 Calendar." p. 1 14. 
 
 Bishop M'Ilyaiu'k. 
 
 " I cannot but deplore the rashness, 
 which has prompted them to recom- 
 mend to private Christians the dedica- 
 tion of particular days to the Religions 
 Commemoration of deceased men." 
 Exeter, quoted by JM'Ilvaine, p. 270. 
 
 "They have even furnished a spe- 
 cial service in honor of Bishop Ken." 
 p. 270. 
 
 " A more bare-faced insult to all de- 
 cent consistency with the principles of 
 the Church of England was never per- 
 petrated than the ' Matin Service for 
 Bishop Ken's day.' " p. 271. 
 
 " The whole service, in words, and 
 form, and parts, and arrangement, and 
 every single feature, is most studiously 
 adjusted to the Roman Breviary." p. 
 272. 
 
 " Whence have they authority to 
 canonize a 6aint! And why should 
 they stop at Bishop Ken ? Cannot 
 the principle be advantageously carri- 
 ed out much further?" p. 272. 
 
 1 Here is another specimen of curious theological palliation. Mere " exer- 
 cises in liturgical composition!" If these men had the revision of the Liturgy, 
 how full of these " mere exercises " would it be! How quickly, too, would 
 the 39 Calvinistic Articles (which are called "the offspring of an uncatholic 
 age") disappear before the black marks of such Catholic scribes! 
 
32 
 
 Bishop Doawe. Bishop M'Iltaine. 
 
 " How soon will the memory of Mr. 
 Froude be enshrined in a Matin ser- 
 vice, with Nocturns and Antiphons, 
 of the Roman Breviary 1" p. 275. 
 " Let Daily Service, and the keeping of holy daya be universal, (says the Bri- 
 tish Critic.) The Saints anJ Angols will be with us at all events." 1 
 
 " How is this known? (adds Bishop M'llvaine.) Are not these 
 writers developing their system too fast for the times ?" p. 273. 
 
 x. ^rmisubstautfaiKm. 
 
 V The impression sought to be produced by these Oxford writers is 
 that there is a mysterious presence of the body of Christ in some 
 sense, which is neither that of the Romanists, nor Protestants, but 
 (1 ike their doctrine of an inherent righteousness ' within, us, but not 
 in us ') a substantial presence, but not corporeal ; a real presence 
 of his real body, but not a local presence ; not transubstantiation ; 
 but the next thing to it, and acknowledging itself to be a great deal 
 more like transubstantiation, and ev'dently sympathizing with it far 
 more than with the anti-transubstantiation doctrine of Protestants." 
 Bishop M'llvaine, p. 220. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop MTlyaijte. 
 
 "Sensibly [says Dr. Doane] does "The idea by which others [Protes- 
 
 Dr. Pusey write : ' There is a true, tants] explain the real presence of 
 
 real, spiritual (or rather the more real Christ, as distinguished from a local 
 
 because spiritual) presence of Christ presence, viz : that he is really present, 
 
 at the Holy Supper; more real than when he is present effectively, as he 
 
 if we could, with Thomas, feel him was to the woman who touched not 
 
 with our hands, or thrust our hands in- Aim but his garment; while he was 
 
 to his side ; this is bestowed upon locally but not effectively present to 
 
 1 Bishop Doane (who is already a very strenuous observer of " man's feasts 
 and fasts in God's Church ") says, " It will not be long, I trust, before the Daily 
 service, which the Church designs, shall gather us, with grateful heart*, within 
 the walls of our sweet house of prayer." [See " little pastoral" for 1841, p. 
 2.] Far be it from us to speak disrespectfully of so pious and Catholic a de- 
 sign ; but we would not dare to assert with quite as much confidence as the 
 Tractarians, that " the saints and angels" would patronize an effort of this 
 kind at all events. Such a trust, (to use Bishop M'llvaine's language) is " too 
 fa6t for the times." Expeuientia docet. 
 
 The Oxford divines not only observe days, but also "canonical hours." 
 Among the instances of the "judicial humiliation" of the Church of England, 
 they reckon " the compression of the seven canonical hours into our two daily 
 services," which they consider an admonition " that we, like the Jews, have 
 fallen back from our privileges, and that if we do not take heed we shall forfeit 
 the final inheritance also." Bishop Doane is known to have so far risen up to 
 his privileges, as to affirm that the canonical hours are " according to ancient 
 practice," and also to appoint the semi-weekly fast day services at 9 o'clock, 
 which is one of the canonical hours. It has been told us, however, that this 
 canonical hour has been here changed, during the winter season, to 10 o'clock. 
 
33 
 
 Hi shop Doake, 
 
 faith, . . . but it is there inilepertdentlu 
 of faith." p. 118. 
 
 "The reverential suggestion of a 
 writer in the Tracts, that the unneces- 
 sary discussion of the Holy Eucharist 
 should be avoided, as almost certain to 
 lead to profane and rationalistic 
 thoughts, has seemed to authorize a 
 most unworthy and unwarrantable sus- 
 picion." p. 1 18. 
 
 " That theirs is not Popish teaching, 
 our Lord Jesus Christ himself is wit- 
 ness ; Matt. 2G: 26. 27." p. 118. 
 
 Disaor M'Ilvaink. 
 the multitude that passed and touched 
 him, but who derived no benefit, be- 
 cause they had no faith ; this is too 
 abstract and visionary for Oxford." p. 
 219-20. 
 
 " Connect with this, the anxiety of 
 these Oxford writers that the subject 
 should not be discussed. But while 
 discussion has been discouraged, ad- 
 vancement has been made towards 
 transubstantiation." 
 
 " Behold to what length the matter 
 has come in the following passage, 
 from the last British critic: "Is the 
 wonder wrought at the marriage of 
 Cana, a miracle, and the change which 
 the Holy Elements undergo, as conse- 
 crated by the Priest, and received by 
 the faithful, no miracle, simply because 
 the one was perceptible to the natural 
 eye, while the other is discerned by 
 the spiritual alone V p. 275. 
 " So much lias been written (says Bishop M'Ilvaine) for the pur- 
 pose of showing how near this divinity approaches to the Romish 
 doctrine of Transubstantiation in its zealous maintenance that there 
 is not only a real presence of Christ at the Eucharist (in the sense 
 of effective as distinguished from local, and through the Spirit and 
 not in any substantial manner, which is the Protestant sense) but 
 that there is also a "substantial presence;" 1 — "an immediate, un- 
 seen Presence of the Body,"— that we need not here exhibit the lan- 
 guage of Oxford divinity any further on that head. The tendency, 
 at least, of such views cannot be mistaken." p. 273. 
 
 Mr. Newman thinks it "literally true" that "the consecrated 
 bread is Christ's body," and that there is a real snperlocal presence 
 in the holy sacrament." And Tract 85 asks " If Balaam's ass in- 
 structed Balaam, what is there fairly to startle us in the Church's doc- 
 trine, that the water of baptism cleanses from sin, and that eating 
 the consecrated bread is eating his body." Bishop Doane also is 
 evidently a believer in this "substantial" presence of the body ot 
 Christ at the sacrament. Me employs ten pages in attempting to 
 show that the Oxford doctrine is the true one ; that it is the teaching 
 
 1 The Reformers never used the term "substantial," which was one of the 
 terms of the Romanists to express their carnal presence. Cranmer and the 
 early English Reformers carefully avoided even the use of the term " real," as 
 being of Popish signification. See Strype't Annals, chop. 3. Although more 
 modern evangelical Protestants make use of the term " real," they carefully 
 guard against its being considered as opposed to "spiritual." The term "sub- 
 stantial," which Bishop M'Ilvaine quotes as Oxfordian, and as implying some- 
 thing "next to transubstantiation," is not of Protestant phraseology. Like 
 "snperlocal" not local, it is the exponent of Tractarian mysticism. 
 
of the " Lord Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, the Liturgy, the Cate- 
 chism, the Articles, the Homilies, Cranmer, Ridley, Hooker, the 
 Reformed Dutch Church, and the Presbyterian Church! See Brief 
 Ex. pp. 115-124. A more unfair, uncandid and unsuccessful effort, 
 it appears to us was never made. For example, the Article of his own 
 Church says "The body of Christ is given, taken and eaten in the 
 Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner." The Pres- 
 byterian Confession of Faith declares with like emphasis: " Worthy 
 receivers, outwardly partaking of the- visible elements in this sacra- 
 ment, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not 
 carnally and corporeally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon 
 Christ crucified, and ail the benefits of his death." A stronger 
 " protest" against Oxford substantiation could not be given than 
 is given by the English and Presbyterian Churches. Whether the 
 Oxford doctrine be called transubstantialion, consubstantiaticn, or 
 substantiation, it is a departure from the spiritual views of the sa- 
 crament entertained by the English and other Reformers. It is an 
 error, which has a close connection with the claims of the High 
 Church Priesthood; 1 and is derogatory to the simple and edifying 
 objects of the institution. 
 
 1 The recent controversy in Baltimore between Bishop Whittingham and his 
 Presbyter, Rev. H. V. D. Johns, was in relation to this very subject. The 
 Bishop, who preached in the morning, took the most extravagant views of the 
 priesthood; and Rev. Mr. Johns, who preached in the same Church on the 
 evening of the same day, replied to his Bishop, after the scriptural style. He 
 showed that the Lord's Supper was not a sacrifice, the Lord's table was i.ot an 
 altar, and that the Christian minister was not a priest, in the sense of the offerer 
 of a sacrifice. Ke has also published, as an appendix to his sermon, a lecture 
 from the late Bishop White, sustaining to the uttermost all his positions. 
 
 Bishop Doane, on the other hand, agrees with Bishop Whittingham. In his 
 last Conventional Address, he says, " I have been pleased to observe the intro- 
 duction iuto several Churches of the prothesis, credence, or side-tub le, for the. 
 elements in the Holy Eucharist, before they are placed upon the Altar by the 
 Priest. Such an arrangement, while it makes the act of offering distinct and 
 solemn, is necessary to the strict observation of the Rubric." p. 31. Now on 
 this passage, we most respectfully beg leave to offer a few remaiks. (1) Is 
 not the object of these terms and of this additional ceremony, in accordance 
 with the Oxford view, to change the supper into a sacrifice? The elements 
 must be first placed upon the prothesis, so that the priest of the Apostolic suc- 
 cession may the more solemnly transfer a portion to the altar, where the act of 
 offering consecrates and substantiates the sacrifice. (2) An Episcopalian will 
 in vain search his Frayer-Book to find the meaning of •• prothesis, credence or 
 side-table." lie must bring in " tradition ,-" and then he will find that this 
 appendage ol Fopery was abolished at the Reformation. Wheat ley, whose com- 
 mentary on the Prayer-Book is recommended in " the course of ecclesiastical 
 ■todies established by the American, [or "Scolo-Anglican "] House of Bishops 
 expressly declares " VVk have no sidk tab he authohizkd bx ouh Church." 
 If this prothesis, credence or side-tuble, be so " necessary to the strict observa- 
 tion of the Rubric," it is very remarkable that it was never introduced before, 
 and still moie remarkable that even now it is only introduced into " several 
 churches " of the Apostolical Diocese of New Jersey ! (3) The word "*/?//«)•," 
 is equally foreign from the language of the Prayer-Book ; the term having been 
 studiously excluded by the Reformers, when they tore down the Popish altar, 
 and set up, in its place, " the Lord's table." Wheat ley shows that the change 
 
35 
 
 11 It is a well-known tenet of Romanism that the age of miracles 
 has never ceased; and that miracles are a distinguishing mark of a 
 true Church. Oxford Divinity [says Bishop M'llvaine] is disposed 
 to claim thus much too." p, 27G. 
 
 Bishop Doajje. 
 
 "Is it not true, that in these days, 
 washing seven times in the Jordan, lo 
 cure a leprosy, would be rejected as a 
 superstition ; or Peter's shadow, or a 
 handkerchief, or an apron from Paul's 
 body, to cure diseases? Yet such 
 tilings have been. God's power mean- 
 while has not been shortened, but 
 man's faith ; and who will say lhat 
 Christianity or the world has been the 
 gainer by the change?' 1 p, 54. 
 
 Bjshqp M'Ilvatne. 
 "One of the last tracts published, 
 No. 80, asks why we should suppose 
 that with respect to sudJcn and extra- 
 ordinary cures, a broad line is drawn 
 between primitive and latter ages? On 
 which a writer in the British Critic [a 
 Tractarian journal] says 'Surely it is 
 want of faith, which is the only hin- 
 drance to these gifts, in latter times.' 
 What is the meaning of the popular 
 phrase 'the age of miracles'? Is not 
 every age of the Church an age of mir- 
 acles?' " p, 276. 
 
 The agreement between Bishop Doaneand the Tracts seems to be 
 both general and particular. Even in regard to miracles, the Bishop 
 thinks the only hindrance " in these days "is the " shortening of 
 man's faith I" But is there no sufficient faith in the Diocesan A '" s<? - 
 tolic Church? Cannot an Apostle (for the worthy Bishop fre- 
 quently calls Bishops Apostles, and once even Vicars of Christ ! 
 Bf. Ex. p. 221.) perform miracles among Churchmen, who have 
 taken the sacraments, whereby their justification and faith are in- 
 creased more and more? Nevertheless, until this power of working 
 miracles is proved in the visible Apostolic manner, we must "dis- 
 sent" from these extraordinary claims. Our faith is short. 
 
 took place at the instance of Bishop Hooper, who declared lhat "it would do 
 well to turn Altars into Tables, according to the first institution of Christ; for 
 as long as Altars remain, both the ignorant people and the ignorant and evil- 
 persuaded priest will always dream of Sacrifice" The same thing appears 
 from one of Bishop Ridley's injunctions: "for that the form of a table may 
 more move and turn the simple from the old superstitious opinions of the popish 
 mass, and to the right use of the Lord's Supper, we exhort the curates, church- 
 wardens, &c, to erect and set up the Lord's board, after the form of an honest 
 table, decently covered." During the reign of King Edward, the Lord's table 
 took the place of the Popish altars; but when Roman Mary came to the throne 
 Altars again took the place of Tables, and the Missal the place of the Prayer 
 Book. When Queen Elizabeth became "Head of the Church," Altars were 
 again removed, and Tables set up once more in the Churches, upon the strong 
 representations and efforts ol the Reformers. (S e Strype's Annals, chap. 12.) 
 Since that period, various High-Church divines have longed for the Altar again, 
 as we may infer from their phraseology. The Prayer-Book, however, puts its 
 veto upon this " restoration." Yet they still adhere to the old Popish lan- 
 guage; and persist in the name of "Jlltar." This unauthorized innovation 
 upon the language of the Church Service, is especially prevalent during these 
 days of Popish Tractarianism. Inasmuch as the Prayer-liook never uses the term 
 "Altar," but always the term " Table," why do the lovers of the Prayer-Book 
 never use " Table " but always "Jlltar'? And why do they now begin to use 
 the prothesis, or "Utile altar '—a phraseology dishonorable both to Prayer- 
 Book and Protestantism ? 
 
30 
 
 xii. ^,'treme eatnctfou. 
 
 "The British Critic, 1 in the Review of the late Tract, No. 8(5, on 
 Church Service, complains of the author, ' because he did not enter 
 a more decided protest than he has, against the common Protestant 
 objection to Extreme Unction.' The Reviewer thinks the testimony 
 of Scripture, unexplained and unguarded by Tradition, is in favor of it. 
 The only reason against it is that it wants Catholic consent. But 
 that [adds Bishop M'livaine] may be discovered before long !" p. 277. 
 
 Bishop Doane has not advocated Extreme Unction, but his views 
 of administering the Eucharist under certain very extreme circum- 
 stances, have been supposed by many to border on the Popish view. 
 Extreme Unction can hardly claim higher power than that implied 
 in the High Church estimate of the Sacraments. The Oxford, High 
 Church party have no need of the additional sacrament of Extreme 
 Unction. They maintain that "Rome has not faith enough in the 
 efficacy of the sacraments, (!!) and therefore has added to their num- 
 ber." It is surely much simpler to take the Oxford plan, and add 
 to their power. 
 
 xin. sittofntCnfl at jjajJtfsm anS ftonfirmatfou. 
 
 "The absence of these in the Anglican Church [says Bishop 
 M'livaine] is called '■the loss of a privileged And the keeping up 
 
 of the Coronation Service in which anointing is retained, is regarded 
 as an indication of 'special Providential care over the Church' — 
 thus keeping up a witness to both of the Catholic truths, of which 
 the omission of anointing at Baptism and Confirmation might seem 
 to betoken a disparagement." p. 278. 
 
 The Oxford Tractarians, or High Churchmen, must necessarily 
 have a partiality for oils in religious services, inasmuch as these 
 oils were in constant use in the third and fourth centuries, the favor- 
 ite age of Tractarianism. As soon as the Anglo-Prussian scheme 
 of Catholic Ecclesiastical Order shall go into Continental operation 
 (and it will assuredly also embrace a few prelates of the Scoto-An- 
 gliean succession in these parts) what is now called " the loss of a 
 privilege'''' will be most generously supplied, according to "Catholic 
 consent" and Roman usage. Things will go on smoothly then ! 3 
 
 1 We have heard that Bishop Doane has recently written a notice, expressing 
 his alarm at the British Critic for speaking so leniently of the supremacy of the 
 Pope. It will he remembered, however, that he publicly recommended this 
 same journal to clergymen and private families, a year or two after any of the 
 extracts, contained in these pages, were written. We do sincerely hope that 
 a divine, of Bishop Doane's extensive influence, will be led to renounce all the 
 abominable doctrines of that Tractarian journal. If any are alarmed at the 
 "inconvenient" doctrine of Papal Supremacy, there is surely ground for alarm 
 in the pernicious doctrines which gradually formed the system, over which the 
 Pope merely presides. 
 
 2 Tract 9, mourning almost with comminution penitence over the "entire 
 omission of the use of oil at baptism and confirmation," declares that " no one 
 can say the nrtF.ATXKSs or Tin: bifth which are here withdrawn; how much 
 
37 
 
 xiv. increase of sacramental sfflns anti efficacious 
 
 SsmtJOls. 
 
 By these Tractafian innovators, "the Cross [says Bishop M'll- 
 vaine] is called • a Sacramental sign'' and memorial (o the eyes 
 of the faithful, • a holy efficacious emblem.' Now this is precisely 
 the distinguishing description given in our Article on the Sacraments, 
 of the Sacramental character of Baptism and the Eucharist. Thus 
 is the cross put on a level, as a sacramental sign, with Baptism and 
 the Lord's supper." Bishop JWllvaine, p. 278. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaixe. 
 
 "The half-way step to image-wor- 
 ship is in the present reverence to the 
 image of the Cross." p. 533. 
 
 In "the .Architectural description " From similar restorations in doc- 
 of St. Mary 1 * Church, Burlington, trine, it behoves the whole Church 
 N. J. occurs the following : " On the most earnestly to pray " Good Lord 
 apex of the pediment is intended to deliver «s." p. 56. 
 be fixed an acroterium, bearing an en- 
 riched Greek Cross." 1 Rector's offering 
 of '34, p 47. 
 
 The new Church in Salem, N. J., A Tractarian writer says, "Let us 
 " is surmounted, as it should be, by the multiply the same holy efficacious em- 
 Cross. We honor the spirit which has blem far and wide. There is no say- 
 thus vindicated the rightful use of that ing how many sins its awful form 
 most sacred emblem of our religion." might scare, how many evils avert." 
 Conv. Add. 1838, p. 18. [ ! ! ! ] quoted by Bishop M'llvaine. 
 
 p. 279. 
 
 Mr. Newman, at Littlemore, erected a Cross, after the Popish fa- 
 shion, over the Communion table, or Altar! "Sicut a/J/e." 
 
 In general, Protestant Christians, whilst they "glory in the cross," 
 do not, and cannot adopt the badges of Romanism and superstition. 
 One such superstition leads to another. The same writer, quoted 
 
 we have thereby fallen from the high appellations of 'a royal priesthood, a holy 
 nation, a peculiar people.' " JNo one, we think, can doubt that these theologians 
 are a peculiar people. 
 
 1 It may be of public use to state that this Cross was not allowed to remain 
 on St. Mary's Church. The good " intentions" of the " Rector" were frus- 
 trated by the Christian opposition and perseverance of the Church Wardens 
 and Vestrvmen. The latter thought that the " Greek Cross " was so much 
 like the Latin Cross, that the difference could not be translated ; and they 
 therefore voted to veto its erection. Nevertheless, the "responsibility" was 
 assumed to veto the vote ; and the Greek Cross was put upon the acroterium 
 and the acroterium upon the apex of the pediment. The Vestry, however, 
 were men who " knew their rights, and knowing, dared maintain them." They 
 voted that the Greek Cross should be taken down from its ecclesiastical eleva- 
 tion ; and lo ! in the midst of the dubious contest, it suddenly disappeared on a 
 dark night. Tradition reports that the work of demolition was done thorough- 
 ly ; and that the famous Greek Cross is now lying in several "rudiments " in 
 the cellar of an adjoining building. The "acroterium" is also among the 
 " lost privileges." — Thus triumphed the Protestant Episcopalians of Burling- 
 ton ! 
 
3S 
 
 above l>y Bishop M'llvaine, goes on to say " With the Cross should 
 be associated other Catholic symbols still more than even itself, vocal 
 to the spiritually discerning. Such are the Lamb with the standard ; 
 the descending Dove ; the Anchor; the Triangle; the Pelican ; the 
 lcthus (Fish,) and others." " Here we see [adds Bishop M'llvaine] 
 Symbols for the Times, as well as Tracts." p. 279. * 
 
 xv. gbscrcmcKt of fHatraftt, 
 
 The germ of this restoration, [says Bishop M'llvaine, p. 28],] is 
 quite visible in the following mystic language: 
 
 "The ordinance of Marriage has an inwari! and spiritual meaning, contained 
 in it and revealed through it — as if persons, to place themselves in that human 
 relation, interested themselves, in some secret way, in the divine relation, (that 
 of Christ and the Church) of which it is a figure." 
 
 The Bishop of New Jersey seems to have a peculiarly solemn 
 view of matrimony, differing somewhat from that of the Prayer- 
 Book. In regard to the solemnization of this ceremony, he says : 
 " Marriage should always be performed in the Church. There is a 
 departure in this respect from her provisions, and from Christian 
 propriety, much to be regretted." 2 Now amongst "the admirable 
 provisions of the Book of Common Prayer," is the Rubric, which 
 states that " persons to be married shall come within the body of the 
 Church, or shall he ready in some proper house.'''' It is very evi- 
 dent that the Bishop is a " dissenter " from this Rubric. 3 His zeal 
 for the solemnization of marriages in the Church, may possibly 
 arise from his peculiarly solemn view of the nature of the marriage 
 contract; and perhaps it may be an Oxford "element in rudiment," 
 waiting to break through " reserve," and to rise with the glory of 
 more "active development." 
 
 The Oxford men think the Church has a right to multiply sacra- 
 ments to any extent ; and may therefore include matrimony among 
 the holy rites. Mr. Newman, speaking of the five additional sacra- 
 ments of Popery, savs : " They are not Sacraments in any 
 sense unless the Church has the power of dispensing grace through 
 rites of its own appointment, or is endued with the gift of bles- 
 sing and hallowing the 'riles and ceremonies,' which, accord- 
 
 1 " Among the divine ordinances [says Mr. Newman] are a number of more 
 or less abstract, or (what may be called) disembodied riles, to which the Church 
 gives a substance and a form : such as public worship, imposition of hands, 
 benedictions, and the sk;\ of the moss, which are first elements of actual or- 
 dinances, and the instrumental principles of grace". 
 
 2 Note to Keble's Christian Year, p. 377." 
 
 3 Yet in one of his sermons, Pillar of truth, p. 23, Bishop Doane, speaking 
 grandly of his Church, which he certainly loves with great sincerity, says : 
 " Even her Canons and her Rubrics are drawn from Scripture." How is 
 this? A Bishop against a Rubric, and both Scriptural ? (Quere, queer?) 
 
39 
 
 itig to t be ^Uili Article, it ' hath power to decree.' Bur \vk may 
 
 WKLL BELIEVE THAT THE ClIUKCII HAS THIS GIFT." 1 And that she 
 
 will exercise it, as soon as she is Oxfordized ! 
 
 xvi. ©clffcacw o£ the ©Icrfifi-— iHonastcrfes. 
 
 The celibacy of the Clergy is a doctrine in high repute at Oxford, 
 where Romanism finds the most sympathizing vindication of its 
 abominations. Mr. Newman (whom the Bishop of New Jersey 
 calls one of "the holy three,'''' the other two being Dr. Pusey and 
 Prof. Keble) says, "As far as clerical celibacy is a duty, it is ground- 
 ed, not on God's law, but on the Church'' s rule or on vow." So 
 that the Church may at any time enjoin the duty of the celibacy of 
 the clergy ! 3 It is somewhat singular that those who believe in the 
 peculiarly holy and sacramental character of matrimony, should 
 generally be the very persons who would have the clergy remain in 
 the comparatively unholy (as proved by history) state of celibacy. 
 Those Tractarian divines, who are already in the bonds of matri- 
 mony, are in a very undesirable dilemma, their practice having an- 
 ticipated their doctrine, and given a "Providential homage" to the 
 scriptural view. 
 
 Dr. Pusey praises " the height of holiness of whole bodies of men in the 
 Church of Rome." Bishop M'llvaine remarks: " This of course can mean 
 nothing else than corporate religious bodies, Monastic bodies. Then this 
 eminent holiness of the Church of Rome is to be found in her Monasteries, 
 among her Monks ! Of course, we are to look for it in those countries where 
 Monastic Bodies flourish in all the glory and holiness of those days of monastic 
 peace, when (he sound of the trump of Luther had not yet broke upon the 
 silence of the cell, or disturbed the quiet of the Litany of St. Alary !" p. 295. 
 
 This "height of holiness," which is attainable through those 
 means of grace, the Monasteries, is recommended by the Tracta- 
 rians to be sought for after the same Romish manner. The En- 
 glish papers state that a building is used at Oxford for Monastic pur- 
 poses, with a convenient number of cells for young English Monks. 
 
 1 This quotation and a few others have been taken from Mr. Goode's master- 
 ly exposition of Tractarianism, in his " Case as it is." 
 
 2 There have been persons, at various times, in the established Church of 
 England, who were not unfavorable to clerical celibacy. Queen Elizabeth, the 
 female " Head of the Church,' refused to allow the marriage of priests. Strype, in 
 his Jtnnals, ch. 3, states: "But among the good acts of Parliament, one was 
 wanting, tho' as it seems labored at by the Protestant divines to be brought 
 about. It was to revive King Edward's Act for the Marriage o( Priests, which 
 Queen Mary (the Papist) had repealed. But the Queen (Elizabeth) would 
 not be brought so far to countenance the conjugal state of the Clergy. This 
 troubled not a little the Divines, especially such as were married. Of this 
 matter Sandys speaks in a letter to J J urker, telling him, 'That no law was 
 made concerning the Marriage of Priests, but that it was left, as it were, in 
 medio ; [or in via media] and that the Queen would wink at it, but not estab- 
 lish it by law. Which is is nothing else, said he, but to bastard our Children.' 
 The Inconvenience hereof was that the Clergy were fain to gel their Children 
 legitimated." So much for an arbitrary Head of the Church ! Perhaps a 
 few years may find a Royal Head of similar views. 
 
40 
 
 xvn. 3Jicfcdtfcs In the ©futrch Jaevbice. 
 
 1. Lichted candles in the Church. " Two lights blioulJ be placed upon 
 the Altar, according to Ed war J the 6th's order, ratified in our present Prayer- 
 Book. We think it plain that these candles were meant at the Reformation, to 
 be lighted, as bad been usual, during the celebration of the Holy Eucharist." 
 Quoted by JU'Jlvaine, p. 280. 
 
 2. Peculiar decorations ox feast days. — "There should be some spe- 
 cial decoration on festival days; altar coveiings and pulpit hangings of unusual 
 richness; or the natural flowers of the season woven into wreaths, or placed 
 (according to primitive custom) upon the altar. These should be chosen with 
 especial reference to the subject of the Festival. White flowers are most pro- 
 per on the days consecrated to the blessed Virgin, as emblematic of sinless 
 purity ; purple or crimson on the several Saints' days, to signify the blood ot 
 martyrdom; and on All Saints' day and the Holy Innocents, white should bo 
 intermingled, as a memorial of Virgin innocence. The decoration of the chan- 
 cel should be the especial privilege of the Minister himself." p. 2S0. 
 
 3. Bowisgs, genuflections, &c. " Persons should be encouraged to 
 make obeisance on entering Church; and the Minister should never approach, 
 or pass the Altar without doing reverence, as is customary at this day in some 
 of our Cathedrals, p. 281. 
 
 Some of these ridiculous Papal mummeries are very fashionable 
 at Oxford; and a few of the Highest Church in this country have 
 already begun to practice thetn. The mummeries used by Laud in 
 St. Catharine Creed, London, are even now in the progress of repe- 
 tition by his idolizing followers at Oxford. 
 
 The fact that these doctrines always tend to these outward follies 
 proves their inward corruption, and their identity with Popery. 
 
 xviii. gjse of liomfsh prai?cr=i)oo&s, an* rules of 
 JFastfng, 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 " It is known that their mere reprint "An ecclesiastical Almanac has 
 of devotional works have brought on, been published, for the guidance of Ox- 
 ulready, a new era among publishers; fordisls amid the riches of the ancient 
 . . . procuring a market for such books services as found in the Roman and 
 as never sold before." [Very likely !] Parisian Breviaries. In this is a se- 
 Bf.Ex.\>. 160. lection from old Catholic Service books; 
 
 . . with minute rules of the Roman 
 Church as a guide to in ilivi duals for 
 abstinence and fasting." 282. 
 
 The Tractarians also regard it as " a very delightful sign of the 
 times that Parker, in Oxford, finds it his interest to import a large 
 number of copies of the Roman and Parisian Breviaries for private 
 devotion." Bishop M'Ilvaine, p. 282. 
 
 xix. Serb tee in an unftnoton tontjtte. 
 
 Bishop M'Ilvaine remarks: "That these writers have said any 
 thing positively in favor of service in an unknown tongue is not as- 
 serted; but their whole system of Reserve, of sacred veils over 
 " awful mysteries," to conceal them from the eye of the profane, and 
 
41 
 
 of the use of all those sacred symbols which only the initiated are 
 supposed to be capable of reading, indicates the very principle on 
 which the Service in an Unknown Tongue in the Romish Church is 
 defended." p. 282. 
 
 It may be added that, as early as Tract 9, the following language, expressing 
 some regret, is used in reference to the change from the Latin to the En- 
 glish language: "Services were [at the Reformation] compressed into one, 
 which had been originally distinct; the idea of united worship, with a view to 
 which identity of time and language had been maintained in different nations 
 vas forgotten ; the identity of time [canonical hours] had been abandoned, 
 and the identity of language [Latin] could not be preserved. Conscious of the 
 incongruity of primitive forms and modern feelings, our Reformers undertook 
 to construct a service more in accordance with the spirit of their age. They 
 adopted the English language: they curtailed the already compressed ritual 
 of the early Christians," &c. 
 
 This mournful|latiguage sounds very much as though the Oxford 
 men thought their vernacular anything but a privilege- 
 
 xx. Bfsuse of ^reaciifita. 
 
 Bishop M'Uvaine justly remarks "how little use there is in fre- 
 quent preaching, for all the purposes of the Oxford system." " Why 
 may not a whole congregation of such persons be equally profited 
 by the mere contemplation and preaching of the sacred ' Catholic 
 Symbols' above described, the Triangle, the Fish, the Anchor, the 
 Pelican, added to the manipulations and genuflexions of the 
 Priest, his divers bowings and incensings, accompanied with the 
 aid of rich altar-cloths, symbolic candlesticks, splendid sacerdotal 
 vestments, and enchanting choral music?" p. 283. Bishop M'U- 
 vaine also quotes on same page a Tractarian writer, as sayino- ; 
 
 " The church is out of her place, converting in a Christian coun- 
 try!" 
 
 Tract 87 asserts: "not that we would be thought entirely to deprecate 
 preaching as a mode of doing good ; it may be necessary in a -weak: and lan~ 
 guishing state ; but it is the characteristic of this system as opposed to that of 
 the Church ; and we fear the undue exaltation of an instrument, which Scrip- 
 ture, to say the least, has never much recommended." 
 
 Tract 80 thinks that " so far from it being considered necessary to keep per- 
 tons from Church on account of irreligious lives, it is usually thought that 
 every thing is done if they can be brought to it." 
 
 A great deal would be gained, if there was discipline enough in 
 the Church to keep such writers from the pulpit. 
 
 xxi. auserbe of ilcUrjfotts IXnotolc&flc. 
 
 Bimop M'Uvaine remarks: " The author of Tract 80, considers 
 
 that in the days of the Puritans great evils arose from the puttino- 
 
 forward of divine truth ■ without that sacred reserve,' which he has 
 
 been ursine,. • The consequence of this indelicate exposure of re- 
 
 (j 
 
ligion was the perpetration of crimes almost unequalled in the an- 
 nals of the world.' That is, the making known of the Gospel — 
 the preaching of the death of Christ as an atonement for the sins of 
 the world ; the calling of sinners to flee to that refuge hy repentance 
 and faith ; to seek rest only in the Cross of Christ — was productive 
 of all this ruin ! What will it be [adds Bishop M'llvaine] when the 
 Gospel is preached to every creature ?" p. 83. 
 
 Mr. Newman (one of the "holy three") also says: "The Alexandrian fath- 
 er (Clement) who has heen already referred to, accurately describes ihe rules 
 which should guide the Christian in speaking and acting economically ;" one of 
 which accurate rules is : " He both thinks and speaks the truth, except when 
 
 CONSIDERATION IS NECESSARY, AND THEN, AS A PHYSICIAN FOIl THE GOOD OF 
 HIS PATIENTS, HE WILL BE FALSE, OR UTTEH A FALSEHOOD, AS THE SOPHISTS 
 
 say. . . . Nothing, however, but his neighbor's good will lead him to do this. 
 He gives himself up for the Cltuich." 
 
 Tract 80, says: " To require, as is sometimes done, from both grown persons 
 and children, an explicit declaration of a belief in the atonement, and the full 
 assurance of its power, appears equally untenable." The atonement is con- 
 sidered " a great secret." 
 
 Bishop M'llvaine, with every evangelical Protestant, truly says: 
 "Our grand message every where is: 'Be it known unto you, 
 men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you 
 the forgiveness of sin : and by him all that believe are justified from 
 all things from which they could not be justified by the law of 
 Moses.' St. Paul waited not till men were well initiated into Chris- 
 tian mysteries, before he unveiled the grand subject of atonement 
 and justification through the blood of Christ. No— the Gospel plan 
 of promoting sanctification is just the opposite of holding in obscurity 
 any feature of the doctrine of justification." Bishop M'llvaine, 
 p. 540. 
 
 xxii. Kinase OTcrshfp. 
 
 We quote as usual Bishop M'llvaine : " That these writers have 
 advocated Image worship, is not here pretended. But that they 
 manifest a strange tenderness and tendency towards the abominable 
 idolatry, we shall easily show. This is one of the subjects which 
 they would exclude from discussion ; but if it must be discussed, as 
 with transubstantiation, they would not rest the argument on Scrip- 
 ture, because there may be a difference of opinion in regard to its 
 meaning; but on Tradition. As if the simple command, ' Thou 
 shall not make to thyself any graven image,' <$fc, which any one 
 can read for himself, were of less plainness and solemn decision than 
 the confused folios of Tradition, for which the million must depend 
 on the reading of the few.'" p. 284. 
 
 After quoting from the Bishop of Exeter, what the Oxford men 
 say about the worship of images, viz : " it is dangerous in the case 
 of the uneducated, that is, of the great part of Christians,^ Bishop 
 M'llvaine proceeds to illustrate "the singular tenderness of these 
 writers towards the idolatry of the Romish Church." He thinks it 
 
43 
 
 evident that these divines have an "extreme tenderness for corrup- 
 tions, which tilled our Cranmers and Hookers and Jewels with loath- 
 ing;" and applies to them the following from the Homily against 
 Peril of Idolatry: "Away, for shame, with these colored cloaks of 
 idolatry, of images and pictures, to teach idiots, nay, to make idiots 
 and stark fools and beasts of Christians " Bishop DFllvaine, p. 2S4, 
 291. 
 
 xxin. Ei-aMtfou. 
 
 Tradition, though really a top-stone, is converted at Oxford into 
 a corner-stone of the system. 
 
 " We have reserved all that we have now to say about the Oxford error of 
 Tradition for this place, because, though theoretically it would seem to be a 
 starting point for all the errors of doctrine, we regard ii as in practice one of the 
 last to be adopted. The sinner tirst says in his heart there is no God, and then 
 he goes to hunt after arguments in support of his atheism. So the Romish 
 Church firt-t declined into great errors, and then invented her doctrine of Tra- 
 dition for a defence. So it is with Oxfordism. Its doctrine of Tradition is 
 not practically the source of all its other peculiarities, but its wall of protection 
 for them against the Scriptures. The need was first felt, and then the cordon 
 sanitaire was drawn." liis/iop M'llvaine, p. 307. 
 
 The extracts under this important head will show that the Trac- 
 tarians adopt in substance the Romish view of Tradition, rendering 
 it authoritative in the interpretation of the Word of God. 
 
 1. The Oxford men and Bishop Doane (with the Romanists) 
 maintain the existence of Ai'ostolic traditions in addition 
 to the Word of God. 
 
 Bisiiue Doane. Bishop MTlvaine. 
 
 Bishop Doane asks whether, " in our "It is to me, I confess, a matter of 
 
 zeal against the very name of'tradi- surprise and shame, that in the 19th 
 
 lion.' we forget that Paul speaks of century, we should really have the fun- 
 
 ihem ! As — to the Corinthians (1 Cor. da mental position of the whole system 
 
 11. 2.) 'keep the ordinances,' (or tra- of Popery re-assertetl in the bosom of 
 
 ditions,) 'as I delivered them to you.' that very Church, which was reformed 
 
 And to the Thessalonians (2, 2. 15.) so determinately three centuries since 
 
 'hold tlie traditions which ye have from this very evil. What! Are we 
 
 beer, taught, whether by word or our to have all the fond tenets, which for- 
 
 cpistle ;' and again, (2, 3. 6) 'that merly sprung from the traditions of men 
 
 walked disorderly and not after the />-«- re-introduced, in however modified a 
 
 ditions which he received from us.' " p. form, among us!" Quoted lnj Bishop 
 
 124.1 M'Ilvaine, p. 309. 
 
 1 " It becomes incomparably more alarming when we learn with what latitude 
 the word Tradition is understood. It includes, as we gather from the oft re- 
 peated statements of the learned author [Keble] ' unwritten as well as written ' 
 tradition,' certain remains or fragments of the treasure of Apostolical doctrines 
 and Church rules;' in other words an oral law, ' independent of, and distinct 
 from the truths which are directly scriptural ;' which traditions are to be receiv- 
 ed 'apart from all Scripture evidence, as traditionary or common laws ecclesias- 
 tical.' So that it appears that Scitii'rriiK and OKWBITTBH as well WBITTEH 
 thadition are, taken together, the joint rule of faith." — M'Ilvaine, p. 310. 
 
44 
 
 When we consider that no allusion to unwritten injunctions is con- 
 tained in the writings of the fathers of the first two centuries ; (which 
 was certainly the most probahle period for their prevalence) — that 
 the fathers of the third and fourth centuries frequently differ from 
 each other in matters of greater or less importance, in such a way 
 as to show the impossibility of any traditions which were infallible; 
 — that the first appeal to floating traditions, as containing articles of 
 belief in addition to Holy Writ, was made by the Valentinian here- 
 tics; 1 — that it was the common manoeuvre of heretics to prefer this 
 claim ; 3 — and particularly when we consider that the fathers them- 
 selves always appealed to Scripture as the only infallible rule of fai'.h 
 and practice, it seems incredible that any person, with the Bible in 
 his hands and its spirit in his heart, should still resort to such a 
 phantasm of man's imagination. " This we do affirm that, having 
 four different accounts of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the last written 
 for the very purpose of making the account complete, and above 
 twenty Epistles written by the Apostles to explain it still further — to 
 say that any thing at all important has been omitted, is a libel upon 
 that Holy Spirit by whom the Apostles were guided." 3 Let those, 
 who are disposed to profane the word of God by exalting tradition, 
 remember the words of our Lord against the Pharisees who were 
 great advocates of oral communications: "Why do ye transgress 
 the commandments of God by your tradition?" (Mark 7, 9.) And 
 again, " ye have made the commandment of God of none effect by 
 your tradition. (7, 13.) And again, "beware lest any man spoil 
 you after the traditions of men." (Col. 2, 8.) 
 
 2. Bishop Doane agrees with the Catholics, in maintaining that 
 the Bible is an ubsouke book. 
 
 Bisuop DoAxn. Brsnop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 In reply to the remark that 11 the " Yes, you may rely upon it, breth- 
 Bible is, in the judgment of Oxford ren.this 'joint rule ol faith' will never 
 men, a very obscure book," Bishop D. long consist with the simplicity of the 
 
 1 Irenxus says of these heretics: " When they are reproved from the Scrip- 
 tures, they immediately begin to accuse the Scriptures themselves; as if they 
 were not correct, nor of authority, and that they are not consistent; and that 
 the truth cannot be found out from them, by those ivhn are ignorant of tradi- 
 tion." And Ptolemy, the Valentinian, expressly asserts that "their doctrine 
 was derived from Apostolical tradition, handed down to them by a successional 
 delivery from the Apostles." Quoted by Goode, vol. I. p. 309. 
 
 2 So usual was it for heretics to appeal to tradition, that Jerome says of them 
 generally, that they were accustomed to say — " We are the sons of those wise 
 men who, from the beginning, have delivered to us the doctrine of the Apos- 
 tles." " Filii sumus aapientium qui ab initio doctrinum nobis apostolicam 
 tradiderunt .'" Goode, vol. I. p. 309. 
 
 3 This quotation is from " Goode 's divine ru'e of faith and practice," a work 
 of pre-eminent ability, and suited to the times. This book settles the contro- 
 versy with Oxford in the most scriptural style. It contains a mass of informa- 
 tion which is of great practical utility, and ought to be in the hands of all stu- 
 dents, as a preservative against Popish errors in regard to the relative authority 
 of Scripture and Tradition. 
 
45 
 
 Bishop Doank. Bishop M'Ilyaine. 
 
 says: "Well; did not Peter entertain Gospel . . Already texts, of inspired 
 very much the same judgment, not on- Scripture are weakened or contracted 
 ly of St. Paul's writings, but of ' the to the narrowest and most doubtful 
 other Scriptures?' 2 Peter 3: 16. — sense . . . All this is but too natural." 
 ' In which are some things hard to be p. 314. 
 understood, which they that are un- 
 learned and unstable wrest, as they do 
 also the other Scriptures, unto their 
 own destruction." 1 p. 125. 
 
 When the Bishop of N. J. thus maintains that the Bible is an ob- 
 scure book, and of course makes Peter, as one of its writers, impeach 
 his own wisdom and the wisdom of God, who inspired all the sacred 
 writers, he endorses one of the main perversions of Romanism. On 
 this point, our only safe course is to adopt that great principle of 
 Protestantism that •« However obscure any of the doctrines or state- 
 ments of Scripture may be, there is no plainer report of them than 
 we can find there, that can come to us with any authority to bind 
 the conscience to belief." 
 
 3. Bishop Doane maintains, with Oxford and Rome, that the 
 Bible cannot be understood without the aid of the Church. 3 
 
 In support of the position that the " I appeal to you whether we have 
 
 Bible needs an interpreter, Bishop not here a totally false principle as- 
 
 Doane says, '• Was it Romish in the serted as to the rule of faith. I appeal 
 
 Ethiopian Eunuch to answer, and in to you whether this is not to magnify 
 
 St. Luke to record his answer, to the the comments of men above the in- 
 
 Deacon Philip — ' Understandest thou spired words of the Holy Ghost. I ap- 
 
 what thou readest !' — ' How can I, ex- peal to you whether, this is not to make 
 
 cept some one should guide me?'" tradition an integral part of the canon 
 
 Acts, viii. 30. p. 125. . of faith." p. 310. 
 
 The Bishop of N. Jersey must be pressed in the service of Ro- 
 manism to otler such singular proof. In the first place, this Ethio- 
 pian Eunuch, brought up in barbarian ignorance, was as yet unbap- 
 tized,and consequently, according to High Churchism, he was tinder 
 the condemnation of mortal sin, and therefore unfit to be a teacher 
 either to " irreverent dissenters" or to "Catholic Churchmen." In 
 the next place, this Ethiopian does not say " How can I understand 
 
 1 " It occurs to us that the danger might be as great, perhaps, of wresting the 
 note and commentary, as of wresting the text to their own destruction. We 
 think that of the two modes, the Bible itself is by all means the least danger- 
 ous, and especially for the unlearned and unstable, who would fare very badly 
 under the guidance of notes and comments, made peradventure by men as un- 
 stable, if not as unlearned as themselves." 
 
 2 King James II, told Bishop Burnet that the reason of his turning Papist 
 was that he heard so much from the English divines about '• the authority of the 
 Church, and of the tradition from the Apostles in support of Episcopacy," he 
 considered that other traditions might be taken on the word of the Catholic 
 Church, as well as Episcopacy on the word of the English, and he therefore 
 thought it " reasonable to go over to the Church of Rome." Burnet's hist, of 
 own Times, vol. I. p. 245, quoted in Bib. Rep. 1838, p. 116. 
 
46 
 
 except some High Churchman guide me?" but "except some owe," 
 that is any one who understands the Bible. — In the third place, the 
 Eunuch was not in possession of the New Testament, but was read- 
 ing a prophecy in the Old Testament, which, if interpreted by tra- 
 dition, binds us to the use of the Jewish Talmuds, including Mishna 
 and Gemara. — In the fourth place, the ignorant Eunuch acted very 
 wisely in calling Philip, or any one else, to his aid; and it would not 
 be amiss if some others, who ride in their High-Church chariot, would 
 let deacons get up and interpret Scripture for them too, sometimes. 
 
 4. Bishop Doane, with Oxford and Rome, places the Church 
 
 even before the Bible. 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 In reply to a remork that an in- "The false principle will go on, 
 
 quirer must go Jirst to the Church and 'eating as doth a canker.' The in- 
 
 thcn to the Bible, Bishop D. says, spired word of God will he neglected, 
 
 " And is not this the veiiy ghound and the traditions of men will take its 
 
 on which St. Luke commended the place. Traditions and Fathers will 
 
 Bereans as ' more noble,' in that they occupy the first place, as we see in the 
 
 • received the word ' spoken by Paul sermons of the chief Roman Catholic 
 
 and Silas, and [then] searched the authors of every age, and Christ come 
 
 Scriptures daily whether these things next or not at all." Quoted, p. 314. 
 were so." p. 12. 
 
 But if inquirers must first go to the Church and to Churchmen 
 before they go to the Bible, the question arises, which is the true 
 Church? "I," says the Pope! Or, which is almost the same 
 thing, " WE," say the Tractarians ! "By no means," affirm the 
 " mixed multitude" of dissenters, " the Church is composed of 
 
 THE FAITHFUL BELIEVERS AMONG ALL DENOMINATIONS !" So that 
 
 the inquirer is more bewildered in finding out the true Church, 1 than 
 in discovering the true meaning of the Scriptures. And that this is 
 really the case, appears from the fact that Christians, though differ- 
 ing much in ecclesiastical name and order, profess generally the 
 same fundamental truths. We have always supposed that the Bere- 
 ans were commended for their noble spirit in searching the Scrip- 
 tures. We never expected to hear them extolled as the advocates 
 of tradition. Bishop D.'s interpretation is probably traditional. 
 
 5. " Catholic consent " is the great standard of Biblical inter- 
 pretation with Bishop Doane {as with Oxford and Rome.) 
 
 Bishop Doane, Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 " The true Catholic pastor, who thus " So then, we are to search the in- 
 receives the word of God with the spired Word of God, not as the one, 
 
 i Even granting that the only true Church is the Episcopal, nothing could 
 more strikingly show the folly of appealing to the Church for an infallible inter- 
 pretation of Scripture than the differences of opinion between Bishop Doane 
 and Bishop M'Ilvaine. The Bible means one thing in .New Jersey ; and a far 
 different thing in Ohio ! 
 
 Indeed so great and serious are these variations of Episcopacy, that we 
 feel strongly persuaded that Bishop M'Ilvaine would not admit to deacon's 
 orders a person who departed so far from Scripture as to vindicate and endorse 
 the Tractarian system. 
 
47 
 
 Bisnor Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 transmitted witness of the Church ; authoritative rule of faith, but as the 
 
 who guides himself by the Holy Scrip- document of what this Tradition teach- 
 
 tures, not us he understand* them, but es — we are to study the Scriptures, not 
 
 as Catholic antiquity has revealed and in order to ascertain simply (rod's re- 
 
 Catholic consent has kept their metui- vealed will, bu' to prove tradition by 
 
 inff, will be chastised and schooled, Scriptural evidence — and the standard 
 
 by this submission of bis judgment 1 of revelation is no longer the Bible 
 
 to the wisp and good of every age, into alone, that is, the inspired word of the 
 
 that childlike-spirit which God will eternal God in its plain and obvious 
 
 bless." Troy Sermon, p 23. meaning, but Scripture and Tradition, 
 
 taken together, are the joint rule of 
 
 faith !" p. 310. 
 
 We ask whether Romanists arc not altogether satisfied with Bi- 
 shop D's plan of asking the Fathers the meaning of the Bible? The 
 spirit of blind submission to Church authority, in opposition to con- 
 victions of the understanding, (recommended in the preceding ex- 
 tract) is the very thing to bring Scripture into disrepute, and of course 
 to overthrow the foundations of religion. — As to " Catholic consent" 
 it has been well described by Mr. Goode : " It is just the consent of 
 some half a dozen Fathers falling in wi:h the humor of the individ- 
 ual quoting them !" The Bible can hardly refer to this "Catholic 
 consent," when it says " Search the Scriptures ; for in them ye 
 think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of 
 we." — The reader is particularly referred to the remarks on "Cath- 
 olic consent'' by Bishop Sherlock, contained in a note. 3 
 
 It may be proper in this connection to introduce the two following 
 quotations of Dr. Doane, as being natural deductions of the mysti- 
 cal love of antiquity and tradition, which likewise prevails at Ox- 
 ford : 
 
 ' " We hear much now-a-days of the submission of our understanding to the 
 dictation of our spiritual instructors, and to the superior wisdom of antiquity, 
 as though the surrender of our own judgment and the blind adoption of primi- 
 tive usages, were only another name for Christian faith. Let it be at least re- 
 collected, that the humility prescribed by the Gospel extends to every portion 
 of the human race alike ; to the teacher no less than to the pupil. But the 
 humility, attempted to be taught by the dictation of uninspired men, inculcating 
 their own theories as portions of Holy Writ, if it encourages the prostration 
 of the understanding on the one part, is no less favorable to spiritual tyranny 
 and dogmatism on the other." Shultleivorth on Tradition, p. 121. 
 
 2 "As for expounding Scripture by the unanimous consent of primitive Fa- 
 thers, this is indeed the rule which the Council of Trent gives, and which their 
 doctors swear to observe. How well they keep this oath, they ought to consid- 
 er. Now as to this, you may tell them that you would readily pay a great de- 
 ference to the unanimous consent of Fathers, could you tell how to know it; 
 and therefore in the first place you desire to know the agreement of how many 
 Fathers makes an unanimous consent: for you have been told, that there has 
 been 'as great variety in interpreting Scripture among the ancient Fathers as 
 among our modern interpreters;' that there are very few, if any, controverted 
 texts of Scripture which are interpreted by an unanimous consent of all the 
 Fathers. If this unanimous consent then signify all the Fathers, we shall be 
 troubled to find such a consent in expounding Scripture. Must it, then, be the 
 unanimous consent of the greatest number of Fathers ? This will be a very 
 
48 
 
 Bishop M'Iltaine. 
 "But what (saith Latimer) is to be 
 said of the Fathers 1 How are they 
 to be esteemed ? St. Augustine replies, 
 giving this rule also, that we should 
 not therefore think it true, because 
 they say so, though they ever so much 
 excel in holiness and learning. — The 
 Fathers have both herbs and weeds, 
 and papists commonly gather the 
 weeds, and leave the herbs." p. 308. 
 
 Bishop Doank. 
 
 [Speaking in reference to the P. 
 E. Theological Semi7iary at JV. Y., 
 of -which he is ex officio a Trustee,] 
 Bishop D. says : " It should be consid- 
 ered whether the entire omission, or 
 casual notice, of the study of the Fa- 
 thers, in training the teachers of a 
 Church, which every where appeals to 
 ' Holy Scripture and ancient authors,' 
 and receives as truth only that which 
 the first receivers witnessed of as true, 
 be not a strange and most injurious 
 omission.' ' Epis.Address, 1842, p. 9. 
 
 Also, " it should be considered," (as 
 to the Seminary) " whether the promi- 
 nence allowed in the course of study 
 to the Evidences of Christianity, as if 
 it were an open question, be not a lay- 
 ing again of the foundations, inconsis- 
 tent with the position of a Church, 
 which for eighteen hundred years has 
 been the providential witness of its 
 truth."(!) do. p. 9. 
 
 The study of the Evidences of Christianity is certainly quite use- 
 less in a Church, which trains up her children to avoid "open ques- 
 tions" and to rely with instinctive faith upon Catholic consent as 
 interpreted by Apostolical succession. The only wonder is that the 
 Fathers should be studied at all. Why not " Hear the Church 1 ?" 
 
 One more quotation on the Rule of Faith and Tradition will be 
 sufficient for the purposes of this Brief Examination. 
 
 Bishop Doane. Bishop M'Ilvaine. 
 
 [Bishop D., ivlien speaking of the " Not for one moment do we place 
 Rule of Faith, frequently appeals to] tradition on the same level with the all- 
 
 " Hence the stern war of the Oxford 
 divines against the study of the Evi- 
 dences of Christianity, as a way of be- 
 coming established in the truth, in- 
 stead of hearing the Church, and 
 trusting to an 'instinctive faith' in 
 her testimony." p. 194. 
 
 hard thing, especially for unlearned men to tell noses : we can know the opin- 
 ion only of those Fathers who were the writers in every age, and whose wri- 
 tings have been preserved down to us; and who can tell, whether the major 
 number of those Fathers who did not write, or whose writings are lost, were of 
 the same mind with those whose writings we have? And why must the major 
 part be always the wisest and the best men 1 And if they were not, the con- 
 sent of a few wise men is to be preferred before great numbers of other exposi- 
 tors. Again ask them, whether these fathers were infallible or traditionary ex- 
 positors of Scripture, or whether they expounded Scripture according to their 
 own private reason and judgment. If they were infallible expositors and de- 
 livered the traditionary sense and interpretation of Scripture, it is a little strange 
 how they should differ in their expositions of Scripture. ... If they expound- 
 ed Scripture according to their oien reason and judgment, as it is plain 
 thet did, then their authority is no more sacred than their reason is; and 
 those are the best expositors, whether ancient or modern, whose expositions 
 are backed with the bet reasons." — Goode's Div. Rule, p. 214-5. 
 
 1 If the House of Bishops intend to introduce more of the Fathers into the 
 Seminary, we most respectfully suggest, as an excellent introduction to tht 
 same, " Daille' on the right use of the Fa/hers " — a standard work recently 
 re-published by the " Presbyterian Board of Publication." 
 
49 
 
 Disuor Doase. B I SHOP M'Ilvaisz. 
 
 " Holy Schiptuue and ancient au- perfect word of God. Not for one mo- 
 
 tiiobs," as in Brief Ex. p. 182, and ment do we allow it any share in the 
 
 p. 209. — Troy Sermon, p. 2., &c, &c., standard of revealed truth. Scripture 
 
 Again : "The Church evert/ where ap- and Tradition, taken together, are not 
 
 peals to 'Holy Scriptures and ancient the joint rule of faith." p. 312. 
 authors.'" Corn. Add, 1842, p. 9. 
 
 This "every where" appeal of Bishop Doane is only made once 
 (we believe) in the " Book of Common Prayer," and then in a pre- 
 face to a particular service ; and even then in a different sense from 
 I hat which Bishop D. is so anxious it should bear. 1 Whereas the 
 Articles of the Protestant Episcopal Church expressly maintain 
 that the Bible aloxk is the rule of Faith. Read the following words 
 of the 6th Article : " Holy Scripture containeth all things neces- 
 sary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may 
 be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be 
 believed as an article of Faith, or be thought requisite, or necessary, 
 to salvation." The Homilies of the Church also bear equally di- 
 rect testimony : " Let us diligently search for the well of life in the 
 books of the Old and New Testament, and not in the stinking pud- 
 dles of men's traditions, devised by men's imagination, for our justi- 
 fication and salvation ; for in the holy Scripture is fully contained 
 what we ought to do and what to eschew." 
 
 If such be the doctrine of the Church in her Articles and Homilies, 
 why is it not also the doctrine of her divines? 
 
 We agree most sincerely with Bishop M'llvaine, that in regard 
 to to the doctrine of tradition, " Oxfordism is throwing itself 
 into the same defence, as Romanism, for the same purposes, 
 in maintenance of the same errors." p. 308, 
 
 1 The Preface to the " Manner of making Deacons" has these words, upon 
 which Bishop D. lays so much stress: " It is evident unlo all men, diligently 
 reading Holy Scripture and ancient Author*, that from the Apostles' time 
 there have been three orders of Ministers in Christ's Church — Bishops, Priests 
 and Deacons." These words, so frequently quoted by the Diocesan of New 
 Jersey, to prove that his Church makes tradition the interpreter of Scripture 
 fall many degrees short of the Oxford mark, as we think any candid mind will 
 admit. As this is the only passage in the Articles and Ritual of the Church 
 to prove the transcendant authority of tradition, it is not strange that it is seiz- 
 ed with the fresh delight attending a great discovery, and quoted and re-quoted 
 until its original and humble meaning is quite obscured in the splendor of its 
 glorification. We have no doubt that most Episcopalians, would be willing to 
 say, that the passage simply implied the concurrence of ancient authors in the 
 actual existence of the Episcopacy which Scripture at lust saticlionc.l. 
 
 For ourselves, we confess that the passage has always seemed to admit that 
 Diocesan Episcopacy was very difficult to be found in Scripture. This inter- 
 pretation derives a presumption in its favor from the fact that an appeal is no 
 where else made to " Ancient authors." If this be the meaning attached to 
 the passage bv Bishop Doanc, we rejoice heartily over our mutual agreement. 
 7 
 
50 
 
 xxiv. Apostolic Succession- %fgiH£iutrcft &lafms,&c. 
 
 The doctrine of Apostolic succession was one of the first points 
 taken up by the Oxford Tractarians, as appears from Mr. PercivaPs 
 letter. We deeply regret that Bishop M'llvaine has not exposed the 
 absurdity of such claims. Indeed we can hardly account for his 
 silence on this point, unless, from prudential considerations, he was 
 induced to avoid an additional exciting topic, when he had already 
 thoroughly overthrown the foundations of the false system. Even a 
 calm exposition of High-Church claims might also, perhaps, have 
 been considered too personal towards some in the " House of Bi- 
 shops." In our remarks under this head, we propose to show 
 
 that the Tractarians and Bishop Doane agree, [with the Papists] 
 1. In the necessity of a regular Apostolic Succession of Bishops, 
 through which channel alone, grace is transmitted. And 2d. conse- 
 quently that they agree in unchurching other Protestant Churches, 
 and in abusing the Reformers. We shall, also, show as we proceed, 
 that these " Catholic peculiarities " were not entertained in the early 
 periods of the English Church. 
 
 1. The Oxford Tracts and Bishop Doane agree in maintaining 
 the necessity of a regular Apostolic succession of Bishops, through 
 whom alone, as in a channel, grace descends. 
 
 Oxford Writers 
 
 agree with 
 
 Bisuop Doane. 
 
 "The points we ought to put for- 
 ward are the following : 
 
 1. The doctrine of Apostolic succes- 
 sion, as a rule of practice. 
 
 The successors of the Apostles are 
 those who are descended in a direct 
 line from them by the imposition of 
 hands." J^ercival's letter. 
 
 [This doctrine is continually taught 
 throughout the Tracts. See particu- 
 larly Tracts 1, 4, 7, 10, 17, 24, 33, 52, 
 54, 60, 74. It is one of the well- 
 known fundamentals of Tractarianism.] 
 
 " The participation of the body and 
 blood of Christ is essential to the main- 
 tenance of Christian life and hope in 
 each individual ; and it is conveyed to 
 individual Christians only by the hands 
 of the successors of the Apostles and 
 their delegates," I'ercival. 
 
 "Episcopal authority is the very bond 
 which unites Christians to each other 
 and to Christ." Tract 10. "None but 
 the Apostles and their deputies could 
 be said to have Christ's warrant for 
 blessing that bread and that cup. And 
 
 " The office which Timothy held 
 and exercised by the laying on of 
 Paul's hands, is transmitted in an un- 
 broken line, entire and perfect to our 
 time." Office of a Bishop, p. 11. 
 
 "They committed it to other 'faith- 
 ful men,' who should come after them, 
 and they again, in an unbroken line, 
 to us." Leeds sermon, p, 19. 
 
 " Yes, could 1 swell my voice, tin it 
 should reach from Canada to Mexico, 
 and from the Atlantic to the Pacific 
 shore, it should be lifted up to entreat 
 all who heard it, not to be content with 
 the word of God, without that minis- 
 try and those sacraments, which are 
 equally his ordinances, and equally es- 
 sential to salvation." &c. Office of a 
 Bishop, p. 26. 
 
 " Episcopacy is the Church's living 
 bond of union with Christ; the chan- 
 nel in which the grace has been trans- 
 mitted through the hands of the Apos- 
 tles, which lends their virtue to her 
 sacraments, and gives to penitent and 
 
51 
 
 OxFonu WniTEiis agree with Bisuop Doane. 
 
 this is a matter pbrtamvng lo each faithful hearts assurance of acceptance 
 man's salvation." Tract 52, p. 7. and salvation through the purchase of 
 
 the blessed Cross; apart from which 
 [Episcopacy] it [the Church] could 
 have no connection with the Apostles, 
 and could claim no promise made to 
 them." Burning Jius/t, p. 23. 
 
 Quotations might be indefinitely multiplied, but it is unnecessary. 
 In order lo show the zincertainty hanging over the Apostolic succes- 
 sion, we quote, as a specimen, the following, from the 9th lecture in 
 Smyth's admirable work on this subject: 
 
 " Hooker admits that ordinations had oftentimes been effected without a Bi- 
 shop to ordain, ' and therefore,' he says, ' we are not simply, without excep- 
 tion, to urge a lineal descent of power from the apostles, by continued succes- 
 sion of Bishops in every effectual ordination. Stillingfleet declares, that ' by 
 the loss of records of the British churches, we cannot draw down the succes- 
 sion of bishops from the apostles' times.' There is, in fact, no reckoning for 
 the first five hundred and ninety-six years, until the time when Augustine was 
 sent from Rome to re-establish Christianity in Britain. Nor is the record of 
 these five hundred and ninety-six years, any better kept at Rome than in Bri- 
 tain ; for if we come to Rome, says Stillingfleet, ' here the succession is as mud- 
 dy as the Tiber itself,' 'and what shall we say to extricate ourselves out of this 
 labyrinth V Who can tell the date of the consecration of Augustine, about 
 which a late prelatic advocate differs from himself in the small amount of fifty- 
 four years, and in reference to which we find Baronius contradicting Bede, and 
 Dr. Inett making confusion worse confounded 1 The archbishopric of Canter- 
 bury, says Dr. Inett, in his Origines Anglicana;, had been void from the year 
 1089, in all, about four years, and the bishopric of Lincoln about a year. 
 Towards the end of the eighth century, this same see was divided into two 
 parts for several years. Dr. Inett himself affirms, that ' the difficulties in that 
 see betwixt the year 768 and the year 800, -were invincible.' Speaking of the 
 death of Dunstan, this writer further states, that Ethelgar 'succeeded to the 
 chair of Canterbury the year following, but dying the same year, our historians 
 are not agreed who succeeded, some confidently pronouncing in favor of Siri- 
 cius, and others of Ellricus.' " 
 
 As another specimen of the difficulties of hereditary transmission, 
 we may mention the historical fact that, for a number of years, 
 there were two Popes, each claiming supreme jurisdiction, and the 
 treasury of apostolic succession. Bishop Doane, in denying that 
 Rome is the " essential centre of unity," argues as follows against the 
 Bishop of A rath: " The essential centre of unity ! A pretty figure, 
 doubtless, xc ere it true ! But how was it when there were 
 two Popes? Were there then two 'essential' centres? 
 Or which was which T" (Bf. Ex. p. 213.J Now we ask also, 
 how was it when there were two Popes 1 Were there then two de- 
 positories of Apostolic grace ? or which was which ? For our- 
 selves we do not care which was " which ,•" for we abjure this eccle- 
 siastical witchcraft, which professes to delineate the only course of 
 the regular ministry and the operations of God's Spirit. But how 
 our friend, Dr. Doane, is to decide between "which and which," is 
 a point which we are very much at a loss to determine. We should 
 
52 
 
 not advise any one to risk his salvation upon the right solution of 
 this historical puzzle. 1 
 
 In regard to these extravagant and absurd opinions, it has been 
 well remarked : 
 
 "We sincerely pity the man, who believes them. His chance of heaven, if 
 we may use such language, is on his own principles, slender indeed. The man, 
 whose title to his estate depends upon his being able to prove that there has 
 been no invalid marriage in the line of his ancestry for two thousand years, 
 would be well off, compared with him whose hope of salvation rests on the 
 assumption that there has been no invalid ordination in the ecclesiastical pro- 
 genitors of his parish priest since the davs of the Apostles. Let it be remem- 
 bered that one invalid ordination (or consecration) would, in the course of a 
 few generations, vitiate hundreds, and then thousands. Alas, for those who have 
 no hope but on the uninterrupted succession !" Princeton Review for 1841, 
 p. 154. 
 
 Bishop Burnet remarks to the same purpose: 
 
 " The condition of Christians were very hard, if private persons must certainly 
 know how all ministers have been ordained since the Apostles' days; for if we 
 will raise scruples in this matter, it is impossible to satisfy them unless the 
 authentic registers of all ages of the Church could be showed, which is impos- 
 sible; for though we were satisfied that all the priests of this age were duly 
 
 1 Some of the High Church have lately attempted to trace their genealogical 
 table through the early English Church up to St. Paul. On this effort, we 
 make two remarks. 1. The existence of the early English Church no one 
 doubts; but it is not an established historical fact that Paul ever visited Britain. 
 We quote from Burton'' s Church History, used at St. Mary's Hall, ivith a re- 
 commendation by Bishop Doane. " We need not believe the traditions con- 
 cerning its first conversion [by Paul] ; and it is right to add that the earliest 
 writer who speaks of Britain as having been visited by any of the Apostles is 
 Eusebius, who wrote at the beginning of the fourth century ; and the earliest 
 writer who names St. Paul is Theodoret, who lived a century /«<<?;•" .' .' .' Thus 
 what was unknown, or indefinite, in the first centuries, was probability in the 
 fifth, and certainty in the nineteenth ! — 2. Our second remark is, that notwith- 
 standing the existence of the early British church, the Apostolic line of suc- 
 cession was long since diverted from that channel, and now runs through the 
 Popish ordinations. Augustine, with 40 monks was sent by the Pope from 
 Rome to England, where he landed in 596, and marched to Canterbury in ec- 
 clesiastical style with a waving banner and a silver crucifix ! Two years after, 
 he was made Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of all England ; the Pope 
 sending the Archbishop a pall, with presents for the new Cathedral, including 
 holy relics, &c. Augustine did much to set the Church in Roman order; and 
 hence he is truly called "the founder of the English Church as distinguished 
 from the British " and " the great Apostle of England." {Blunt, p. 27.) After 
 his death, great confusion prevailed, so that 60 or 70 years after, there was only 
 one canonical Bishop in all England. We now quote from Blunt's Hist, of 
 Eng. lief, which has a recommendatory letter by Bishop Doane : Two of the 
 provincial kings, "consulted together on the actual condition of the church, and 
 came to a determination, in which the church itself concurred, to send a priest 
 of their common choosing to Rome, to be there consecrated Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, -who might henceforth supply the sees of England canonically, 
 and set in order its ecclesiastical rites. Theodore, a monk of Cilicia, was ac- 
 cordingly designated by the Pope Archbishop of Canterbury, [about the year 
 670] and despatched to England." (p. 31, 32.) This Popish Monk was the first 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, "to whom the universal church of England submit- 
 ted." He ordained bishops, rc-ordaincd those whose commission was irregular, 
 and reduced the ecclesiastical affair? of the island to some order. The first five 
 
53 
 
 orJaineil, yet if we be not as sure that all who ordained them had orders rightly 
 given them, and so upward till the days of the Apostles, the doubt will still re- 
 main." (Quoted in Ch. Ubs. '38, p. 827. 
 
 Nothing can be more certain than that the Greatest uncertainty 
 and obscurity exist in regard to various links in the chain of Apos- 
 tolic succession; and that the most vile doctrines of Anti-Christ and 
 the most disgusting immoralities — such as cannot belong to a true 
 Church — have thoroughly defiled the line of ancestry, which pre- 
 tends to exclusive fellowship with the Apostles. — Nor is even the 
 new American succession entirely free from all canonical doubt. 1 
 In short, this theory, unsupported by Scripture, and unsupportable 
 by fact, is a visionary idea of Popery and Uigh-Churchism. It was 
 never incorporated in the system of the Reformers, who framed the 
 Articles of the Church of England, and laid the foundalions of its 
 
 Archbishops of Canterbury were Italians. Blunt further states, "There is much 
 in our [subsequent] history that is dark, intricate and uncertain. Many early 
 church-records have perished in the fires," (p. 43,) — such as those which con- 
 sumed the documents in the " Cathedral of Canterbury soon after the Norman 
 conquest," and " St. Paul's Cathedral with its chapter-house and the ■writings 
 contuined in it," during the great fire in London. — So that the English ordina- 
 tions were thoroughly Popish, and are moreover not a little "dark, intricate and 
 uncertain." 
 
 1 The chain of the " Scoto-.lnglican " or American succession is by no means 
 perfect, but some of its links arc certainly cracked, if not broken. For example, 
 according to High-Churchism, Baptism is the instrument of justification ; or as 
 Bishop Doane expresses it, " he grafts tliem in by hoti/ baptism into the living 
 vine." (Troy sermon p. 25.) J\ow two of the earliest Bishops of the Ameri- 
 can Episcopal church were never " grafted in " — never received this " sacrament 
 of salvation " — were never canonically baptized ! But can an unjustified person, 
 who has not submitted tn the ordinances of the Church of Christ, stand in the 
 place of the Apostles? Bishop White says " If the prejudice should prevail, it 
 is very unfortunate that two of our Bishops [Dr. Provoost and Dr. Jarvis] 
 never received baptism from the hand of an Episcopalian administrator. So 
 that who knows what scruples this may occasion, as to the validity of many of 
 our ordinations ? . . . There would be no certainty of a Bishop in Christendom." 
 (Mem of Ep. Ch. p. 282.) Now inasmuch as these two unbaplizcd Bishops 
 assisted in the consecration of Bishops Hobart and (Jriswold in 1811. the whole 
 of the present House of Bishops have a shadow of doubt over their glory. For 
 Bishop D. admits that "an ordination which is merely probable, or only pro- 
 bably sufficient and valid, only makes a probable Jiisliofi, or one who 
 is merely probably a Bishop . . . True and valid Episcopal vocation is not 
 merely probable, but certain and undoubted." (Brief Ex. p. 228 ) Now the 
 fact that various ways have been devised to prove that consecration without 
 baptism is not defective, shows that there is some "doubt" on this subject. If 
 we take one of the solutions, viz : that " baptism by a layman is valid, if the es- 
 sentials arc preserved " — why may not ordination by a layman be valid, if the 
 essentials are preserved ? Especially as Bishop D. tells us " the commission to 
 teach, being also the commission to baptize. (Troy sermon p. 11.) If we take 
 another solution, viz: that "there is a possibility of transmitting the Episcopal 
 succession through persons who are not members of the Church " — why may 
 not ordination be thus transmitted ! Whatever solution is male, it must equally 
 benefit Presbyterian ordination, because " the commission to baptize is also the 
 commission to teach." But however this may be, it is very unfortunate that such 
 an event as the consecration of Bishops who were never " grafted in," should 
 have occurred in a Church, where every thing is claimed to be Apostolic. 
 
 But what adds still another shade to the shadow is the consecration of 181 1, 
 
54 
 
 glory. The men of that age were too intent upon the great work 
 which engrossed their hearts, to embrace a dogma of Popery, at 
 variance with Scripture, reason and history. Says Archbishop 
 Whafehj : " Those who framed the Articles of our Church claimed 
 no sacramental virtue for the ordinances which they administered, 
 on account of possessing the Apostolic chain of succession, which, if 
 one link be broken, the whole is destroyed. They merely claimed 
 for themselves the tille of being regularly ordained ministers of a 
 scripturally constituted Church of Christ. Those who put forward 
 any other claim were attempting to remove the foundation of the 
 Church from the rock on which it had been built to place it on the 
 
 sand. . The Reformers put forward no exclusive claims." 
 
 This will more fully appear as we proceed to the remaining topic of 
 consideration. 
 
 when Bishop White (as he himself tells the story) " in the imposition of hands 
 on each of the two Bishops elect [Hobart and Griswold] omitted the words 'In 
 the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Hohj Ghost.' The officiat- 
 ing Bishop was unconscious of the omission ; and the first intimation of it to 
 him, was by Bishop Jarvis in the way from Church, (p. 287. ) Now inasmuch 
 as great stress in favor of Episcopacy is laid upon the text " As my Father hath 
 sent me, even so send I yon," it is certain that those, who make every thing of 
 forms, must feel a little uncertainty and doubt about this consecration, in which 
 no mention is made of the Bishops being sent either by the Father or the Son. 
 Would baptism, with no mention of the name of God, be considered free from 
 canonical doubts? Why then otherwise with a consecration which has also a 
 set form, the " rubric being scriptural?'" This omission of Bishop White 
 made no small stir at the time in New-York; and led to much discussion in 
 the newspapers and in a pamphlet by an Episcopalian. The mind of a Church- 
 man of the straitest sect, may well be alarmed at the omission of any words, 
 especially such important words, in one of the established forms of the Church. 
 
 But the difficulty is increased by the fact that both of the errors, or variations 
 from Episcopacy alluded to, were unfortunately concentrated upon the same 
 two Bishops, Hobart and Griswold, the latter of whom is now the respected 
 presiding Bishop. For not only did Bishop White omit the name of the Trin- 
 ity, but the other two Bishops who assisted at the consecration, were the very 
 two (Provoost and Jarvis) who had never been canonically baptized! Each 
 omission by itself might well cause doubt in a conscientious, advocate of forms ; 
 but when the two are blended, assurance of no invalidity is very far from being 
 " doubly sure." 
 
 There is still another uncertainty in the case of Bishop Seahmy ; who fail- 
 ing to obtain ordination in England, was obliged to seek it in Scotland, where 
 he obtained it. But inasmuch as several Covenanters, who had never received 
 any other than Presbyterian baptism and ordination, were consecrated Scotch 
 Bishops, how is it known that this bar in the channel did not prevent Episco- 
 pal virtue from reaching Bishop S.? Moreover, even Perceval, in his " Apos- 
 tolical Succession," adinils that the consecration of Jliches, the non-juror, was 
 " irregular and schismatical.'" p. 133. But the present Scottish succession is 
 derived through both of these sources, according to Perceval, pp. 13G, 137, 
 through the Covenanters and non-jurors; and as both are corrupt streams, it 
 follows of course that so far as the American succession is " Scoto," it is void. 
 Bishop White (Memoirs, p. ICG.) says that " Bishop Provoost was opposed to 
 having any thing to do with the Scotch succession : which he did not hesitate 
 to pronounce irregular." So that here we have very considerable doubt about 
 the first Ameiican Bishop, who of course has communicated great ecclesiastical 
 uncertainty throughout the Diocese of Connecticut, and thus throughout the 
 whole Church ! 
 
55 
 
 52. The Tractariana and Bishop Duane agree in unchurching 
 other Protectant Churches, and in abusing the Reformers. This 
 is the natural result of their pretension to Apostolic succession, as 
 the only channel of grace. 
 
 Oxford WBiTEns agree with Bishop Doane. 
 
 " The privilege of the visible Church "Those trumpet words of Paul to the 
 
 is to be herein like the ark of Noah, 
 that, for any tiling we know to the con- 
 trary, all without it are lost sheep." 
 Tract 74. 
 
 The English Church claims to be 
 
 Ephesians " One Lord, one Faith, one 
 Baptism," ate shrunk from as discour- 
 teous to the great Diana of our Ephe- 
 sus, which rejoices in that descriptive 
 title, " other denominations." p. 161. 
 " The simple faith has been conced- 
 
 merely Reformed, not Protestant, and ed, as the price of peace, or through 
 
 it repudiates any fellowship with the 
 mixed multitude, which crowd togeth- 
 er, whether at home or abroad, under 
 a mere political banner." Tract 71. 
 
 " So far from its being a strange 
 thing, that Protestant sects are not ' in 
 Christ,' in the same fulness that we 
 are, it is more accordant to the scheme 
 of the world, that they should lie be- 
 tween us and heathenism. Tract 47. 
 
 " We are of 'the Church,' not ' the 
 Episcopal Church ;' to call ourselves 
 Episcopalians, is to imply that we dif- 
 fer from the mass of dissenters mainly any of these essentials, may be safely 
 in church-government and form, in left to the depth of the riches of grace." 
 matter of doctrine merely, and not of Office of Bishop, p. 28 
 
 the flattery of smooth words, to the 
 mixed multitude of their [Luther and 
 Calvin] discordant followers." p. 161. 
 
 " Aye, ' there's the rub .'' But really 
 it cannot be avoided. The ' Protest- 
 ant denominations' complained of, as 
 unchurched at Oxford, may go farther 
 (to Geneva) and fare worse." p. 36. 
 
 " The seeming harshness of the in- 
 ference, the conclusion that the loss of 
 salvation, must follow the failure in 
 
 [To which same grace may be safely 
 commended the alienation of " Catho- 
 lic charity."] 
 
 " I shrink from the suspicion of a 
 more profound respect for schism in a 
 Geneva cloak than in a Koman vest- 
 ment." p. 18'J. 
 
 "I look with equal favor on the 
 schismatic of every form." p. 189. 
 
 fact, whereas the difference is, that we 
 are here and they there : we ix the 
 Chckcii, and they out of it." JJr, 
 Crit. 26. p. 341. 
 
 " I repeat, the Bishops are Apostles 
 to us. — The si EETiNGEits have no 
 head, they are all mixed together in a 
 confused way." Tract 10. 
 
 " Whatever be our private differen- 
 ces with the Homan Catholics, we may 
 join with them in condemning Socini- 
 ans, Baptists, Independents, Quakers, 
 and the like." 'Tracts, vol. 1„ p. 603. 
 
 These quotations sufficiently indicate the spirit of the Oxford 
 Tracts, and of the Bishop of New Jersey. It is a spirit of aliena- 
 tion from Protestant Churches, and a rejection of their title to the 
 fellowship of Christ. 
 
 Now, any one acquainted with the history of the Reformation, 
 knows that a strong unity of feeling existed between the Reformers 
 in England and on the Continent; so much so that the latter were 
 constantly consulted by the former, in matters pertaining to the Re- 
 formation in England. John Knox, the father of l'resbyterianism in 
 Scotland, was one of King Edward's Chaplains, assisted in revising 
 the Liturgy, and in forming the Articles; 1 and was offered a Bish- 
 
 1 M'Crie's Life of Knox. 
 
50 
 
 opric, which he refused from conscientious convictions. Through 
 the agency of Archbishop Cranner, Bucer and Martyr, both foreign 
 divines, were called to the theological chairs of Cambridge and Ox- 
 ford, during the reign of King Edward; and on the accession of 
 Queen Elizabeth, (says Strype, cka.pt. 21) " Peter Martyr, the great 
 divine was ardently invited to come again hither." Re-ordination 
 was not considered necessary to ecclesiastical preferment during the 
 reign of Elizabeth, for many divines who had been ordained abroad 
 exercised their functions in the established Church. Bishop Burnet 
 on the 23d Article says : "We are very sure that not only those who 
 penned the Articles, but the whole body of the Church, for above 
 half an age after, did, notwithstanding these irregularities, acknowl- 
 edge the foreign Churches, so constituted, to be true Churches, as to 
 all the essentials of a Church." In 1581, when collections were 
 taken up in the English Churches to assist Geneva in defending her- 
 self against a Popish army, the Queen and her Council, in their let- 
 ter to the Bishops, call this " a needful service to the Church," and 
 admit that " that poor town (Geneva) hath served in this latter age, 
 for a nursery unto God's Church." (Strype's Grindal, p. 279) And 
 Grindal, Archbishop of Canterbury, in his letter to the metropolitan 
 clergy, commends to them this effort " for the defence of so nota- 
 ble and sincere a Church." (Strype' s Grindal, p. 290.) Lord 
 Bacon also writes "Yea, and some indiscreet persons have been so 
 bold as to use dishonorable and derogatory speech and censure of 
 the Churches abroad ; and that so far as some of our men ordained 
 in foreign parts have been pronounced to be no lawful ministers." 
 In 1609, when the Scotch Bishops were consecrated, a question was 
 raised by the Bishop of Ely, whether they ought not first to be or- 
 dained Presbyters, as having received no ordination from a Bishop. 
 Bancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury, who was present, maintained 
 " that thereof there was no necessity, seeing, where Bishops could 
 not be had, the ordination given by the Presbyters must be esteemed 
 lawful, otherwise that it might be doubted if there were any lawful 
 vocation in most of the Reformed Churches." So likewise Arch- 
 bishop Usher, although he thought non-Episcopal Churches defect- 
 ive, declared : "yet for the testifying my communion with those 
 Churches, which I do love and honor as true members of the Church 
 universal, I do profess that with like affection I should receive the 
 blessed sacrament at the hands of the Dutch ministers, were I in 
 Holland, as I should do at the hands of the French ministers, if I 
 were in Charcntone." It is moreover well known that, at the Synod 
 of Dort, 1618, five English divines, including three Bishops, took 
 their seats officially as the representatives of the English Church ; 
 and though they defended their own Church, they did not unchurch 
 others. Even Archbishop Sancroft, who was a non-juror, enjoined 
 it upon his clergy, in 1680, to pray " for the universal blessed union 
 of all Reformed Churches at home and abroad against our coin- 
 mon enemies." Archbishop Wake, in 1720, says that he would not 
 have the " iron heart" of " certain raving writers," who thought 
 that " the Reformed Churches have no valid sacraments, and so 
 
57 
 
 pronounce them scarcely Christian" But it is useless to multiply 
 testimonies. The London "Christian Observer " says " it cannot 
 be denied that foreign Presbyterian ordination was practically, how- 
 ever inconsistently, reckoned valid during the feigns of Edward, Eli- 
 zabeth, the Jameses and Charleses." Although Episcopal ordination 
 since that time has been always necessary to preferment in the Eng- 
 lish Church, we do not believe that the foreign Protestant^Chufches 
 have ever been disowned by any considerable number of the Eng- 
 lish divines. The present Archbishop of Canterbury only reitera- 
 ted the sentiments of his predecessors, from Cranmtr downwards, 
 with three or four exceptions, in his recent reply to an invitation from 
 the " Church of Geneva" to attend the Jubilee in honor of the Re- 
 formation. Dating from Lambeth, 1835, he acknowledges on be- 
 half of his "brother bishops" as well as himself, their " high re- 
 spect for the Protestant Churches on the continent, and sincere con- 
 cern for their welfare." lie also alludes to the " illustrious men," 
 who were the means of " rescuing your Church [Geneva] from the 
 shackles of Papal domination." Dr. Whatcly, the present Archbishop 
 of Dublin, also maintains that " those who framed the Articles of 
 our Church, clearly recognized the claim of every Christian com- 
 munity, who hold the great fundamental doctrines of the Gospel, 
 and administer the ordinances instituted by Christ, lo be called a 
 Church of Christ." — Such expressions of fellowship with other Pro- 
 testant Churches have been generally characteristic of the Church 
 of England. They appear in strong and Scriptural contrast with 
 the unfriendly exclusiveness and alienation of certain Traclarian and 
 " Protestant Episcopal " divines. 
 
 Let us now briefly examine the particular cases of LUTHER 
 and CALVIN. 
 
 Oxford wniTF.ns agree with Bishop Doane. 
 
 " Really I hate the Reformation and 
 the Reformers more and more." 
 
 Fronde, p. 389. 
 
 " The simple faith has Buffered com- 
 promise, through an uth eet for 
 Mahtin Lutbkb and Joan Ualvut." 
 
 p. 160. 
 ; The Reformation was a limb badly " While the Germ and Gexeva.it 
 
 set — it must be broken again in order glosses are rejected, 6lc , the Catholic 
 
 to be righted." do. p. 433. 
 
 " Protestantism in its essence and in 
 all its bearing* is characteristically 
 the religion of corrupt human nature. 
 — The Protestant tone of doctrine and 
 thought is essentially anti-Christian." 
 Br. Crit. 1841, p. 27,29. 
 
 " They will see that the cry of ' Po- 
 pery ' is but a feint, devised by the 
 arch-enemy of the Chuch, whereby to 
 hurry men down the steep of ultra- 
 Protestantism to its"uniform end, — the 
 'denial of the LorJ that bought them.' " 
 Tract 77, p. 3G. 
 
 8 
 
 doctrine which Paul preached, will be 
 proclaimed again — proclaimed as at the 
 first and owned in that one Cuirch," 
 &c, p. 162. 
 
 " There is no ground for anxiety ! It 
 is but the ejection from the Church of 
 the malign influences of cant and 
 Calvinism, that now disturbs it ; cry- 
 ing with a loud voice, as of old, when 
 they come forth." p. 182. 
 " Whole Babylon is down ; unroofed 
 
 in Luther' a Reformation; 
 The walls Juhn Calvin overthrew; 
 Socinus the foundation." 
 
 Some, " no doubt would stop the de- 
 molition at the middle of the second 
 line. But it is hard to jump bui half 
 way down a precipice." p. 157-8. 
 
5S 
 
 Oxford writers agree with Bishof Doan£. 
 
 "The perverse anti-ecclesiastical "From the work of self-willbO 
 
 spirit, to which the Reformation on the German hands, making more haste 
 
 Continent gave birth."' Br. Mag, 9, than speed, there have proceeded count- 
 
 p. 359. less forms of error, heresy and schism." 
 
 Elizabetlitoivn Sermon, p. 17. 
 
 " Then many a schism o'erleaped the " Then many a 6chism o'erleaped the 
 
 banks, banks, 
 
 Genevese, Lutheran and Scotch diver- Geneykse, Lutheran and Scotch di- 
 
 sities." . versities." 
 
 Quoted in Br. J\Iitg. 9, p. 31. Quoted by Donne, do. p. 38. 
 
 "God forbid that we should ally our- " So the German Reformers take the 
 
 selves with the offspring of heresy and first step with Lutiikh and Calvin, 
 
 schism." Tract 24. and the last with Hegel and Strauss." 
 
 Quoted by Doane, do., p. 18. 
 
 This language and spirit so studiously derogatory to the Continent- 
 al Reformers, and especially to the great names of Luther and Cal- 
 vin, is the more remarkable, when we consider the influence of these 
 two eminent men in framing the Articles and the doctrinal opinions 
 of the Reformed Church of England. 
 
 As to LUTHER, we request the reader to attend to the following 
 statements given by Bishop MTivaine. " All the English Reformers 
 were wont to speak of the grave and excellent judgment of Martin 
 Luther, that most singular and chosen instrument of setting forth the 
 Gospel of Christ." (Prcf. p. 6.) "The Articles of the English 
 Church chiefly derived their origin from Lutheran formularies. 
 Some of them are drawn from the Confession of Augsburg, others 
 from that of Wittemburg, known as the Saxon Confession." " If 
 any person could but sit down to the perusal of our Articles, in utter 
 forgetfulness that Europe had ever been seriously agitated by the 
 Calvinistic dispute, 1 and with nothing in his mind but the controversy 
 between the Reformed Churches and the Church of Rome, he would 
 then clearly perceive that those Articles were constructed for the 
 most part on the Lutheran system, and principally as a rampart 
 against the almost unchristian theology of the schools. Thus we 
 have two very important auxilaries, in case of any difficulty in un- 
 derstanding the precise meaning of our standard compositions; (1) 
 the writings of Luther and his associates, especially of Melancthon, 
 together with the Augsburg Confession, which the latter composed, 
 from materials prepared by Luther; and (2) the doctrines of the 
 Church of Rome. (See Bishop M'llvaine, p. 321.) 
 
 From these remarks it is evident that Luther ought to be held in 
 high esteem, by those who profess any attachment to the Articles 
 of the Episcopal Church! 
 
 1 Bis/top Davenant observes that Melancthon " for the substance of doctrine, 
 acknowledged his agreement with Calvin." And Bishop Burnet is obliged to 
 admit concerning Luther that " it was no wonder if he, without a strict examin- 
 ing of the matter, espoused all Austin's opinions." (l?th Art.) 
 
 Toplady says " The plain truth is, Luther himself was an absolute predesti- 
 narian ; and was as able and resolute a defender of God's eternal, irrespective 
 decrees, as Calvin or any other." (613.) 
 
59 
 
 As to CALVIN, his influence upon the theology, and even Litur- 
 gy, of the Church of England was perhaps greater than that of Lu- 
 ther — certainly it was very extensive. The first Liturgy under King 
 Edward, containing a number of things at variance with the opinions 
 of the Continental Reformers, Calvin wrote to Somerset, the Lord 
 Protector, objecting to prayers for the dead, chrism, and extreme 
 unction, — which were accordingly expunged at the revision of the 
 Liturgy in 1551. Even Heylin, a High Churchman of the strict- 
 est sort, admits: "Here the business might have rested [without be- 
 ing revised] if Calvin's pragmatical spirit had not interposed." " The 
 first Liturgy, being disliked by Calvin, was brought under revision." 
 "This wa^done to give satisfaction unto Calvin's cavils." And again, 
 says Heylin : " The great business of this year was the taking down 
 of Altars by public authority; the principle motive whereunto was 
 in the first place, the opinion of some dislikes, which had been taken 
 by Calvin against the first Liturgy." So high was Calvin in King 
 Edward's favor, that Archbishop Cranmer wrote to him, saving that 
 he could not do any thing more profitable than to write often to the 
 King. Indeed no writer speaks disrespectfully of Calvin, until the 
 rise of Arminianism 60 or 70 years after his death. Inasmuch as 
 Calvin's Form of Church goverment differed from that of England, 
 the ground of the respect entertained for him must have been his 
 doctrine. 1 Indeed the great body of English Reformers were prcdes- 
 tinarians. The martyrs, Tyndal, Lambert, Barnes, Patrick Ham- 
 ilton, John Rogers, Bradford, &c, were all predestinarians in doc- 
 trine. So were Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, Hooper, Bucer, Martyr, 
 &c. The 39 Articles were drawn up by men who very evidently 
 professed Calvin's doctrine. Bishop Burnet, who was himself an 
 Arminian, says (on the 17th Article) "It is not to be denied but that 
 the Article seems to be framed according to St. Austin's doctrine." 
 44 It is very probable that those who penned it meant the decree to be 
 absolute." "The Calvinists have less occasion for scruple [than the 
 Arminians;] since the Article does seem more plainly to favor 
 them. The three cautions, that are added to it, do likewise intimate 
 that St. Austin's doctrine was designed to be settled by the Article." 
 p. 220. If any doubt existed as to the theology of those who framed 
 the Article, it would be dissipated by reading Novell's Catechism, 
 a thoroughly Calvinistic production, which was sanctioned by the 
 same Convocation that decided on the Articles, and which [accord- 
 ing to Bishop JWlhaine, p. 472.] " may be received as a most au. 
 thentic voucher of the doctrines of the Church, as understood in the 
 reign of Queen Elizabeth." Heylin himself admits that " it was 
 
 1 Jewel!, in the reign of Elizabeth, writing to some of the Continental He- 
 f.irmers, after regretting that the Queen would not sanction a more thorough 
 Reformation, adds, " as to doctrine, we have gone to the quick, and are not a 
 nail's breadth from you therein." 
 
 It is hardly necessary to state that Presbyterians prefer a different form of 
 Church government from that contained in the Articles; and of course thai 
 they take eiceptions to those Articles which relate to ihia subject. 
 
60 
 
 safer for any man in those times to have been looked upon as an 
 heathen and publican than an anti-Calvinist." Parker, Grindal and 
 Whitgift, the three Archbishops of Canterbury during the reign of 
 Elizabeth, were all Calvinists. The celebrated Lambeth Articles, 
 put forth by Whitgift, were rooted and grounded on Scriptural Cal- 
 vinism ; and " whenever occasion offered, Whitgift labored to coun- 
 tenance his own writings by those of Calvin; and especially out of 
 Calvin's Institutes, yielding him the title of a famous and learned 
 man." Strype's Whitgift, p. 583. This Archbishop ofCanterbury 
 boldly says of the Calvinistic Lambeth Articles, " I know them to be 
 sound doctrine and uniformly professed in the Church of England 
 and agreeable to the Articles of Religion established by authority." 
 Do, p. 462. Under James 1., who was himself a Calvinist, the 
 Church of England continued to adhere to the principles of the Re- 
 formers; and the divines who represented her at the Synod ofDort were 
 Calvinists. Land, however, at this time began to broach his Armin- 
 ianism ; but even in the following reign of Charles I., the great majori- 
 ty of the clergy had not swerved from the Articles. Every Archbishop 
 of Canterbury, up to Laud, was a Calvinist; the Puritans and their 
 supporters had still a large majority in Parliament ; and the Court 
 faction of Arminians was very inconsiderable in numbers. An Ar- 
 minian clergyman was refused his degree at Cambridge, as late as 
 the 10th year of Charles I. Oxford also continued to teach the doc- 
 trines of the Reformation. Indeed the Universities taught Calvinism 
 from the days of Elizabeth until the civil wars. Heylin says: " It 
 cannot be denied but that, by the error of those times, the reputation 
 which Calvin had attained to in both Universities, and the extreme 
 diligence of his followers, there was a general tendency unto his 
 opinions." He also adds that " Calvin's Book of Institutes was, for 
 the most part, the foundation upon which the young divines of those 
 times did build their studies." Heylin'' s Hist. 626, 7. Even after the 
 Restoration, under Charles II., Bishop Saunderson (who wrote the 
 Preface to the English Prayer-Book) says " Calvin's Institutes were 
 recommended to me, as indeed they were generally to all young 
 scholars in those times, as the best and perfectest system of divinity, 
 and the fittest to be laid as the groundwork of that profession. And 
 indeed my expectation was not at all deceived, in the reading of those 
 Institutes." In latter years, we do not doubt that Arminianism be- 
 came the prevailing religion of the divines of the established Church. 
 So that the celebrated saying of Lord Chatham has much truth in it, 
 that the Church of England had " Calvinistic Articles, a Popish 
 Liturgy, and an Arminian Clergy.'''' Dr. South, also, in allusion 
 to Bishop Burnet's principle of interpretation of the 39 Articles, which 
 opened the door not only to Arminians but to Arians and others, de- 
 clared that that prelate had given the Articles " forty stripes save 
 one." Notwithstanding the general decline into Arminianism which 
 has taken place since the Restoration, a large number of the most 
 pious and learned divines in the Episcopal Church, both in England 
 and America, revere the name of Calvin as a great theologian and a 
 noble Reformer. 
 
61 
 
 Such being the influence of LUTHER and CALVIN upon the 
 Reformation in England, (as well as upon the revival of religion on 
 the Continent) is it not singular that some Christian men and Church- 
 men should be found in the 19th century willing to unite with Papists 
 in reviling their characters, depreciating their services and disown- 
 ing their Churches? 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
 Having now exhibited the doctrines and the spirit of Oxfordism, 
 we shall make a few concluding observations. 
 
 1. OxFORDISM IS A FIKE-BliAND IN TIIE HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH. 
 
 It is a system which commenced its operations with open hostility 
 lo the Protestant churches. Its naming dogma of Apostolic succes- 
 sion was hurled against the temple of the '■'■Diana of Eii/iestis," to 
 overwhelm all "other denominations" with ecclesiastical fire. The 
 spirit of the whole " movement," both in England and in this coun- 
 try, is martial and aggressive. It is a spirit that provokes contro- 
 versy, that engenders strife even in its own communion, that arrays 
 Bishop against Bishop, clergy against clergy, periodical against peri- 
 odical ; — a spirit that casts out of the pale of Christian fellowship the 
 Churches of the Reformers, and builds itself up by the promulga- 
 tion of doctrines, adverse to the principles and charity of the Bible. 
 Such a "movement " must do incalculable injury to the cause of 
 Protestantism in general. And among its almost necessary re- 
 sults is the reproach it brings upon the Episcopal Church ; exciting 
 among other Churches hostility to her institutions, and a suspicion 
 of their legitimate tendencies. Nor can we doubt — from the rising 
 opposition among all denominations in our land to High-Church 
 Episcopacy, an opposition which is the antagonist of the unfriendly 
 exclusiveness that gives it birth— that the Oxford, High-Church 
 party are engaged in an enterprise injurious to the interests of true 
 religion. A system which foments so much discord in its own 
 Church, and so much resistance from other Churches, presents kw 
 scriptural claims for its adoption. 
 
 2. Oxfordism is directly contrary to the Articles of the 
 Church of England. No Church in Christendom contains, within 
 so small a compass, such a complete protestation against the Oxford 
 doctrines as is contained in the 39 Articles. The Articles were 
 framed with an especial reference to that corrupt system, overthrown 
 by the Reformers, which the Tractarians are now laboring with en- 
 ergetic perseverance to rebuild. The doctrines of grace, beginning 
 with justification by faith— nil drawn directly from Scripture alone — 
 are in irreconcilable opposition to the doctrines of the Tracts. AH 
 the errors of Oxfordism, from Baptismal justification to the end (not 
 of the chapter, for that is nut y ' ended] >f the present movement, 
 receive from the Articles the most authoritative and uncompromising 
 condemnation. Whilst the Articles urge the sinner to go to Christ 
 for justification, and to exhibit a holy life as its evidence, the Trac- 
 
tarians point to the Baptismal Register and to the List of Church 
 communicants. The whole system of Oxfordism is, in the lan- 
 guage of Bishop M'llvaine, "the very reverse of that which we 
 have learned from the Scriptures, and which our Fathers have de- 
 clared to us;" — "an abandonment of all we have been taught by 
 our Church to believe, to be the true, the narrow, the only way that 
 leadeth unto life." Whatever may be claimed in favor of Oxford- 
 ism from certain passages in the Liturgy, it requires a stronger op- 
 position than No. 90 vs. 39 to break down the Articles of the 
 Protestant Reformed Church of England. 
 
 3. Oxfordism is essentially Romish divinity. Its doctrines 
 are Romish doctrines. Although all its followers are not prepared to 
 bow before the Pope, they agree in the fundamental elements of the 
 Ralian plan of salvation. Luther's was a true saying of Henry 
 VIII, that he " killed the Pope's body, but saved his soul alive.'''' 
 The Tractarians exhibit the same royal (loyal) concern for the Papal 
 life. They adopt in substance or in " rudiment," Baptismal justifi- 
 cation, mortal and venial sins, Purgatory, Prayers for the dead, 
 Saints' days, the substantial Presence, Sacramental Signs, Mumme- 
 ries in Church Service, Reserve, Tradition, Apostolical Succession; 
 &c, &c. — in short, the distinguishing peculiarities of Romanism, 
 The " Pope's soul" is safe enough under such care. These doc- 
 trines are " as far asunder from Protestant doctrines as Trent and 
 Heaven." And the persons who maintain them, "unroof the edi- 
 fice and deface the walls of Christian faith, leaving nothing thereof 
 but loose altar stones for the idolatrous sacrifices of Romanist?." 1 
 In short, Oxfordism contains " the very soul and strength of all 
 that is evil in the Romanism against which our Reformers protested 
 to their last breath out of the furnace of fire." Bishop J\rilvai?ic, 
 p. 522. 
 
 4. Oxfordism demonstrates the fallibility of forms, as a 
 means of preserving purity of doctrine. There can be no question 
 that public Standards, Articles of belief, Confessions of Faith, &c, 
 are all-important in maintaining among different Churches the true 
 doctrines of Scripture. No Church, however, has ever yet entirely 
 succeeded in preventing errors from creeping in unawares. Some 
 divines have been accustomed to claim more for the Episcopal Church, 
 on this point, than history will bear them out in affirming. Let us 
 hear, for example, our friend Bishop Doane: 
 
 "Not to preach Christ in the Church is to frustrate the purposes of God, 
 and make the crors of Jesus ineffectual in the salvation of sinners. Go. follow 
 it through the world. Go to Germany, go to Switzerland, go to the Puritan 
 pulpits of Great Britain, and come buck with the pilgrim fathers to the shores 
 of our own New England And what, to the descendants of those unshrink- 
 ing witnesses of Jesus, is his Cross now become, but as to the Greeks ' foolish- 
 ness,' and as to the Jews a ' slumbling block V This I say, where the order of 
 the Apostles has been preserved with the truth of the Apostles, there has been 
 no such fearful exhibition ; where the Cross of the Lord Jesus Christ has been 
 
 Jackson, quoted by Bishop M'llvaine. 
 
63 
 
 preserved in the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, it has suffered no 6uch 
 degradation. Convocation Sermon '38, p. 11. 
 
 " What has been the effect in Germany and Switzerland ? Where are those 
 who started on the principles of the Reformation, yet Sfparated themselves from 
 the Church 1 Where is their faith — what is it] I have lived in a land peo- 
 pled by those who emigrated from this country. It is the fashion to call some 
 of them the pilgrim fathers. . . The rankest enormities of doctrine are now 
 rife among the descendants of the pilgrim puritans that ever festered on the 
 face of the earth. . . This comes of the separation of Uod's truth from God's 
 Church." Jlildress at Coventry, England. 
 
 Again. Bishop D. speaks of the want, in other Churches, "of those iw- 
 
 HEHENT PIIIXCIPLES OF U.NIOX WHICH ALONE CAN BIMI IN ONE LARGE MASSES 
 
 of mankind;" and adds, in reference to other denominations thus destitute, 
 "Meanwhile they turn instinctively to US." [! ! !] Missionary Bishop, p. 13. 
 
 Yes, truly. By the "instinctive" power of the association of 
 ideas, we turn to the unfortunate Church of England to behold the 
 fearful divisions which now make her the object of sympathy through- 
 out Reformed Christendom. When have "ranker enormities of 
 doclrine" sprung up than those, which, in the language of Bishop 
 M'llvaine, are making at Oxford "another gospel?" Alas, for 
 the infallibility (fur the claim amounts to that) of the Church of Eng- 
 land ! The dogma of Rome is hardly more absurd ! 
 
 But let us briefly show from the history of the English Church 
 since the Reformation, that her forms have failed to secure this boast- 
 ed uniformity of doctrine. — For more than half a century after its 
 secession from Rome, the leading divines of the Reformed Church, 
 with all the Archbishops of Canterbury, were professedly Calvinis- 
 tic in doctrine. This was in accordance with the 39 Articles, which 
 were framed on the sub-lapsarian or milder form of predestination, 
 before Arminius was born- In the reign of Charles I, and the pri- 
 macy of Laud (both of whom were afterwards brought to the block) 
 Arminianism, which had been creeping in during the preceding reign, 
 became more and more popular under the operation of " the inhe- 
 rent principles of Union" in the Church. In the progress of this 
 singular ecclesiastical revolution, " large masses of men" who be- 
 came dissatisfied with Church and State, overturned both Arminian- 
 ism and Royalty. The orthodox English divines were now assem- 
 bled by order of Parliament at Westminster Hall to re-establish the 
 Church upon the principles of the Reformation, and to re-model the 
 defective government of the hierarchy. These divines, all of whom 
 had been episcopally ordained, were unanimously Calvinistic in sen- 
 timent. They formed the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, — a 
 noble monument of their piety and learning, whose principles, with 
 those of the 39 Articles, will be remembered in glory, when hierar- 
 chies, Church forms, and the kingdoms of this world have all van- 
 ished away. — In the meanwhile the civil Revolution progressed ; and 
 in spite of the efforts of the Episcopalians and Presbyterians, King 
 Charles was beheaded without the honors of martyrdom, (which 
 were bestowed afterwards ;) and Cromwell was elevated to the place 
 that had been occupied by the former " Heads of the Church," four 
 of whom had been male and two female. Independency, with all 
 sorts of " heresies and schisms," was now triumphant in the midst 
 
64 
 
 of the confusion of Episcopacy and Presbytery. The " inherent 
 principles of union " contained in the 39 Articles and in the Confes- 
 sion of Faith were unable for a time to resist the power of " large 
 masses of men." 
 
 After the Revolution, Arminianism and looseness of morals wero 
 introduced by the High-Church Court party under Charles II, wbo 
 himself died a Papist. His successor, James II, was also a Papist ; 
 but before this " Head of the Church" had time to re-establish Ro- 
 manism, he was compelled to abdicate, not without leaving many 
 staunch friends among the Episcopalian, non-juring divines, who 
 kept up a spirited ecclesiastical controversy about the allegiance due 
 to a Papal King. During the reign of Queen Anne, the High- 
 Church Tories attempted to carry out their principles by means of 
 State penalties and disabilities of the most atrocious character, which 
 kept the Church and nation in a state of continual agitation. On 
 the accession of the House of Hanover, religious liberty was re- 
 established in the State; but the Church found herself in the most 
 mournful and humiliating condition. Arianism, which afterwards 
 spread into the dissenting Churches, invaded the Church of England 
 through the auspices of Dr. Samuel Clark, Rector of St. James, 
 Westminster, — which station he occupied until his death. Infidelity 
 and Atheism also exerted a pestilential influence throughout the 
 land ; the Arminianism of the age imposing few restraints against 
 the influence of the writings of Lord Bolingbroke, Lord Shaftsbury, 
 Collins and others. At this period, vital religion exerted but little 
 sway in England; and the morals even of the clergy were loose 
 and corrupt. Says the present Bishop of Calcutta : " The decline 
 
 FROM THE PRINCIPLES OF THE REFORMATION, which had begun 
 
 •under our first Charles, and which had been lamentably increased 
 by the fanaticism of the Commonwealth, and the latituclinarianism 
 and immorality of the times following the restoration of the Royal 
 Family, still chilled the warmth of public devotion, and the efficien- 
 cy of parochial ministrations. The infidel writers, fostered by this 
 state of things, had been refuted indeed by argument, but had not 
 been sufficiently repelled by the most powerful of all weapons — the 
 holu doctrines and consistent lives of the ministers of the Christian 
 Church." 
 
 About this period, (fortunately for England and the world) there 
 arose within the established Church, a new society, called Metho- 
 dists, which now comprizes very " large masses of mankind" in- 
 deed. The Articles, the Liturgy, the Homilies, the Slate Organization, 
 the Universities, the Bishops, were no obstacles to John Wesley. — 
 His followers increased, in spite of all " the inherent principles of 
 union" that were in the Church of "Apostolical Succession." And 
 one great reason of the rapid progress of Methodism, was the deplo- 
 rable laxity of doctrine and life in the establishment. 
 
 The London " Christian Observer" says of its own Church : 
 
 " If we advert to the days of Whitfield and Wesley, we shall find that the 
 great charge against those " enthusiasts," as they were called, was that they 
 
65 
 
 preached justification by faith instead of works; the majority of the clergy de- 
 nouncing the doctrine of justification by faith as hostile to the interests of moral- 
 ity. In this shape, the dispute came down to the present century. Our clergy 
 had nearly lost sight of the true Protestant Scriptural doctrine. . . The'practice 
 was not then common of using the language of Scripture and our own Articles, 
 but of appropriating the justification, predicated in them, to baptism. . . The 
 clergy very generally disclaimed altogether the doctrine of justification by faith, 
 and earnestly [■?] exhorted men to justify themselves hy good living. They in 
 fact adopted the Papists' second justification, losing sight of the first." Vol. 38, 
 p. 496. 
 
 Toplady, of the established Church, hears even stronger testi- 
 mony of the general decline of religion in his times, or just before 
 the American Revolution. 
 
 " Where shall we stop? We have already forsook the good old paths trod 
 by Christ and the Apostles: paths in which our Reformers also trod, our mar- 
 tyrs, our bishops, our universities, and the whole of this Protestant,/, e. of this 
 once Calvinistic nation. Our Liturgy, our Articles and our Homilies, it is true, 
 slill keep possession of our Church walls: but we pray, we subscribe, we as- 
 sent one way ; we believe, we preach, we write another. In the desk, we are 
 verbal Calvinists ; but no sooner do we ascend a lew steps above the desk, [into 
 the pulpit] than we forget the grave character in which we appeared below, 
 and tncr the performance with a few minutes' entertainment compiled from the 
 fragments bequeathed to us by Ptlagius and Arminitts ; not to say by Arius, 
 Socinus, and others still -worse than they. ... Is thkre a single heresy, 
 
 THAT F.VFIt ANNOYED THE CHRISTIAN WortLl), WHICH HAS NOT ITS PRESXHT 
 PARTI ZANS AMONG THOSE WHO PROFESS CONFORMITY TO THE CllCRCH OF 
 
 England J" p. 275. 
 
 Let us hear the testimony of the immortal YV ilber force : 
 
 'Towards the close of the last century [i. e. alter the restoration and before 
 1700] the divines of the established church professed to make it their chief ob- 
 ject, to inculcate the moral and practical precepts of Christianity, which they 
 conceived before to have been too much neglected; but without sufficiently 
 maintaining, often even without justly layinc, the grand foundation of a sinner's 
 acceptance with Cod, or pointing out how the practical precep's of Christianity 
 grow out of her peculiar doctrines, and are inseparably connected with them. 
 By this fatal prror, the very genius and essentia! nature of Christianity was im- 
 perceptibly changed. She no longer retained her peculiar characters, or pro- 
 duced that appropriate frame of spirit by which her followers had been charac- 
 terized. Facilis descensus. The example thus set was followed during the 
 present century. Thus the peculiar doctrines of Christianity went more and 
 more out of sight ; and as might naturally have been expected, the moral system 
 itself also, being robbed of that which should have supported it with life and 
 nutriment, began to wither and decay. At length, in our own days [1 797] 
 these peculiar doctrines have almost altogether vanished from the view. Even 
 in the greater number of our sermons, scarcely uny traces (f them are to be 
 found." Pract. Chr., chap, G. 
 
 These testimonies are sufficiently strong and humiliating in regard 
 to the practical variations from the Articles and Liturgy, which so 
 generally prevailed throughout the Church. Hut we ought not to 
 omit mentioning the petition of nearly two hundred and fifty of the 
 established clergy, in 1772, presented to Parliament for relief in the 
 terms of Church subscription. This movement seems to have origi- 
 nated with the Socinians ; but it was opposed in Parliament " entire- 
 ly on political grounds." During the discussion, says Robert Hall, 
 9 
 
66 
 
 (in his Review of Lindsley's Memoirs) " there was not one member 
 of Parliament who expressed his belief in the Articles. Mr. 
 H. Stanley opposed the petition, as it tended to disturb the peace of 
 the country, which, in his opinion, " ought to be the subject of a 
 fortieth Article, which would be well worth all the thirty-nine." 
 With such levity and contempt (adds Hall) was the national Creed 
 treated at that time. The fact is that, through the irreligion and sec- 
 ularity of the clergy, evangelical truth was nearly effaced from the 
 minds of the members of the establishment in the higher ranks, and 
 that an indolent acquiescence in established formularies had succeed- 
 ed to the ardor, with which the great principles of religion were em- 
 braced at the Reformation." 
 
 The revival of religion in the Church of England, which follow- 
 ed these disastrous and evil days, was owing mainly, under God, to 
 the instrumentality of Wilberfore, Hannah Moore and their associ- 
 ates, who made the " Christian Observer" the organ of their senti- 
 ments. Very great progress was made in re-modelling the practical 
 religion of the country. Indeed no period in the history of the es- 
 tablished Church since the Reformation has probably witnessed more 
 evangelical piety than the period commencing with the present cen- 
 tury. Yet, lo ! in the midst of these promises, the Oxford heresy 
 bursts forth ! Like the volcanoes near Rome, its rumblings, indis- 
 tinct at first, have been followed by smoke and flame, and fearful 
 agitation. This development at Oxford of Italian elements presa- 
 ges evil to the unfortunate, and as yet we fear unhumbled, Church 
 of England. It demonstrates that vain is the wisdom of man, and 
 futile all the forms of outward defence, unless the Lord overshadow 
 the temple with his glory. 
 
 On closing this brief view of the fallibility of liturgies as exem- 
 plified in the English Church, we do not deny that they may have 
 exercised many beneficial influences. But we see nothing in them 
 that is calculated to preserve religion, when the Spirit of God is not 
 in the hearts of the clergy, nor do we see any thing in mere forms 
 to cherish spiritual influences. To boast of forms is very natural 
 in persons who entertain unscriptural and extravagant views of 
 Church order and government; but far better is it to follow the ad- 
 vice of inspiration : " Let him that glorieth, glory in the Lord." 
 
 We merely express an humble opinion in a matter of history, 
 when we declare our conviction that the Presbyterian Churches both 
 in this country and in Scotland, and also our Congregational Church- 
 es have, without Liturgies, possessed at least as much sound doc- 
 trine and piety, during the last and present centuries, as were enjoy- 
 ed in the Church of England, according to the statements of her 
 own divines. It cannot be denied that the Episcopal Church in this 
 country, previously to the American Revolution, was in regard to 
 morals and evangelical truth, in a most humiliating and woful con- 
 dition, notwithstanding her Articles and Liturgy. It also appears to 
 us to be a fact in history that there has been, during the same period, 
 at least as much looseness of doctrine, including Socinianism, in 
 
67 
 
 the English Church, as in those American Churches, whose founders 
 " it has been the fashion [according to truth] to call the Pilgrim Fa- 
 thers." 
 
 Whatever may be our opinions as to the past, the Episcopal Church 
 is warned by her present agitations to refrain from boasting over- 
 much in regard to her " infallible " Liturgies. May she be endued 
 with power from on high to purge off the vile fruit of Romanism, 
 which has been "grafted in" by insidious hands! May the spirit 
 of the Reformation, which framed her Articles again appear to carry 
 them out in the power of their own glorious truth ! Then shall 
 Tridentine doctrine no more pollute the sanctuary of England, nor 
 Gregory stand in triumph over the grave of Cranmcr ! 
 
68 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 General opinion of Oxford Tractarians, 
 On the Popish tendency of Oxfordism, 
 
 1. Justification, * 
 
 2. Faith, - - - . 
 
 3. Sacraments . . . Baptism, 
 
 4. Sin after Baptism . . . Penance, 
 
 5. Mortal and Venial Sins, 
 
 6. Purgatory, 
 
 7. Prayers for the Dead, 
 
 8. Invocation of Saints, 
 
 9. New Saints' Days, 
 
 10. Transubstantiation, 
 
 Prothesis, Altar, &c — Note, 
 
 11. Age of Miracles, 
 
 12. Extreme Unction, 
 
 13. Anointing at Baptism and Confirmation, 
 
 14. Sacramental Signs, 
 
 15. Sacrament of Marriage, 
 
 16. Celibacy of the Clergy . . . Monasteries, 
 
 17. Novelties in Church Service, 
 19. Use of Roman Prayer-Books, &.C., 
 
 19. Service in an unknown tongue, 
 
 20. Disuse of Preaching, 
 
 21. Reserve in communicating Religious Knowledge, 
 
 22. Image-worship, ... 
 
 23. Tradition . . . Bishop Doane's singular views, 
 
 24. Apostolic Succession . . . High-Church Claim?, &c., 
 
 The English Succession through the Pope, — Note, 
 The American Succession, — Note, 
 Unchurching other Churches, - 
 Unreasonable abuse of Luther and Calvin, 
 
 25. Conclusion — 
 
 1. Oxford Divinity is a fire-brand in the Church, 
 
 2. " " against the 39 Articles, 
 
 3. " " essentially Romish, 
 
 4. " " shows the fallibility of Liturgies 
 
 in preserving doctrinal purity, 
 
 5 
 6 
 9 
 16 
 18 
 22 
 25 
 27 
 29 
 30 
 31 
 32 
 34 
 35 
 36 
 36 
 37 
 38 
 39 
 40 
 40 
 40 
 41 
 41 
 42 
 43 
 50 
 52 
 53 
 55 
 57 
 
 61 
 61 
 62 
 
POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 The following Card appeared in the Burlington Gazette of Feb- 
 ruary 10th. 
 
 "BISHOP DOANE vs. BISHOP M'lLVAINE, on oxfobd theologt." 
 
 "The only notice I have to take of this pamphlet, 'by a Presbyterian,' is to 
 say, that the professed history of the Cross on St. Mary's Church, at p. 37, is 
 entirely untrue ; and to refer whom it may concern to the Wardens and Vestry, 
 for the authority for this contradiction. G. W. Doane. 
 
 Riverside, 6 February, 1843. 
 
 A REPLY. 
 
 The Wardens and Vestry, who have been consulted, by no means sustain 
 the Rector's assertion that "the professed history of the Cross on St. Mary's 
 Church is entirely untrue." For in the following particulars, the statement in 
 the note is found to be "entirely true;" viz. 1. A Cross was eight years ago 
 put on St. Mary's Church. — 2. There was a strong feeling against it in the Ves- 
 try ; so much so that — 3. The Cross had to be taken down; and — 4. It was 
 6ecrctly taken down in the night. I find that my chief mistake, and an important 
 one, consists in arraying the Rector and Vestry against each other officially. 
 This I had understood to have been the fact from one of the most prominent 
 Vestrymen in the Church, with whom I had an accidental conversation a few 
 weeks since, on board of a steamboat. I endeavored to give the substance of the 
 information communicated; and although there were a number of items, I be- 
 lieve after all that I have failed only in one material point. After the lapse of 
 a number of years, it is not strange that a person's memory should confound 
 opposition expressed with opposition expressed officially. Both my own mis- 
 take and his, by the by, show how very hazardous it is to rely upon tbaiu- 
 tio>-s. 
 
 The additional explanations which seem now to be rendered necessary, in 
 order to a full understanding of the various particulars connected with the his- 
 tory of this famous Cross, are the following: 
 
 A plan for improving the church, with a Cross in front of the tower, was 
 adopted by the Vestry, a majority of them, however, not noticing the Cross at 
 the time. When the building was finished — to their great surprise, as well as 
 that of many in the community, of all "denominations" — lo ! a Cross made 
 quite a Catholic appearance on the apex of the pediment! Considerable oppo- 
 sition immediately manifested itself, both in the Vestry and out of it. Those 
 members, who objected to the Cross, declared that they had never knowingly 
 sanctioned it; but it was replied that, by voting to adopt the plan in general, 
 they had sanctioned all the particulars. An adjournment having been carried 
 to postpone a direct vote, after a very warm meeting, one of the Vestry shortly 
 after declared that unless the Cross was taken down very soon, it should be 
 pulled down. This alarmed some of the more cautious, who thereupon em- 
 ployed a carpenter to take down Cross and acroterium in the night — without 
 the knowledge of the Vestry. A very profound silence was observed for some 
 time in regard to this most singular and mysterious disappearance. Even many 
 members of the Vestry obtained no information whatever about it ; and three of 
 them informed me that it was only a few weeks since, that ihey became ac- 
 quainted with the circumstances of the transaction. This " reserve in the com- 
 munication of religious knowledge" may have been justifiable at the time; but 
 in regard to that, I express no opinion. 
 
 " A PnESBYTEniAN." 
 
 P. S. Since writing the above, I learn that the "Greek Cross," which was 
 sawed down in the night, has been re-placed at the apex of the pediment! I 
 rejoice to learn that this work was done in the day-time. This is merely states! 
 as a matter of its curious history. 
 
70 
 
 The note on page 37, when corrected, reads as follows: 
 
 It may be of public use to state that this Cross was not allowed to remain on 
 St. Mary's Church. The good intentions of the Rector were frustrated by tho 
 Christian opposition and perseverance of the Church Wardens and Vestrymen, 
 many of whom were not aware that a Cross was in the Plan until it made its 
 appearance on the acroterium at the apex of the pediment. The " Greek Cross " 
 looked so much like the Latin Cross that the difference could not be transla- 
 ted ; and of course considerable excitement in regard to it immediately en- 
 sued. In the Vestry fortunately were " men who knew their rights, and know- 
 ing, dared maintain them." A determination was manifested to have the Greek 
 Cross taken down from its ecclesiastical elevation. In the midst of the contest, 
 it suddenly disappeared on a dark night. Tradition reports that the work of 
 demolition was done thoroughly, under the direction of one or two of the 
 Vestry, with the approval of the Rector ; and that the Greek Cross and acro- 
 terium were deposited in several "rudiments" in the cellar of an adjoining 
 building. Thus triumphed the Protestant Episcopalians of Burlington! 
 
 The passer-by, as he looks up to this Cross, which is once more on St. Mary's 
 Church, beholds one of the " efficacious symbols " of Oxford theology. Like 
 that theology — which is a collection of Popish fragments — this Cross has 
 been re-fitted from its state of " rudiment," and formed into an aspiring "de- 
 velopment;" and although, like the Tracts, it was once put down, it has again 
 risen into ecclesiastical notice, at the See of the Diocesan. — Truly, as Bishop 
 M'llvaine says, " Popery is on the alert." 
 
 A few members of the Vestry, without much reflection, (?) ordered this "addi- 
 tional restoration." It is to be hoped, on one account, that the Cross will 
 not be again removed ; because this outward emblem of Popery, (which some 
 of the wisest commentators, as Sir Isaac Newton, consider the " mark of the 
 beast") is a very consistent badge of the " Catholic" theology of Oxford. 
 The two systems are as much alike as two Crosses. — How important that the 
 people should be instructed in regard to this new theology, which in the lan- 
 guage of Bishop M'llvaine, is "another gospel," and which aims at changes 
 in the ecclesiastical edifice, both outward and spiritual, from corner-stone to pe- 
 diment! Far different from this theology was the Episcopacy of the Refor- 
 mers ! 
 
 SKETCH OP THE SUPERSTITION OF THE OUTWARD CROSS. 
 
 Having given a sketch of the rise and progress of St. JWary's Cross, it may 
 be interesting to extend our inquiries to the origin of the general practice. The 
 general history of the Cross will be found hardly more evangelical or dignified 
 than that of St. Mary's in particular. 1 
 
 The Cross, always an object of pious regard to the mind, was in the first corrup- 
 tions of Christianity imitated externally by signs and crossings, such as are now 
 common with Roman Catholics. Tertullian, A. D. 200, is the first to mention 
 these puerile manipulations. But as superstition increased, it resorted to a tan- 
 gible form, as the means of indulging itself with freer scope. Hence the device 
 of the outward emblem. Nevertheless, before the middle of the fourth centu- 
 ry, Crosses were not used on Churches. According to Bingham, "That they 
 were not in use for the three first ages, seems evident enough from the silence 
 of all the writers of those times." 
 
 1 The writer has heard the re-erection of this Greek Cross ascribed to a desire 
 to "compliment" the Hector. This calls to mind the anecdote of the French- 
 man, who, going into a Church for confession and not finding the Priest there, 
 politely left his card on tho Altar and gracefully retired. 
 
71 
 
 The practice of honoring external Crosses received an impulse from two 
 circumstances, which were swiftly improved to evil by the Popish tendencies 
 of the fourth and fifth centuries. Que circumstance was the miraculous 
 sign which the Emperor Constantino is rcpoited to have seen in the heavens. 1 
 The other and most influential circumstance was the reputed discovery by 
 the Empress Helena, mother of Constantino, of the true Cross on which the 
 Saviour died. The story is, that having discovered in digging at Golgotha 
 three Crosses, together with the inscription written by Pilate, the Cross of the 
 Redeemer was miraculously verified by its restoring a dead woman to life ! 2 The 
 Empress gave a part of it to the city of Jerusalem where it was enshrined in 
 silver; and another part to the Emperor, who considered it the Palladium of 
 Constantinople, and had it encased in his own stalue, around which the people 
 were wont to assemble with great homage. Pilgrims flocked in crowds to Je- 
 rusalem to obtain fragments of the Cross ; and as so many pieces must have 
 soon exhausted the supply and stopped the traffic, the Cross was said to be en- 
 dued with the power of a miraculous self-renewal, by which although contin- 
 ually diminished it remained entire. No wonder if, under such encourage- 
 ments, it became an object of religious adoration, and was deposited piecemeal 
 on the altars of Churches as a most sacred relic. 
 
 After this, history informs us that the custom arose of putting Crosses over 
 the altars of Churches, and on the "apex of the pediment." Superstition mul- 
 tiplied the sacred emblem far and wide. Chrysostom, who wrote a few years 
 after Helena's discovery, says : "The Cross is to be seen every where in honour, 
 in the private house and the public market-place, in the desert, in the high-way, 
 en mountains, in forests, on hills, on the sea, in ships, on islands, on our beds 
 and on our clothes, on our arms, in our chambers, in our banquets, on gold and 
 silver vessels, on gems, in the paintings on our walls, on the bodies of diseased 
 beasts, on human bodies possessed by devils, in war and peace, by day, by night, 
 in the dances of feasting and the meetings of the fasting and the praying." 
 Two Cl.urch festivals were speedily established in honour of the Cross ; one of 
 which was called The exaltation of the Cross, because on Easter Sunday the 
 Bishop of Jerusalem ascended to a conspicuous place, and held up on high a 
 piece of the Cross for the veneration of the multitude. The history of these 
 and of subsequent times bears abundant testimony to the idolatrous reverence 
 paid to Crosses, images, pictures, relics, crucifixes, &c.; and shows that the 
 
 1 This miracle of Constantino's Cross rests almost entirely upon the authority 
 of Eusebius, and has been called in question with very great reason. Eusebius 
 himself makes no mention of the miracle in his ecclesiastical history, written 
 twelve years after the event, although he narrates Constantino's victory. The 
 first record of it is in his life of the deceased Emperor, after an interval of a 
 quarter of a century. Other historians mention the occurrence as having taken 
 place in a dream ; and it is very remarkable that the fathers of the fourth and 
 fifth centuries (who were Dot averra to the marvellous) do not record the mira- 
 cle. It hardly seems (o rest or. better authority tii.ui the miracle of Helena, 
 which Chrysostom narrates as true, and which Cyril gloiifies. 
 
 • Jlfp.JWwmon, in a long Essay on Miracles, prefixed to F/eurt/'s Keel. Hist. 
 intimites his belief in the miraculous discovery of the true Cross. He also ex- 
 pressly states that the evidence in Favor of the alleged miracles of the third and 
 fourth centuries " is applicable in defence of those of the medieval period." and 
 by inference of those of the present times. According to Oxtord ami Home, 
 miracles have never ceased in the Church. This view is necessary in order to 
 sustain the claims of tradition as a co-equal with Scripture. If the lathers could 
 work miracles, then their writing* have the same kind of divine support as 
 those of Peter and Paul. Hence Xetoman agrees with "Catholic antiquity" in 
 crediting Helena's discovery, and in his general views of the continuance of mi- 
 raculous agency. Who «/#<>, with some •• reserve," entertains very similar sen- 
 timents? (Sec "Oxford Divinity by Bitliop DoatU and Bjsbop M'llvainc," 
 p. 35.) 
 
72 
 
 ■nameful idolatries of saint and image worship, together with the endless pue- 
 rilities of Roman Catholic ceremonies, soon obtained their immense sway. 
 
 For many ages, the Cross has been specially identified with the Church of 
 Rome. Some of the ablest commentators have supposed it to be the " mark- of 
 the beast," so frequently mentioned in Revelation. It is indeed the public and 
 private badge of Anti-christ. It is carried before the Pope wherever he goes. It 
 adorns the vestments of Popes, Cardinals, Bishops and Priests; it is erected in- 
 side and outside of their Churches ; it is prominent, both in outward form and 
 by manipulation, in all their services of religion, public or private. The super- 
 stitious do not consider an oath obligatory, unless there is a Cross on the Bible. 
 No Baptism occurs without this sign *, — no Confirmation, no Ordination, no 
 marriage, no confession of sin. Even bells and images cannot be consecrated, 
 or the dead laid out for burial, or scarcely any act of a public or private nature 
 performed, without this Papal mark. The Crusaders made the Cross their 
 standard of war; and in the presence of its form of mercy, the Inquisitors have 
 ever slaughtered the faithful witnesses of God. From the earliest beginnings 
 of the Papal power, the apostasy has existed under the form of religion and 
 with the very emblem of the crucifixion. It is not without reason, therefore, 
 that the external mark of Popery has been thought to be the " mark of the 
 beast," 
 
 Sir Isaac Nkwton, whose reputation gives respect to his opinion, and who 
 studied and wrote upon the Book of Revelation, distinctly declares that, in his 
 judgment, the "mark of the beast" is + the Cross. He reiterates the opinion 
 towards the close of his dissertation. 
 
 Faber, a distinguished living writer on the prophecies, and also a member 
 of the Church of England, says: «• With regard to the ' mark of the beast,' I 
 think with Sir Isaac Newton, it is the Cross." 
 
 Scott also in his Commentaries mentions this interpretation favourably. 
 
 Whatever be the interpretation, it is certain that the Oxfordists are reviving 
 the acknowledged symbols of Popery. What can be more natural than that 
 those, who go back to Popish doctrines, should also go back to Popish practices 1 
 To set up a Cross on a Protestant Church is only a declaration that the doc- 
 trines of the Reformation are there growing in less and less repute. This must 
 be a matter of grief to the evangelical portion of a Church, whose fathers sealed 
 in blood their abhorrence of Roman superstition. Even in the reign of Henry 
 VIII, A. D. 1535, the spirit of the English people would scarcely tolerate Crosses 
 (Buinet, I. p. 135;) and in the reign of Elizabeth, one of her Bishops, who 
 assisted in framing the Prayer-Book, refused to preach in the Queen's chapel 
 where there was a crucifix over the Communion table ; alleging that " the 
 matter of images hath always been a gainsay since first they entered into the 
 Church." (Strype, jSpp. 22.) And another of the divines of the Reformation 
 maintained that, "from the fathers' own writings, for four hundred years after 
 Christ, there was not, in th« place of God's service, any such 6ign [as the 
 Cross] erected." (Strype, ch. 46.) Yet in these degenerate <Says, friend JVeiuman 
 has placed in the Church at Littlemore, (attached to his own parish, St. Mary's, 
 Oxford,) a Cross over the Altar, alter the Popish model. So characteristic of 
 Tractarianism is the veneration of this outward symbol, that some of its advo- 
 cates have ventured to use a Popish vestment with embroidered Crosses. 
 (Ch. Obs. 38. p. 174.) This system of error will go on developing itself both 
 in England and in this country. It will make its insidious encroachments, and 
 at last connect itself so far with Popery that the yeomanry of the land, if the 
 clergy shrink back, must demand a new Reformation to restore to them the reli- 
 gion of the Apostles and the simplicity of the Gospel ! 
 
 Thus it appears from history that for the first three or four hundred years, 
 Crosses were not erected on Churches — that they were brought into use by su- 
 perstition — that for ages they have been identified with Papery — that at the 
 Reformation they were very generally discontinued — that theywere once pulled 
 down at Burlington— and thai those frutestunt clergy who now aim at restoring 
 them, are daily departing from Protestantism and moving step by step (vesti- 
 gia nulla retrorsum) to the dark regions of Popery. 
 
Princeton Theological SemmarH-Speet j.'ji'jj' 
 
 1 1012 01082 0258 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 ^___^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 MAMtiMmfc 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD 
 
 
 
 PRINTEO IN U S A.