/

"Ml. ^52

)ii

A LETTER TO THE LAITY

OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND

ON THE SUBJECT OF

RECENT MISREPRESENTATIONS

CHURCH PRIISrCIPLES.,

BY THE REVEREND ALEXANDER WATSON, M. A.,
OF CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE* CAMBRIDGE;
LICENTIATE IN THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OP DURHAM;
ASSISTANT ailNISTER OF ST. JOHN'S, CHELTENHAM,

By one Spirit we are all baptized ihto one Body* 1 Cor. xii, 13.
The Church which is His Body. Eph. i, 28.
Our faith is the same from the beginning and cannot become new*
BisJwp Jermiy Taylor.
It is the entire want of a knowledge of Church History which causes so much needless or
Useless controversy; it Is the entire absence of all knowledge of the necessity for it, which makes
controversy constantly so disgusting.
The late Rev. Hufjh James Jtose, Chaplain to His Grace the ArchbisJtop
qf Canterbury, <5' late Christian Advocate in the University of Cambridge.

LONDON:
J. G. F. & J. RIVINGTON,
JAMES BURNS, AND HOULSTON AND STONEMAN.
LEEDS : T. W. GREEN. CHELTENHAM : W. B. HILL.
MDCCCXLII.

TO
THE RIGHT HONORABLE
WILLIAM EWAHT GLADSTONE,
LATE STUDENT OF CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD,
M.P. FOR NEWARK,
VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE,
AND
MASTER OF THE MINT,
&c., &c.
Dear Sir, In acting upon your kind permission
to inscribe these pages to you, I feel how unworthy
an offering I am making to one who in these trying
times is at once the ornament and example of that
body to whom this Letter is addressed. The whole
Church, laity, and clergy alike, are much your debtors
for your valuable contributions to the literature of your
country ; and our hope must be that you may be pre-
a2

IV
served and strengthened to carry out as a Christian
Statesman, the views you have so ably propounded as a
Christian Scholar.
Unworthy as these pages are of dedication to yourself,
I trust you will find that 1 have not abused your kind
confidence; and that however imperfectly executed and
carried out, my desire and object have been "to allay
the heats which have recently prevailed, and in vindi
cating truth to deal in the tenderest manner with
ignorance and misapprehension." I have the honor to remain,
Dear Sir,
With every feeling of respect.
Your faithful Servant,
ALEXANDER WATSON.
Cheltenham,
March, 1842,

A LETTER, ETC.

Brethren beloved in Christ,
In entering upon the task 1 have set myself of addressing
you on the subject of recent misrepresentations of Church
Principles, I cannot but be fully sensible of the responsi
bility I incur, to confine myself within bounds of truth
and love. He who ventures to stand forth as a champion
for truth, must not think that there is any rank so obscure
as to render it of small importance whence he draws his
weapons. The humblest soldier, and the most illustrious
general must each be accoutred from the same armoury,
and each observe the same rules of war. And if, as is
sometimes the case, one blow cannot be effectually
parried without dealing another, the soldier of Christ
must ever remember that he must not strive, but be
gentle, and that in patience and confidence must be his
true strength. Above all, let him be especially careful
that it is not mere victory for which he is contending :
let it not be clanship or partizanship for which he strug
gles ; but let his steady aim be, to maintain truth, and

to make a stand for principle. I trust I am under the
influence of these feelings in now addressing you : and
if, from a perusal of these pages, you should be led to
such an examination of the privileges which are your
inheritance, as may result in greater peace within the
palaces of Zion, it will not be a vain or unprofitable thing
that you have had your attention directed to the subject.
It is a sight which gladdens fiends, while it might make
angels weep — and does make man despair, to see the
strength of the armies of the Lord of Hosts wasted in
skirmishes among themselves. This strength should be
concentrated in a combined effort to repulse the common
foe of God and man : and until there be more union
amongst ourselves, upon the principles to which we are
in common pledged, it is vain, and worse than vain, to
hope for that blessed consummation, when the sword
shall be beaten into the ploughshare, and the knife into
the pruning hook — the lamb lie down with the lion —
and the young kid with the tiger.
It is impossible to pay even the slightest attention to
passing events without being impressed with a conscious
ness of the most unusual agitation of the minds of almost
all upon the subject of religion. All classes of society
seem leavened with an excitement which cannot continue
without prejudice to the interests of practical piety and
sober devotion. Polemical strife between members of the
one Holy Church among us, exhausts the strength and
absorbs the energies of those who marshalled under the
banner of the Great Captain of salvation, and signed with
the symbol of His Passion, should not be ashamed to

confess the faith of Christ crucified, nor, remiss in man
fully fighting in one company against sin, the world, and
the devil. If the Church is to accomplish the purpose
for which she was instituted and chartered by our
Lord, her members must be one even as He and the
Father are one. You have of late been invited to pro
claim to the world that within one branch alone of that
Church there are strong differences of opinion and bitter
divisions. I am loath to describe these invitations and the
appeals with which they have been accompanied, in the
language which I think they deserve : I would rather
set before you the counter statements and leave you to
form your own conclusions This much is certain, that
there is at the present moment a vehement desire on the
part of some members of the Church to disturb others,
their brethren, in the enjoyment of opinions which these
latter have been accustomed to consider integral portions
of the faith delivered once for all to the saints. In order
that I may be perfectly intelligible, I would remind you
that there has of late been a strong effort to get rid of
principles which are maintained because they are sup
posed to be Catholic and Scriptural ; and this effort has
originated with, and been encouraged by, those who take
to themselves the name of the Evangelical Clergy. The
charges averred by this party against those from whom
they differ, are for the most part very general in their
character, and very vague in their bearing : and opinions
which are really held, being mixed up with dogmas
which are strongly repudiated, a curious mSlange is pre
sented to the public view and condemned under the name
of Puseyism.

Under this title, those, who formerly liked not to be
called Simeonites, scruple not to denounce truths which
are coeval with Christianity, and which at the time of
the Reformation were once again exhibited to the hum
ble child of the Church in the simplicity and beauty
which accompanied their original claims upon the affec
tions of the disciples of Christ. Were the term Puseyism
confined to the opinions of those who directly or indirectly
are or were the disciples of that exemplary scholar and
pious divine, from whose name the term is derived : then
a refutation of the attacks made upon it, might be safely
left in the hands of that divine and those immediate
friends whose intimacy is interpreted as discipleship. But
the real fact of the case is this, the Romanist, the Dissen
ter, and those who within the Church are favourably
inclined to dissent, are all agreed in placing the ban of a
party name on certain doctrines which inquiry and inves
tigation will prove to be the doctrines of Holy Scripture
as received by the Church universal, and taught in our
own particular branch, the Church of England. Those
who dare to assert Church Principles are branded with
the name of " Puseyites, Newmanites, or Newmaniacs,"*
and their names are cast out as evil in the Church at
whose altars such of them as are clergy serve, and to
whose Prayer Book they have not only subscribed but as
far as they are able, act up.
1 will first explain why 1 call Puseyite or Newmanite
a brand or name of disgrace, and I will then point out
my grounds for supposing that these titles are assigned
' Speech of Rev. F. Close, M.A., to Tradesmen of Cheltenham, Feb. 3.

to all who contend for the principles of the Church of
England as pure from the additions of Rome on the one
hand, and untainted with the crudities of Geneva on the
other ; and in the course of this latter explanation you
will perceive the motive by which I have been actuated
in making this appeal to you my brethren of the laity.
And first let me explain why I object to the terms
Puseyite and Newmanite, as being brands or names of
disgrace. Do not suppose that my objection to these
epithets arises from any mere opinion which I may
entertain of Dr. Pusey or Mr. Newman. Without pre
suming to sit in judgment upon their pretensions, 1 object
to designations taken from them on the simple ground,
that we are to call no man Master upon earth. It is
natural, that those who date no higher than Wesley for
their title, or who glory in the nomenclature of Calvin
or Arminius, — ^it is natural for those who are not content
with having the name of Christ called upon them, but
who add to that glorious name, the affix of the founder
of some human system of the last century or two, — it is
natural for such to wish to bring their opponents in con
troversy to a level with themselves, by calling them by
party names, and if it were possible for us to consent to
dishonour Christ by preferring the name of man to that
of our incarnate God, if we could forget that an Apostle
has declared it sinful to say I am of Paul, or I of
Apollos, then it would be a question for dispute why to
be a Puseyite should be more discreditable than to be a
Wesleyan, — why to be a Newmanite, should be more
objectionable than to be a Brownist, — why Oxford

10
Tract men should convey greater reproach than Inde
pendents, Baptists, Jumpers, or the thousand and one
other sects which prove the boast of Ultra-Protest
antism. But so long as we acknowledge none other for
master save Christ, and Him alone, so long shall we be
jealous of acknowledging any spiritual pedigree which
halts in tracing back our descent, short of Christ the
great Head of the Family of the baptized ! — so long shall
we be suspicious of our relationship with Him, if we be
not found in the " glorious company of His Apostles."
And thus, even if Dr. Pusey and Mr. Newman were
inspired — still to be called "of" them — to be designated
by and after them, would be a brand, or name of disgrace.
In my own name then, and such other of my brethren as
will allow me to speak for them^ — I would enter my most
earnest protest against any admission by which it might
be supposed that Puseyism as Puseyism is defensible — or
by which I may be thought to accept with complacency
the style and title of a Puseyite. The saying of Tertul
lian has been well embodied by one now no more, in the
following sentence : " Whatever in religion is old, is,
€0 nomine, true: whatever in religion is new, is, eo
nomine, false :"* and, upon this ground, anything which
* " The matters which come under our especial consideration as Christians, are
not the naked oiFspring of human reason exercising itsejf upon the suhjeet which
concerns its eternal interests, but are trutlis revealed to us by God himself, with
this especial promise, that he will be with his Church in all ages, so that the gates
of hell shall not prevail against the great truths of the Gospel. It therefore
becomes of unspeakable importance, that we should know tuliat truths have been
held by the Church in all ages, because their general acceptance, combined with
the remembrance of God's promise, makes tliem binding on us. Whatever in reli
gion is new, is, eo nomine, false. Whatever in the strict sense of the words is old

11
is distinctively Puseyism — anything of which Dr. Pusey
is the first teacher, must be false, and cannot be defended
by those who look to Christ and His Apostles for their
religious faith. But if, under the nickname of Puseyism,
truths for which confessors have witnessed and martyrs
have bled, are called in question and condemned, then it
is time for the friends of truth to vindicate her from
aspersion, and steadily to maintain her cause. I shall,
in the course of my remarks, prove from the writings
and speeches of those who attack " Puseyism" the most
bitterly, that the doctrines which they condemn are
Christian verities, which have been in the Church since
the times of the Apostles, and which, as such, are held
by our own branch of the Catholic Body of the Redeemer.
And lest I should seem to be unduly taking upon myself
this defence of Church Principles, I will at once bring
before you a very sufficient ground that I have for sup
posing that it is the doctrines of the Church of England
which are attacked under the name " Puseyism." In the
British Magazine, for February, I find the following
paragraph :—
" Lay Movement against Pijseyism. — ^We have reason to
believe that the most decisive steps are about to be taken by the bench
of Bishops, rohich will result in ridding the Church of every Clergy
man rvho is tainted with Puseyite sentiments. The laity of this town
have come forward with a determination to strengthen the hands of
the " heads of the Church," and for that purpose have got up an
address to the Archbishop of Canterbuiy, calling upon his grace to
that is, whatever has been handed down from the apostolic times through the lapse
of ages to us, that is, eo nomine, true." — Rev. H. J. Rose, B.D., Lecture on Church
History at Durham.

12
take measures for stopping the growing evil. The gentleman who
had charge of the address, took care to invite none to sign it but those
who were capable of judging of the injurious effects which must
ensue from the Tractarian writings. It is a singular fact, that several
pew-holders in St. John's Church, in this town, were nearly the first
to attach their signatures to this important document. The address
will be forwarded by this night's post. — Cheltenham Chronicle."
My attention was called to this paragraph at the time
of its publication, but I have been so often misrepresented
and abused in the paper in question as to prefer the silent
contradiction of consistency, and the knowledge of others
of my teaching and character, to any mere newspaper
warfare. But now that the paragraph has been trans.
ferred to the pages of an influential and respectable
journal like the British Magazine, I feel that I "may notice
it without compromising my position. And in its state
ments I find a sufficient plea for undertaking, as far as I
am able, the vindication of Church of England principles
from the nicknames of party. I have no means of know
ing how far the assertion that several of my congregation
signed the document in question, is true : but judging
from analogy, and from my knowledge of my people, I
should be induced to discredit the fact. The petition
being sent off on the day the announcement was made
rendered investigation impossible, but admitting the
fact, 1 ask why was it " singular " in the estimation of
the writer, that such should be the case ? This phrase is
to be understood only on the supposition that Puseyism
is taught and encouraged in St. John's, and that therefore
it is " singular " that pewholders in the church should

la
petition against what their minister is supposed to approve.
Now in the full consciousness of what I have taught in
St. John's, I allege that " Puseyism " must mean the
principles of the Church of England, if it has been
broached in the church in which the Bishop has appoint
ed me to serve. Englishmen are never slow in hearing
an accused party in his own defence, and as one of those
who have been branded with a party nickname for teach
ing the doctrines of Holy Scripture, as embodied in the
Prayer Book, I ask of you a fair hearing in behalf of
principles which I believe to be identical with the gospel,
but for proclaiming which I and others are branded in
such language as the following. I quote from published
reports of the proceedings of a dinner, to which the
Tradesmen of Cheltenham were invited by the Rev.
Francis Close, A.M., Perpetual Curate of the Parish, on
the third of February last.
The chairman, the Rev. F. Close, is reported to have
said —
" These are days when Protestant principles are shaken to their
very foundations. (Hear.) These are days when we have not only
foes without, who are willing to pull down the house — not only men
who would rejoice at our hurt ; but the kot, the dry rot is in the
house itself. (Hear, hear.) There are those within the Church of
England who are eating her very vitals and her principles out."
Having quoted from the [Romish] " Priest's Vade
Mecum," a passage describing Romish Baptism, the
Reverend gentleman proceeds —
" These are what the Puseyites consider the desiderata in the
Church of England worship. {Hear, hear.) Shall we go back to

14
these mummeries? If we are to have the oil and Chrism, shaill we
have the spittle and salt 1 Are we to have our children spit upon
and salted and pickled, instead of being simply sprinkled with water
in Baptism ? Away with such dishonest innovations. * * » »
These clergymen, are wolves in sheep's clothing. The time is come,
and we must not be afraid to speak out, — to drive out the man of
Sin who has insinuated himself into the bosom of Christ's Church.
(Cheers.) There is a power of God's Spirit within the Church of
England, which will enable her to throw off this disease, and to stand
forth among the nations with more purity than ever. (Applause.)
***** a, coadjutor who is not tinged or tainted with the
leprosy of the Oxford heresy."
I have before me very many quotations to the same
purport, from speeches and sermons, but I forbear to
transfer them to these pages lest we should, by their
perusal, be incited to that vehemence of temper which is
always most unfavourable to religious truth. Nothing is
farther from my intention than the enkindling in the
breasts of those well affected to Church principles, the
rancourous spirit of attack which at present characterizes
the abettors of what are commonly styled Low Church
opinions. And knowing how inflammable a thing zeal
is, I forbear to provoke its development in the angriness
of that recrimination to which a multiplication of such
passages must necessarily lead. I have quoted at least
enough to show that those who hold High Church
opinions are, at the present moment, the attacked party
— that they are on their defence. And having shewn
thus much, I have established sufficient to ensure them a
patient hearing at the bar of Church opinion. But in
order that this claim may be fully made out, I must show,

15
upon something beyond mere assertion, that the opinions
attacked are such as it is not novel to hear maintained,
and find defended in the Church of England. The
opinions chiefly cavilled at, and which give the most
umbrage are, I believe, the following : —
I. Regeneration in Holy Baptism.
II. The Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist.
III. That the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
is a Visible Body.
IV. The Doctrine of the Apostolical Succession, and as
connected with it, that of Priestly Absolution and
Benediction.
V. A Judgment according to Works.
VI. The Authority of the Church in Controversies of
Faith.
To a seriatim consideration of these questions I invite
you, and 1 shall hope to prove to you, that in maintain
ing these doctrines, a clergyman of the Church of Eng
land but acts up to the vows of his ordination, and the
requirements of the Book of Common Prayer, and that
he is herein strictly conformable to the standard writings
of our ablest divines. If you respect the names of
Hooker and Andrews, of Bramhall, Joseph Mede, San
derson, (of whom Dr. Donne said, "the very dust of his
writings is gold,") and Hammond, of Jeremy Taylor,
Heylin, Pearson and Bull, of Archbishop Potter, of
Nelson, and of Home, — if you hold these worthies of the
Church of England in estimation, you must speak ten
derly on the above points : for these are opinions for
which they most strenuously contended. But before I

16
enter upon the proof that these are principles not only
held in, but taught by our Church, and that on Scripture
warrant — I would seek to bring before you some causes
as they appear to me, of the present extraordinary excite
ment on religious subjects. And to show you how true
it is that the present controversy has been made " dis
gusting" from " an entire absence of all knowledge of
the necessity for a knowledge of Church History."
Thoroughly to investigate the circumstances attendant
upon the present excitement upon these topics, would
take us back to the time of our Reformation, and would
lead us to inquire into the various phases which religious
opinion has presented at that and subsequent periods.
And although this would be a task beyond the limits I
have prescribed to myself, yet it can do no harm to
impress upon your minds the fact, that from the acces
sion of Queen Elizabeth to the present time, there has
been in the Church a section or party, more or less
numerous according to circumstances, holding in a more
or less modified sense, the traditionary doctrines of the
Genevan, or Calvinistic school ; and by this party those
who hold to the Church's statements, and who do not
reject a doctrine, or a practice merely because, together
with much error, Rome has held and maintained it, are
always represented as deficient in spirituality, and as
abettors of the Papacy ; as Jesuits in disguise, and the
Hke.* It is true the disciples of this school had in many
* It would be easy to bear out this assertion by quotations from the writings of
those divines whose writings are the glory of our Church, but who were not allowed
to escape the charge of Popery. It may be enough to refer the reader to Arch-

17
particulars a representative in the person of Bishop
Hooper, whose vehement opposition to the wearing of
bishop Bramhall's Epistle Dedicatory, in the folio edition of his works ; and to
Bishop Sanderson's Sermons, and more especially his two prefaces. 1 subjoin
short extracts from each of these writers.
Archbishop Bramhall says — " I pray God to open the eyes of a well-meaning
but miserably misled sort of men among us, that they may see and avoid their
danger, who by boggling at a shadow of Popery which has place in their own
imaginations only have opened a door to let in the substance. * » » » Are
not men who see no superstition in a. habit or a gesture tempted, when they hear
them exclaimed against as Popish and Idolatrous, to have kinder thoughts of
Popery itself and to think it is no such bugbear, and so to swallow the whole religion
when they find no ill taste in those harmless institutions 1"
And Bishop Sanderson — to whom are attributed the General Tlianksgiving
and the Prefaces in the Book of Common Prayer, thus urges the injurious prac
tical tendency of this wholesale denunciation of things innocent and indiiferent as
Popery —
" Thirdly, and above all, I beseech them to consider whither that a/itTpia tyiq
avSoXsriQ, which many times marreth a good business, hath carried them ; and
how mightily (though unwittingly, and I verily believe, most unwillingly,) they
promote the interest of Home — whilst they do with very great violence, (but not
with equal prudence) oppose against it, so occupying that of the Historian Poet,
though spoken in another case —
Omnia dat qui justa negat.
I mean in casting out, not ceremonies only, but Episcopacy also, and Liturgie and
festivals out of the Church, as Popish and Antichristian. Hoc Ithacus velit. If
any of these things be otherwise guilty, aud deserve such a relegation on any other
account (which yet is more than I know) farewell they. But to be sent away
packing, barely upon this score, that they are Papist ar\A. Antichristian ; this
bringeth in such a plentiful harvest of proselytes to the Jcsuite, that he doth not
now, as formerly, gaudere intus et in sinu, (laugh in his sleeve, as we say,) but
yvjxvfj rrj KapaXij openly and in the face of the sun, triumph gloriously, and in
every pamphlet proclaim his victories to the world.
* * * * -^
" A man otherwise rational and conscientious, but somewhat wavering in point
of religion, yet desiring, in sincerity of heart, to be of the truer Church, if he
knew which were it — hath some temptations offered him by his education, friends,
books, the companions among us or otherwise, to incline him to the Church of
Rome. " Which temptations, being not able of himself to conquer, he repaireth to a
B

18
a surplice in Divine service may be regarded as the first
introduction of the apple of discord upon these points of
ceremonial : but it was not until the Marian persecution
had driven numbers of the clergy to find an asylum among
the disciples of the continental reformation that the leaven
was extensively introduced into our Church. On their re
turn, however, at the period just alluded to, they set them
selves most zealously to the work of introducing Genevan
tastes and of reviling English habits of reverence for what
is ancient. Some of these persons were so thoroughly
inimical to the very constitution of the Church, and en-
Presbyterian (suppose) or Independent, he acquainteth him with his doubts, and
desireth satisfaction therein ; telleth him, among other things, that he had a good
opinion of the Church of England heretofore, whilst he had Episcopal Govern
ment and a well-formed Liturgie, and did observe Christian Festivals, and some
kinde of outward decency in the worship of God, as all the Churches of Christ had
and did in the purest and primitive times : but now, that all these things are laid
aside, he must needs be of another onind, unless he can fully satisfy him concern
ing the premises. In this case, I would fain know what possible satisfaction such
a man could receive from either of these, holding to their principles. To tell him
these things were Popish — and therefore to be cast out of the Church, were the
next way to put him quite off; he would presently conclude, (and it is impossible
he should &o otherwise, being already so prepared, as the case is supposed,) that
certainly, then, that which we call Popery is the old religion, which in the purest
and primitive times was professed in all Christian Churches throughout the world.
That only (!o(pbv ipap/iaKiv which is usually the last reserve in these disputes,
' that the mystery of iniquity began to work betimes ;' will seem (to him) but a
ridiculous begging of the question, and he will tell them that every sectary may
say the same to them. Whereas the sober English Protestant is able, by the
grace of God, with much evidence of truth, and without forsaking his old prin
ciples to justifle the Church of England from all imputation olHeresie or Schism,
and the Religion hereof, as it stood by law established, from the like imputation
o{ novelty; and to a.pT?ly proper and pertinent answers to all the objections of
those (whether Papists or others) that are contrary-minded, to the full satisfaction
of all such as have not, by some partial affection or other, rendered themselves
mcapable to receive them."  Bishoj, Sanderson's Preface to his Twenty
Sermonis.

19
tertained so deeprooted a dislike to all her usages that
they seceded from her communion, and set up a fictitious
altar against that true one which the mercy of God has
suffered to be planted in this land : these are they to
whom of right and par-excellence the title of Puritans
belongs. But there were also a considerable section who
although they held not with her ceremonies and diluted
her doctrines yet remained within the Church accepting
her titles, wearing her honours and receiving her pay.
And since that period the views of which these latter
were the representatives have had currency within the
Church, showing themselves with more distinctness at some
times than others. Not to dwell upon the intervening
times (to the strifes prevailing during a portion of which
we owe the invaluable labours of the "judicious Hooker,")
and not to urge the lesson taught by the full development
of these Genevan principles, in the parricidal horrors of
an Archbishop's murder and a Monarch's martyrdom : 1
would invite your attention to the course of events since
the Revolution of 1688. The manner in which Church
questions were affected by this great event, is thus ably
alluded to by Mr. Gladstone in his truly seasonable
volume on " Church Principles considered in their
Results." " We owe to the Revolution of 1688, besides many great civil
blessino-s, the immediate deliverance of our Church from the violent
assaults of Romanism, aimed directly at her constitution. We must
not make it a matter of surprise, nor suffer it to create in our minds
any prejudice against those who were concerned in that great event, if
we find that its consequences exposed the Church to dangers of slower
and much less palpable operation, yet issuing if they had not been
B 2

20
intercepted in equal or if it be possible, even more pernicious results
than those they threatened. Just as one might argue of the deliverance
of the early Church from temporal persecutions, that it tended to in
troduce the corrupting influence of wealth, and to relax salutary
discipline, to lower the spirit of devotion, and to bring back the Church
into the captivity of that world which it was ordained to resist and to
conquer ; and yet that deliverance was in itself a blessing, and must
be acknowledged as a blessing though it was abused, and its authors
must in justice be regarded as benefactors of the Church." From the
period, then, of the Revolution dorvmvard, and owing in great ineasure
to its aite7idant circumstances, the tone of Church principles rcas
grievously lowered and relaxed."
We see the truth of this assertion in the severity of the
shock by which Puritanism convulsed theological truth, and
the rude violence with which it offered a check to the genial
current of sound and deep divinity, which had watered the
Church's territories, when Hooker, Taylor, Hall, San
derson, and others of such stamp held the keys of know
ledge. These were called upon to bear their part in
controversy : but they administered the bitters of this
branch of religious learning with such true judgment,
that a better and more healthy action in the whole
body Ecclesiastic was the result. In the writings of
the divines of the school of which we speak, in an
age which has been called the Augustan age of
English divinity, we possess unfailing stores, and inex
haustible mines. We have in them an armoury in which
the combatant may be dressed, and a rich casket of
jewels with which Christians of every time may be graced.
But a picture of these times is drawn in such a master
style, by one now no more 1 that with its vivid outlines
upon my mind, any description I could give would lose

21
its interest except as it was a copy of this powerful
original, and as I shall have occasion in after pages to
refer to the great man who wrote it, I ask no apology for
transferring the passage in this place.
" No one can trace our Church history without seeing that the
character of our writers is changed from the hour that the dreadful
plans of the Puritans were accomplished. It is true, indeed, that
some of our greatest writers became eminent after the Restoration,
but they had been brought up in other days, at the feet of those
Gamliels of whom I have spoken ; and with such principles to guide
them, they had now the advantage (to such men it was an advantage)
of being hardened in the school of adversity. But with Bull, and
Taylor, and Jackson, and a few other such men, the elder sdiool
expired. " Though the ancient stock retained enough of its vigour to send
forth for a short time such men as a Stillingfleet and a Bentley, this
vigour soon died away. Once or twice, indeed, as in the case of
Waterland, an offset sprung up, which almost recalled the memory
of the ancient days. Yet even in him, while there was the same vast
store of learning, the same sound judgment, or even greater, to guide
it, the same reverence for Catholic antiquity, the same devotion to the
subject, there wanted yet the exuberance, the warmth, the flow of
eloquence, the tenderness, which fix the memory and the words of
Hooker, of Taylor, of Hall, and of Sanderson, deep in our memory
and our heart. ****** jjj ^j^q iggf eentuiy a school
grew up with very peculiar and distinct features. They were acute and
clear, and maintained the low ground on which they stood with
remarkable dexterity and shrewdness. Terse and finished in their
style, compact and complete within their own sphere, they never went
beyond it. Content to dwell in decencies for ever, comprehensive
views, courageous defence of high grounds, enthusiastic or even
affectionate devotion to a great cause, is not to be expected from
them; but you have, in lieu, a careful survey of all the narrow ground
on which they are treading ; they have marked well its towers and
told all its bulwarks, and are ready for the defence of every tower,

22
every bulwark, and every inch of ground ; and that too, a careful,
judicious, and clever defence. Their maxim evidently is to give up
the greater in order to keep the less with certainty and safety, a max
im often dangerous, and often impossible to practise. But besides
this, the natural effect of renouncing high views one's self, is to sus
pect or ridicule them in others. They who dare to hold them are
considered as unreasonable, bigoted, impracticable; and what is called
common sense, but what is, in good truth, a slavish and deliberate
choice of low views instead of high ones, is made the guide of prac
tice and the object of imitation. A good deal of humour is not an
unfrequent attendant of this calm and cautious condition of mind, and
this is used as freely in ridiculing what are considered the overstrained
views of friends, as the falsehoods of foes. Tlie inevitable consequence
of this is a most unwholesome tone of mind, disposed to consider every
thing which is not common-place, as extravagant ; every thing bold,
as rash : every thing generous, as foolish ; every thing like inflexible
adherence to principle, as bigotry and violence. To fight for principle,
in the eyes of such persons, can arise only from madness or wickedness;
and they use the warfare of ridicule or censure accordingly.
" If we wish for any proofs of this, and of the harm done by it, let us
look to the notions entertained as to Church government in the present
day, which are to be ascribed wholly to these writers. Hooker, and
Hall, Sanderson, and Pearson, and Leslie, dwelt with the utmost
earnestness on the Episcopal office and the ministerial commission, as
necessary for the due possession of the Sacraments by the people.
They taught plainly that priests were nothing by themselves, — that
their value is derived from their office, and from the commission to
minister in their Master's name which that office gives, and that laws
can no more make a priest than they can make a Sacrament. And
Hooker, and Hall, and Pearson, and Leslie, were not thought either
ignorant, or foolish, or extravagant. But when the new school had
possession of the divinity of the Church, and such men as Hoadley
{the lowest minded of all low minded men,) of its high stations. Hooker,
and Hall, and Pearson, and Leslie, were corrected by Balguy and
Powell, and taught that one form is just as good as another ; that the
Church is a sort of club, which must have some laws and some orders.

23
because even a club cannot go on well, without, but that the laws of
one club are as good as those of another. They were taught that the
directions of the Apostles, and the constant and undisputed practice
of the whole Church of Christ for fifteen centuries, cannot be of any
consequence, if we think in our wisdom that a Church can subsist
without a Bishop, and a priest without ordination ; that the state can
manufacture ministers of God's word at its own pleasure, and after its
own fashion ; and that they are fully qualified to dispense the Word of
life, and the Sacraments of the Gospel. Talk to too many Church
men, and find whether this is not too often their notion. Consider
how such miserable degradation entered at all into the Church which
once heard the truth from Hooker and Pearson, and be assured that
it was let down by degrees through this clever, low minded race of
divines, who made it their boast and pride to take what they called
the common sense and tangible view of every question, and laughed
down every one who believed and taught that there are things, which
we can neither touch, nor taste, nor handle, as necessary to our
spiritual life as the air we breathe, and as true as the truth of God.
I must not stay to describe the effects of this low-minded and tangible
divinity farther than to say that we owe to it, and to the ignorance of
the real meaning of the words Church and commission of the clergy,
which it caused but too generally, what is one of the greatest curses of
Protestantism, the setting up preaching above prayer, the gratification
of the itching ear above the elevation of the careless heart, the mag
nifying the man and despising his office, the monstrous and godless
belief tacitly indeed, but firmly, held, that we derive a greater share
of the covenanted gifts and graces of God's Spirit, accordingly as we
happen to be more or less pleased with the elocution, or style, or man
ner of the PERFORMER.
" This was an unintentional consequence of their views and proceed
ings, but a natural one. They had no evil intention of any sort — they
were only contented to keep, on the lowest terms, such a condition of
things as they found, and found tolerable. Their wish was to appear
reasonable, as if the highest truth was not the highest reason. Their
wish was to be candid and liberal ; i. e. to declare, that they who are
in power are always wrong, and that they who oppose them are

24
always right ; always to decide for what was new against what was
old, for what was expedient against what was on principle, for what
was convenient against what was generous, for what, in a word, put
it as we will, was low-minded and selfish, and worldly, against what
was lofty, and noble, and heavenly.*
To this school succeeded, a race of men whose charac
ter it is ungracious to describe in the language which
seems most appropriately to depict them, and perhaps it
would not be just to speak of them over harshly. They
had witnessed the successful issue of the Hoadleian or
Bangorian controversy,'!" and in the consciousness that
victory had been won, they sat down and folded their
arms in a fancied security. Meanwhile, a most aban
doned laxity of life was the distinguishing characteristic
of all classes of society. A dark cloud of ignorance
enveloped the lower orders, and those high in station
lived lives which acknowledged little or none of the
power of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The whole Church
seemed in a sleep, as though recent exertion had exhausted
her entire strength and vigour. The lay members of
her body required arousing, and if we may judge from
the writings of the clergy, which have been preserved to
us, no appeals were addressed to them calculated to meet
the exigencies of the case. Our churches echoed to the
* " The study of Church History Recommended : being the Terminal Divinity
Lecture delivered in Bishop Cosins's Library, April xv, mdcccxxxiv, before the
Right Rev. the Dean, the Chapter, and the University of Durham. By Hugh
James Rose, B.D., Chaplain to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury.— London :
Rivingtons, 1834."
t The reader is referred, for a concise statement of the points at issue in this
controversy, to the article under that head in the second edition of Dr. Hook's
Lhurch Dictionary. It has its name from Dr. Hoadly, Bishop of Bangor.

25
ethics of the schools of heathen philosophy, and the chil
dren of God's heritage had not even strangers' food, they
were worse than the dogs, and had not even " crumbs"
from their master's table. It is true the stores of ancient
literature were not unexamined, and these dry bones of
philosophy were offered to the public gaze, but they were
clothed upon with none of the graces of Christianity, nor
was there breathed upon them ought of the life-giving
spirit of evangelical grace. Nor was it the Church only
which slumbered ; then was the process rapidly going on
which verified the truth of that taunt of the Popish con
troversialist, to which Mr. Le Bas, in his life of Jewel,
thus alludes : —
" It is curious enough, that Harding seems to have apprehended,
almost prophetically, the future declension of high Calvinism from
the Trinitarian doctrine. He says that the Fathers of Trent did not
occupy themselves with determinations and decrees respecting the
Trinity; for then the world had no need of any new determinations
relative to that doctrine, and he adds, ' What it shall have hereafter,
by occasion of your chief master, John Calvin's doctrine, is more
feared than yet perceived.' "
What Harding predicted the event has realized, and
it was at the period of which we are speaking, that
those changes first began to take effect by which it has
come about that more than one hundred and sixty meet
ing-houses, once " Presbyterian," are now Socinian.
But about the middle of the last century, the spell
seemed to be broken ; and within and without the Church
there seemed to be an infusion of fresh life and vigour.
A course of revival was adopted by Wesley and Whit
field, which begun in irregularity, has ended in a schism

26
of the most extraordinary character, and which, as far as
Wesley, at any rate, was concerned, was never contem
plated by its author. But it is a mistake to suppose that
this awakening was only among those who sided with
that earnest minded man. The names of Venn and
Simeon, not to mention others of the same school, are
sufiicient to remind us that of those who remained in
subjection to the requirements of the Church of England,
it was true that they were up and doing. It is foreign
to my present purpose to enquire how far these great
men tempered their zeal with discretion^ — -how far that
zeal of theirs, which was unquestionably a "zeal of God,"
was also a "zeal according to knowledge." When a
deluge is setting in which threatens to overwhelm us
unawares, we are too much lost in gratitude to those who
arouse us from our insensibility, to enquire censoriously
into their observance of etiquette and propriety in their
method of sounding the alarm by which we were brought
to realize our position. And so the Church at large
owes too much to the "early Evangelicals," to suffer those
who differ from their descendants to sit in hasty judg
ment upon them. The funeral of the late Mr. Simeon
testified that this aged clergyman was held in respect for
his zeal and his piety by those who had no sympathy
with the school of which he may be considered in some
sort the founder. But what was regarded with leniency
m the early Evangelicals as an almost necessary accident
of their position, was not to be so readily forgiven in
those by whom they were succeeded. The lamp of piety
once more glowed in the Church : her inward note of

27
holiness once again bespoke her in so far Christ's spouse:
and the trumpet of the watchmen who walked the walls
of Zion once more gave forth a certain sound. Irregu
larities which were pardonable when the subject had
received no attention, became positive faults when dis
cipline was once again enforced upon the high ground of
Apostolical authority. Now arose the setting uj) of a
shibboleth within the Church, and all who did not
pronounce it were regarded, if not as the enemies of the
Gospel, yet as lacking in an especial degree any saving
grace, and as being very deficient in spiritual mindedness.
This was the time when, elated with the popularity of
their ministrations, and led away by the praise of those
whose good opinion they should have set comparatively
little store by, the Evangelical clergy seemed envious of
the questionable distinction of living in the debateable
country between the Church and dissent, and levying
black mail upon the latter. Then it was that they joined
with Dissenters of every class in stigmatizing their bre
thren as faithless, and in pronouncing those to be the
truest and most Scriptural Churchmen who accommo
dated themselves most nearly to dissent. Then it was
that men like Mr. Scott (well known as a commentator
on the Scriptures, and a favorite with the Calvinistic
school,) were emboldened to declare of the Baptismal
Service in the Book of Common Prayer, that it was " a
grievous burthen, hard to bear :" and to indulge in other
complaints of a like character against what may be
regarded as the unequivocally and essentially Catholic
portions of our public documents. All this was not ,

28
going on without protest, and there were found those
who attempted to stand in the breach ; but still their
efforts were comparatively unavailing. Perhaps the
most decided stand was made in the spring of 1813,
when a society was formed for the distribution of
Tracts and other smaller publications in defence of
the constitution of the Church. A work bearing
the name of " the Churchman armed against the
errors of his Time," was one fruit of this society's
labours. In the general preface to these three volumes
we find the following : — " Under these impressions and
with these views it was thought necessary to trace the
claims of the Church to the highest source and to show
that the first builders of this ancient and beloved fabric
were ' the apostles and martys, Christ Himself being the
corner stone.' The first head, therefore, to which in
the arrangement of the argument the attention must be
directed is — the Church of Christ." It is not to be
wondered at that this collection should embrace some
publications hardly in keeping with the company in which
they are found ; but consisting as in the main it did of
re-publications of the writings of our great divines in
the seventeenth century ; but still taken as a whole the
efforts of this society to infuse a better tone among us
should not be overlooked. And perhaps not the least
service rendered by them was their recommendation that
such works as are still our glory and boast should be
generally read : and although much of their defence had
reference to the Establishment, merely they did not
forget to assert such principles as become sound doc-

29
trine. Still their efforts were not sufiicient to turn
tlie tide nor wholly stem the torrent. And about
fifteen or twenty years ago, so ill concealed was the
disaffection of the more violent of the party that
their cries for " Church Reform," and this not in tem
poral, but in spiritual matters, were freely quoted by
Dissenters as proofs of the faults of our Church. And then
too it was that once again the leaven of our master minds
began to work. The efforts of the society just named
and the excellent charges of Archdeacon Daubeny and
others began to take effect, and there were found noble
spirits to act upon the Archdeacon's remonstrances.*
In April, 1826, we find the Reverend Hugh James
Rose entering his solemn protest against prevailing-
laxity, and in his four sermons on the " Commission and
consequent Duties of the Clergy," preached before the
University of Cambridge, we have an assurance that
Christ had not deserted our branch of His Church, nor
withdrawn from her those who would speak with all the
boldness with which, as ambassadors for Him, they ought
to speak. In the advertisement to the first edition of the
above sermons, Mr. Rose has the following passage : —
" It is recorded by Strype,t that in the reign of King James I. the
disposition to treat of Church Discipline in sermons was so strong
and so general that it was at length publicly censured in the university
pulpit, t So constant a recurrence to the topic must have been highly
* " AVhat from the loose writings of some of the clergy, and the general silence
of the body upon the constitution of the Christian Church, the subject is so grown
out of knowledge as to have lost almost universally its influence upon the mind." —
Daubeny's Guide to the Church, p. 341 .
t Annals, vol. iii, p. 491.
t By a Mr. Greenham, " a zealous preacher" according to Strype.

30
mischievous in those days, as it kept alive the flame of controversy,
which it was then particularly desirable to extinguish; and it is
objectionable at all times, as it excludes those higher subjects of
Christian faith and practice, which are the proper topics of the Chris
tian preacher. In the present day we have gone into the opposite
extreme, and Church Discipline is a matter rarely or never mentioned
in the pulpit. There can be no question that of the two, our course
is the wisest ; yet it would he adviseable in this, as in other matters, to
avoid either extremes. The subject of discipline will be allowed by
every one who knows the history of Protestantism, and by every one
who is well acquainted with the human mind, to deserve more atten
tion than it obtains. The importance of forms will be at once
acknowledged by both classes of observers ; but to waive that topic,
we may say with certainty that many unhappy differences would
never have arisen ; much schism, and much that is unseemly in the
conduct of the inferior clergy to their superiors, and to one another,
would have been avoided, if this subject had always obtained due
consideration in clerical studies."
And I have now before me a charge delivered in the
same year, by the Venerable Henry Vincent Bayley,
D.D., Archdeacon of Stow, in which there is abundant
evidence that those err most grievously who date the
reaction in favour of Church Principles, as having no
causes earlier than the appearance of certain writings, to
which 1 shall presently more particularly refer.
Those who in the present day maintain Church Prin
ciples are branded as Puseyites, and it is not easy to tell
why Dr. Pusey should have been singled out as the butt
rather than the other writers of these tracts, except that
the former has struck the tree of the Genevan heresy
nearest to the root, by standing in the fore-ground of the
controversy on Baptismal Regeneration. But waiving
for the present the question which will shortly engage

31
our attention, of how far this doctrine is the doctrine of
the Prayer Book and the Reformers, and our ablest
divines, and not to dwell on the learned and unanswer
able work of the present Bishop of Bangor, worthy
successor of the unworthy predecessor to whom allusion
has already been made, I find the following sentences in
Archdeacon Bayley's primary charge, and yet I never
heard him accused of Popery :
" In some churches, no font is to be found at all ; in others, a
mutilated one ; sometimes converted into a mere receptacle for rub
bish, and sometimes even prostrate on the ground. Meanwhile that
awful and mysterious Sacrament, which regenerates the infant, and
transfers him from wrath to grace, from the family of Adam to the
adoption of Christ — that Sacrament, I say, whicli dedicates the child
to his Redeemer, and pledges him to the Christian service in the sight
and amid the prayers of the congregation, is perpetually thrust out of
the temple into the privacy of a chamber, or a drawing-room. In
cases no doubt of real or apparent danger, the initiatory service may
and must be performed at home* — for where charity appeals, or
necessity commands, all other authorities are silent. But the minister
is not permitted, for the mere convenience and fancy of the parties,
to substitute private for public Baptism :t he has no right to degrade
a blessed ordinance into a beggarly ceremonial : to sink that sacred
office by which our infant names are enrolled in the Book of Life,
into a business of parchment aud parochial registration. I am confi
dent that no other cause, with perhaps the single exception of want of
decent accommodation in the House of Prayer, has so much sepa
rated our people from us : has tended so much to confound the idea,
and obliterate the feeling of churchmanship among us, or has more
fatally contributed to thin the ranks of our communicants, by breaking
the visible and internate connexion of Christ's twofold institutions.
* * * * Need I further urge, that whenever the season and
• StiUingfleet's Eccl., p. 143. + Bishop Kaye's Primary Charge.

32
other circumstances do not prevent, the Baptismal service be duly
read at its proper time, as well as in its proper place ? A service it
is qf singular beauty and inte7'est, and for the omission of it no sermon
can atone."
If this extract be long, I think you will at least
bear me out in thinking it at this moment particularly
seasonable, as showing how our Church has never been
without witnesses, for Catholic truth. 1 could gladly
transfer to these pages some most pertinent remarks on
the subject of Catechizing in the Church which appear
in the same charge, but I must hasten on to a considera
tion of the period when those Tracts first appeared, which
are by many persons regarded as the mainspring in the
return to the better and sounder principles of genuine
Church of England theology which is happily now to be
perceived upon all sides within the Church. Writing as
I now am to you the laity of the Church of England, I
would be very scrupulous in awarding to the Tracts for
the Times all the praise which is their just due. I know
the efibrts which are made to persuade you that ex-pro-
fesso their design is evil and dangerous, and that they are
only good by accident or mistake. Still in the full con
sciousness of this, and in the conviction that our successors
in the faith will praise God for the signal service rendered
by these writers to the cause of English churchmanship,
1 would enter a most humble yet most earnest protest
against the gratuitous assumption which gives to these
distinguished members of the University of Oxford, the
sole praise of recalling the wandering sheep of our fold,
to tread once more the paths in which Leshe, and
Hammond, and Bramhall, and Bull, and Sanderson,

33
and Taylor, and Hickes, and Ken, and Pearson,
and Heylin, and Kettlewell, and Andrews, and Hooker,
and Donne, and Nelson, and Walton, and Potter,
and Home, and Wilson, and a host of others loved
to walk, and in which these, when they walked,
found green pastures and pleasant streams — the place
for quiet thought, and the food to strengthen high
resolves and holy purposes. I trust 1 am not so un
grateful as to withhold one whit of that praise which
justly belongs to them. I feel sure 1 do not undervalue
their efforts, and that I am not blind to the efiicient man
ner in which they have set forward Church truths which
had been well nigh buried in the fanaticism, the frivolity
and the sensuality of the times intervening between the
labours of the giant minds of the seventeenth century,
and the appearance of the publications of which they
are the authors. But 1 think there is sufficient to
show that their origin was connected with an awaken
ing of a larger section of the Church, than that consti
tuting the writers in question. The late Archdeacon
Watson, and the Reverend Mr. Norris, of Hackney,
did not stand alone in their day and generation : and one
name in particular should not be forgotten by a Cam
bridge man in speaking of this reaction in favour of
better principles, I mean one who was a master in Israel,
and who was removed from this earthly scene at the very
moment when human shortsightedness would have
detained him still to stand in the van of the battles of
the cross. I may be forgiven speaking thus of the
Reverend Hugh James Rose, for whatever of love for

34
ancient truth and respect for bygone wisdom, others may
have had stirred up in their breasts by the Tracts for the
Times : these feelings have been evoked in mine by the
personal exhortations and the published writings of this
great man. The dispensation by which he was removed
at the time he was may be regarded as most merciful, for
surely had he lived it would have been very difficult not
to have regarded him as the founder of a school and the
leader of a party. As it is, he has given the Church the
benefit of his solemn protest, and he has passed away as
we hope to realize in the Church triumphant that holi
ness and peace for which he struggled, according to his
measure and degree in the Church militant. The day yet
will, it is to be hoped, come when his valuable contribu
tions to the periodical literature of the day may be collected
together and given to the world. There are those who
know which are and which are not the productions of his
pen in the earlier numbers of the British Magazine and
other works, and what came from him was not ephemeral,
and should not be regarded as such. I have already re
ferred to his Sermons on the Commission and Consequent
Duties of the Clergy, preached seven years before the first
Tract for the Times made its appearance. And it would
be injustice to his memory to omit mention of his deeply
learned work on Protestantism in Germany, which was
published in the previous year, and in which the principles
of sound churchmanship are most manfully asserted. Other
works there are of his, all bespeaking his own earnestness
m the matter. How he sought to infuse that earnestness
into others may be gathered from the following passage,

35
which even now thrills in my ears in the freshness with
which it fell from his lips, addressed to many hundreds
of the Academic body on Whitsunday, 1834. There was
not a spot in any aisle unoccupied, and the stillness was
death-like as he concluded his powerful sermon " On the
Duty of Maintaining the Truth," in the following words :
words which convey a lesson to every willing and
thoughtful Christian heart, and which but gave per
manency to the sterling truths which had preceded
them :
" On you, my younger brethren, in proportion to the errors of
those who are gone before you, will fall an heavier responsibility.
It will be your task to profit by their errors, to correct, as you may,
the mischiefs which those errors are now working, and to carry on
God's cause and God's designs in the world. Yours, in all human
probability, if you act the part of men and Christians, will be a career
of such difficulty as few ages have witnessed. It will be yours to do
the hardest of all works — to resist a destroying spirit, to restore old
foundations, to lay new ones. It will be yours to toil, and to struggle,
and few of you can hope in your generation, (so slow is the progress
cff truth and of good,) to see of the travail of your soul, and be
satisfied !
One, and one only, way is open to you. Learn here, in these your
days of quiet thought and study, the inestimable value of truth, the
solemn duty of speaking it in the light, the glorious privilege of
preaching it upon the house tops, for the glory of God and the good
of man, that which, by God's blessing, ye hear in the ear here. Learn
here to despise, as ye ought, the solemn mockeries which tell you that
Truth changes with times, and that principles must be altered to meet
altered circumstances ; that you must bow to the voice of the million,
and hold public opinion for truth. Learn here, from your Lord's
Word, to confess Him and His truth, and maintain principles, and so
prepare yourself for the conflict that awaits you. ' The disciple is not
c 2

36
above his Master, nor the servant above his Lord. If they have
called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they
call them of His household.'
Expect, therefore, if you will maintain truth, to be hated of
men ; but know for your comfort that so, and so only, can man be
aided and his good promoted ; so, and so only, can God be glorified
and His cause carried on.
And with such motives to lead you on to the struggle, have you
not every comfort which can be needed to carry you through it ?
Have you not your Master's promise, that His Father's Spirit shall
teach you what to speak in the trying hour of struggle and shame,
and difficulty, and danger ; shall calm the anxious heart, prompt the
thought, and nerve the tongue? Have you not His promise that He
marks your tears and your groans, yea, that the very hairs of your
head are numbered ? Have you not His promise, that one day you
shall find in heaven the life you have lost on earth ?, And, above all,
have you not, while you thus walk in your measure and degree, in
the same narrow path which your Saviour trod before you, have you
not an especial right to approach your great Exemplar in all that
communion of prayer, which, most of all, hallows, encourages,
inspires? Can you not, in your own hour of danger and struggle,
call on Him, especially, ' By the mystery of His holy Incarnation, by
His Baptism, Fasting, and Temptation, by His Agony and bloody
sweat, by His Cross and Passion, by His precious Death and
Burial,' to witness and sanctify your struggles for the truth?"
And to show that I am not partial in looking upon
this great man as one of the first who, in terms of loving
sternness, recalled English Churchmen to their duty, 1
may quote the testimony of a very distinguished contri
butor to the Tracts. The Reverend John Henry Newman
dedicates the fourth volume of his " Parochial Sermons"
to the memory of this great man, and in so doing thus
expresses himself: —

37
TO THE
REV. HUGH JAMES ROSE, B. D.,
PRINCIPAL OF KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON,
AND DOMESTIC CHAPLAIN TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF
CANTERBURY,
WHO, WHEN HEARTS WERE FAILING,
BADE US STIR UP THE GIFT THAT WAS IN US,
AND BETAKE OURSELVES TO OUR TRUE MOTHER,
THIS VOLUME
IS INSCRIBED,
BY HIS OBLIGED AND FAITHFUL FRIEND,
THE AUTHOR.
To give one more instance, it will not be pretended
that such divines as the present deeply learned Lady
Margaret Professor of Divinity, in the University of
Cambridge, imbibed his opinions from the " Oxford
Tracts," and yet it would be most unjust to omit his
name from among the number of those who have been
influential in leavening the theological mind with better
principles. 1 shall have occasion hereafter to quote him
more at length, here I will content myself with the follow
ing sentence with which he concludes his introductory
Lecture of a course upon the Early Fathers, merely en
passant referring you to his other able works.
" If then I had to express in a word the general effect which I am
anxious these Lectures on Ecclesiastical Antiquity should produce, it
would be this ; that they may induce my hearers to say Amen to that
part of the declaration of the good Bishop Ken, contained in his last
will, 'As for my religion, I die in the Communion of the Church of

38
England, as it stands distinguished from all Papal and Puritan inno
vations, and as it adheres to the doctrine of the Cross.*
Of the services rendered to true Church principles by
Dr. Hook, the consistent advocate of the via media during
the last twenty years, 1 shall have more to say in the sum
mary with which I shall draw this Letter to a conclusion.
And now having said thus much to show with what injus
tice the writers of the Tracts for the Times are charged with
introducing only novel doctrines, and founding a thor
oughly fresh school of religious truth: I would seek to recall
your memories to the period when these tracts first made
their appearance, and to the practical fruits of an external
character even which have resulted from their publica
tion. The periods immediately preceding and succeed
ing the Reform Bill, were marked by a lawlessness of
temper, the like of which is not often found among
Englishmen. No ties were too sacred to prevent their
disruption, being a matter of cool speculation. If only
the temporalities of the Church had been assailed in this
crisis, there would have been sufficient ground of alarm :
but when to the most reckless proposals with regard to
the temporalities of the Church, was added a shameless
tampering with her spiritual functions : when even the
clergy of her communion were found sacrificing on the
shrine of popular clamour, the received dogmas of that
Church, whose ministers they were, and whose opinions
they had most solemnly subscribed; when the press
_ * An Introduction to a course of Lectures on the Early Fathers, now in delivery
m the University of Cambridge. By the Reverend 1. 1. Blunt, B. D., Margaret
Professor of Divinity, Cambridge. 1840.

39
teemed to-day with schemes for a re- distribution, if not a
spoliation of revenues, — and to-morrow with projects for
the alteration of the Prayer-book : when neither doc-
trinewas enforced and exemplified, nor discipline regarded,
nor vested rights respected, then it was that the time for
some decisive steps seemed to have arrived. Then it was
that Romanist and Dissenter were found in an un-holy
league. Then it was that hatred of the Church of Eng
land was a bond sufficiently strong to apparently tie
together the most heterogeneous materials. Then it was
that an un-holy alliance had existence without the Church,
and what wonder that such a season should be chosen by
wise heads and warm hearts, to remind men of the true and
holy fellowship there is within the Church. What wonder
that when the Evangelicals found they could no longer
safely co-operate with Dissenters, the High Churchmen
should seek to sound the note which should rally the
Church in its spirit of unity, and its bonds of peace. If
ever there was a time when the principles of the Church
were needed it was then, and at that time and under the
following circumstances, the Tracts for the Times ap
peared. Those who wish to see these circumstances given at
length will do well to consult the letter of the Hon. and
Rev. Arthur Perceval upon the subject, which first ap
peared in the Irish Ecclesiastical Journal, of January,
1841, and referring you to this, I may perhaps be allowed
to state the matter concisely thus. The general preva
lence of pamphlets pleading for innovation in our ritual
and discipline to which I have already alluded, having

40
been followed up by the passing of a measure for an
alteration in the Irish Church to the alarming extent of the
suppression of ten Bishoprics, a meeting was held when
the first impulse was given to the organization of a system
for the publication of Tracts, with the view of awakening
the members of the Church of England to a due sense of
the value of the Apostolical functions of their spiritual
Mother. One of the immediate results of action upon
this resolve, was an Address to the Archbishop of Can
terbury, signed by 7000 of the Clergy, expressing their
attachment to Church of England ways, and this was
followed by the Lay declaration of attachment to the
Church, signed by not less than 800,000 heads of fami
lies. To this decisive inroad upon dissenting tactics may
be referred the busy zeal with which the Tracts for the
Times were pertinaciously called Oxford Tracts. A war
cry had to be raised against these writings by those
Ephesian craftsmen, whose calling was in danger, and
what cry so sure to prove a rally for dissenting hatred,
as the mention of Oxford: Oxford, which it has ever
been the fashion to represent as the stronghold of bigotry,
because she has ever been a worthy mistress of learning,
and a faithful nursing mother of orthodoxy. To fix the
stig-ma of Oxford upon them was a point gained, when
the parties whose hostility it was sought to provoke were
Dissenters. But to proceed : such was the origin of the
" Tracts for the Times ;" and, strange to say, with this
origin. Dr. Pusey, who is now made the foster-father, or
ratheris held responsible for all the tenets broached in them,
had nothing whatever to do. Many of the Tracts are but

41
republications of the writings of our elder divines, and
of those which were written for the occasion, it was easy
to assert that their writers were men versed in the piety
and thought of other and better days. Of this class of
writings, there is perhaps not one which has had so
extensively beneficial effect as Mr. Keble's Christian
Year: and I class this book with these writings because Mr.
Keble was one of those who really stood in the foreground
on Catholic questions, and although it has no sort of
direct connexion with the Tracts, yet it is impossible not
to see how powerful auxiliary sound principles have had in
this beautiful Christian Manual.* This book pursued its
noiseless way, winning golden praise by the fervour of its
piety, and the simple eloquence of its poetry ; and many
a heart has owned its sway, when the mind would have
turned unheedingly from an argumentative enunciation
of the same truth. And so also the Tracts pursued their
even course for some time, shaking and disturbing dissent
in its strong-holds, and presenting a front against Rome
which her teachers were but ill prepared to meet. So ill
prepared, and so taken by surprise were they at the time
that Dr. Wiseman when preaching in Manchester two or
three years ago, inveighed most bitterly against their ten
dency, and peevishly complained that these writers had
" started a line of argument which had been left undisturbed
for a century." This titular Bishop of Melipotamus was then
candid enough to state his fears and his dislike of this
* Well mig^ht the Rev. Hugh James Rose say of this work, " who can calculate
the enjoyment which that book has given and will give— the good it has done, and
will do ? "

42
party; and those who agree with me in regarding his
recent publications as the productions of a disputant bent
upon victory as the grand desideratum, will look upon the
Rev. Mr. Rathborne's* denunciation of these authors as
more true exponent of real Romish feeling upon the
subject than Bishop Wiseman's honied palliations of their
"deficiencies." The fact is, that the virulence with which
the Evangelical party within the Church have taken up
the cry of the Dissenters without as to their Popish
tendency, has emboldened the more long-sighted of the
Romish clergy to speak with favour of what, if they be
sincere in their obedience to Rome, they must in reality
have a deep-rooted horror. But the Tracts not only
gave weapons with confidence to wield them to those who
were fighting the enemy off from the approaches to the
citadel of our Zion; but those who had to keep watch upon
her walls, were by them strengthened to let the trumpet
give a certain sound. The laity were reminded of their
proper dignity and their Christian privileges, and the
clergy of the High Church school imitating the zeal with
out imbibing the fanaticismf of the abettors of Genevan
doctrines, the tide seemed to be setting in which should
carry on its peaceful bosom the sincere of all parties into
the haven of unity and love. But a further trial of the
Church's patience was in store. The time for union had
not come, and union was not permitted. The cry of
Popery, to Avhich 1 have already alluded, was raised;
* A Romish Priest.
t Fanaticism is well defined as " that temper which to enthusiasm for our own
opinions, adds bitterness of temper against those who differ from us."— Dr. Hook's
Church Dictionary.

43
doctrines which for 1500 years had been unquestioned
by the whole Church, were slighted ; and Dr. Pusey
having published a tract upon Baptism, in which he
assigTied to that ordinance the sacramental dignity with
which it had been invested by Christ ; those who look
with favour upon the tenets of Calvin and Zuinglius
condemned the reaction, and coined "Puseyism" as the
bugbear to frighten unstable minds. The infidel Sun —
the Evangelical Record — the Dissenting Patriot, and a
host of lesser fry caught up the note, and if we may
judge from the unfounded statements to which currency
was given, the following part of the " Modern Child's
Catechism," had not a few admirers :
" Q. How should you treat those who differ from you ?
A. I should abuse them in every imaginable way.
Q. Upon what would you ground your conduct?
A. On this : throw plenty of mud, some will be sure to stick."
And when the aptest disciples of this school of abuse
have been found among the clergy,* it cannot surprise
any reflecting person to find that the laity have been
misled, and that in many instances they have been
induced to memorialize individual bishops to exercise a
legislative power which no more belongs to them, than
the making or altering of the laws which they have to
administer, belongs to the judges of the land.
* I shall be forgiven if I abstain from multiplying such proofs of this assertion,
as the following which I find quoted in a Tract, published by Seeleys, and called
the Popery of the Oxford Tracts and the testimonies against them. " The men
who imbibe the sentiments of these Tracts are next door to the Church of Rome ;
they slope the way back to ' the mother of harlots.' " — H. Stotvell, A.M., Minis
ter of Christ Church, Salford.

44
The wonder is not that men are enabled to see the hold
which sound Church principles have gained ; but it con
sists in this, that one can hardly understand — nay one is
wholly unable to account for the rapid progress which
has been made. It seems but as yesterday that a large
section of the clergy emulated the practices of Dissenters,
and hailed with delight their co-operation in religious
objects. Now even the Low Church Clergy are begin
ning to think the Christian Knowledge Society as good
an engine for the circulation of the Holy Scriptures as
the Bible Society, although they still make use of that
sad society, the so called Religious Tract Society;* and
* I use the term sad advisedly. This is not the place to say all I co^dd say on
the manner in which this society sacrifices truth to the false god expediency — but
I cannot refrain from alluding to an instance v.'hich fell under my own observation
not a month ago. Being in Manchester I went into the shop of a bookseller whom
the Rev. Hugh Stowellonce described as " our honest-hearted Protestant secretary
and bookseller, Mr. Pratt," and on his counter I saw a Tract, No. 288, on the Religious
Tract Society's list, with the following startling title, " HOW CAN A MAN BE
BORN WHEN HE IS OLD ?" Knowing the ascendancy of the Anti-pajdo baptist
sect in this society, I was curious to see how this question of the Jewish Ruler would
be met. I looked through eight closely printed pages for the Saviour's answer butin
vain. One of Cheist's Holy Sacraments is forbidden ground upon which to touch.
The tract is the history of a hardened American unbeliever, who was attracted to the
place of worship in his village by the fact, that, " In 1819 the minister of the place
removed elsewhere. His successor arrived a total stranger, and the next day, being
tlie sabbath, began to deliver the Lord's message to the people." The minister is
eloquent and persuasive, and the story thus concludes : " It had now begun to be a
time of revival in the church, and others around were asking, what they must do
to be saved. A conference meeting was held on the sabbath evening which was
numerously attended, and Mr. J. was present. After a powerful address by the
pastor, he arose and requested liberty to address the company. With eyes filled
with tears, and in broken sentences, he proceeded nearly in the following words :—
" My friends and neighbours,— I am now fifty-eight years of age, and during the
whole of my life I have served the enemy of souls ; and you are witnesses for me
that 1 have done it zealously. I ara uow determined, in humble reliance on the

45
in numerous yvays it is evident that the external polity of
the Church is not the neglected and despised thing which
ten years ago it was. And yet, at the present moment,
the cry against the writers of the " Tracts for the Times"
is louder than ever.
I do not feel myself competent to say whether the
loudness of this cry may not have been increased by
the fact that of late a tone of apparent undutifulness
toward our own branch of the Church, upon the pretext
of ardent affection for the Church Universal, has com
pelled those who regard the Church of England as the
true VIA MEDIA, to hold in some measure aloof from
some of the more ardent disciples of the writers in
question. Certain it is, that to unveil a parent's nak
edness is not less a sin in the child of a spiritual
mother, than it was a crime in Ham ; and even if certain
extreme writers in the numbers of the " British Critic,"
which appeared in the summer and autumn of last
year, were right in their facts, they at least were not
warranted in their application of them. We should have
grace of God, that 1 will serve the Lord as zealously all the remnant of my days.
And I humbly ask an interest in the prayers of God's people here, that I may be
sustained in this resolution. I have been .esteemed a man of truth, and so I have
been, in all my intercourse with the world, and you had reason to believe me,
when I used to say 1 was a Universalist. I tried to be a Universalist, and tried to
be a Deist, and once tliouglit I was one. But, my friends I was not. I never was
either. I had no rest any where, I never was anything but an enemy to God.
And I now humbly ask your pardon for the injury 1 have done you and the cause
of Christ, by my example, and by all my profane conversation on these subjects. I
now put all my confidence in Jesus Christ, and choose him as my portion." And
in this presumptuous address the tract sees that operation of the Holy Spirit
in the New Birth of which Christ has said — " No man can tell whence it com
eth or whither it goeth." ! ! !

46
but little confidence in the citizen who, professing loudly
his loyalty to the Queen, was found to falsify his prin
ciples by undutifulness to parental authority in the
privacy of home ; and so it is hard to certify the sound
ness of their allegiance to the Church Catholic, who
wantonly expose the supposed faults or defects of that
particular branch of the Church in which themselves
were born to Christ. The true child of the English
Church " may think that at some time something is left
in that Church undone, which should be done ; some
thing done, which should be left undone; but he will
know also, that it belongs not to him to remedy the
error, or supply the deficiency. He will know that God,
under whose especial guidance he believes the Church to
be, may indeed permit evil ; but that His good spirit
will rectify what is wrong, and supply what is wanting
in the appointed way, and at the due season."* And,
therefore, it is possible that the conduct of that ex
treme party, to meet whose case Mr. Newman wrote
Tract XC, may have led the assailants of the sound
doctrines taught in the Tracts in general, to renew their
attacks with better hopes of success : but a close observa
tion of the peculiar views entertained by these assailants,
will not suffer me to think that hence arose their quarrel.
The cause of that quarrel lies deeper. These assailants
dislike the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration ; because
distorting the meaning of plain words, they apply Rege
neration to mean Conversion, and confound Justification
with Indefectible Grace. They hold Baptism to be merely
* Rev. H. J. Rose.

47
an initiatory badge into an outward communion. They
regard the Lord's Supper as a mere commemoration.
Church unity they look for in doctrine apart from discip
line. They eulogise the One Spirit, and practically
deny the one Body through which that Spirit acts. The
Apostolical Succession they revile. A Judgment accord
ing to Works interferes with their dogmas on the subject
of Conversion : and liking aVatican if there may be many
of them, "they substitute for the infallibility of the
Pope, the infallibility of private judgment, and reject
Church authority and Church consent, as assisting us in
our ascertaining the meaning of Holy Scripture. The
question then is, are these principles which are thus
attacked the principles of the Church of England, or are
they not? Upon the answer to this question depends the
issue who it is that are at fault in the present unhappy
strife. Nothing, in such cases, is gained by shirking the
real difficulty, and the body of the English Church will
not be cajoled for ever by declamation. I invite you,
therefore, to judge who are most accordant to the prin
ciples of the Church of England and Scripture, those who
maintain the affirmative, or those who hold the negative of
the six propositions 1 have advanced. And it may help you
in your judgment of the relative regard of these two parties
for the bishops who compiled and re-arranged our Prayer
Book, and canonically conducted our Reformation, if you
bear in mind that it is one serious charge against High
Churchmen that they have daily prayers in the Churches,
that they observe saints' days, that they urge frequent
communion, enforce self denial in bodily acts, such as

48
fasting and abstinence : meanwhile, all these several things
are commanded in our Book of Common Prayer, to all
things contained in which every Clergyman gives his
unfeigned assent and consent.
You will thus see that in this letter it is no part of my
business to defend the Tracts for the Times. I have
perhaps said enough to lead you to further inquiry. I ac
knowledge the service they have rendered to gospel truth,
I reserve the right of demurring to such portions of their
statements as my modicum of reading and knowledge of
the divines of the English Church, and of Ecclesias
tical authorities generally, compels me to differ froin. 1
am not aware that individually I am, in the first instance,
indebted to them for any of those opinions which it
is my object to maintain, not only in these pages, but
whensoever and howsoever I have lawful opportunity.
Whenever I have found them to be violently attacked 1
have examined the points against which objections have
been raised, and I have almost invariably found that those
who find wholesale fault with them, are either strangers
to primitive doctrine, as taught in our Church, or else that
they have grounded their censures on garbled extracts,
taken at second-hand from publications unscrupulous
in their choice of weapons to conduct party warfare.
1 gratefully tender to these deeply learned and pious men
my humble thanks for their successful labours, but 1 owe
them no filial homage, and would maintain in opposition
to their later productions, and more particularly in oppo
sition to those parties who have carried their principles
to extreme lengths, that there is no vassalage in English

49
Churchmanship in the sense in which those who disparage
the memory of Bishop Jewel, by dwelling chiefly on his
assailable points, would insinuate. I have been taught to
thank God for having called me into the state of salvation
in which 1 find myself, and so long as the members of the
Church of England as a body fall short of the practice
she requires, so long, methinks, will the energies of her
ministers be more profitably directed towards the elevation
of their practice, than the scrutinizing of her theory. The
most ardent admirers of Catholicism, and the most
devoted disciples of primitive usage will grant that the
Church of England imposes no sinful terms of com
munion. They will concede that the provisions and
requirements of her Prayer Book, are, as far as they go,
thoroughly Catholic, and that the generality of English
Churchmen do not value as they should the advantages
of Catholic discipline and primitive piety, which their
solicitous Mother so freely affords them. Now, under
these circumstances, surely the filial, the dutiful course
is to induce people, to obey their mother the Church
of England, before you invite them to gaze upon that
Church's faults. /To say that she has faults, is only
to say that she is but a branch of the Church, and
that her integrity is in some great sort in human
keeping. I trust there are but few who rejoice in the
faults of their spiritual Mother, and if only throughout
the length and breadth of the Church, the Clergy would
realize their own vows of conformity in all respects to
the Prayer Book, and invite their flocks to perform the
duties assigned to them, it would be far happier for Zion,

50
peace would be within her walls, and in her palaces there
would be plenteousness.
I have before me a mass of evidence as to the unscrip
tural views held by many of the clergy who attack High
Churchmen, upon most of the points to which I have
referred, but I forbear on the present occasion to quote it,
lest angriness of temper should be the result in your minds;
and my object is rather to defend High Churchmen, than
attack my " Latitudinarian" brethren;* rather to assert
and maintain truth, than to enumerate and condemn
error. 1 may not, however, omit reference to some of
the charges which are brought against us, lest you should
suppose that 1 overrate the virulence of the attack which
is made upon those who are content to abide by the
literal statements, and as far as possible, obey the literal
directions of the Prayer Book. I could refer you to the
extraordinary statements of clergymen, but 1 reserve
them until 1 am called upon by what 1 may deem suffi
cient authority, to name them. As it is, I quote from an
anonymous pamphlet entitled "A New Tract for the
Times; The 'Church Principles' of Nice, Rome, and
Oxford compared with the Christian Principles of the
New Testament." In this pamphlet we are charged with
opinions which 1 will not transfer to these pages, other
wise than in the denials of the learned incumbent of
St. James's Church, Leeds ;t the numerals are references
to pages of the pamphlet : —
^ I cannot call them " Evangelical ;" and I object to their assumption of such
a title. The charge against them, whether true or not, is that they do not preach
the lahole Gospel, but only a part.
t A Letter to the Churchmen of Leeds. By Rev. Geo. Ayliffe Poole, M.A.
Leeds: T. W. Green, Commercial Street.

51
We do not believe that the mere application of water,(') — can justify
the sinner, or change his state to one of holiness :('^) that a man can
be justified and adopted, can be cleansed of sin actual and original,
by the actual outward bodily washing with water :(3) that water,
without the blood of Christ,^*) and without the Holy Spirit,^^)
and without teaching, and faith, and holiness, and instead of a holy
life and heart,^^) is sufficient for man's salvation. And as we do not
believe that the mere outward bodily application of water regenerates,
so neither do we believe that Baptism is the cause of regeneration,^''
or a cause why salvation should be, or must be given to the unbeliever
or unconscious. (8) Nor do we believe it to be the only passport to
heaven j^^) nor that Baptism as a simple rite given by the hands of
man, is sufficient to create faith : (^'') or that man in that or any other
way regenerates his fellow men ; C") or that the influences of the Holy
Spirit are brought down from above, at the beck of a mortal, by the
application of water. ('*> Nor do we believe Baptism to act as a
charm ; (") nor that it was appointed by God to act as a complete
snare ; ('*) nor that to all those who receive all manner of spiritual
blessings, they arise entirely from the act of Baptism. (i^) We do
not hold that people once regenerated must be for ever holy, though
they be such persons as Simon Magus, ^'^^ or the Indian Thugs, (i') or
Robespierre ; ('*) nor that such men are taken at death to eternal
bliss, nor that they are adopted archangels ; '^' nor do we believe that
wilful sin after Baptism, is never forgiven. (^'^
To recur to the charges against us.
We do not believe that Baptism is of such a nature that Regeneration
is sure to follow, when or to whom or to whatsoever it is granted :
and in particular we do not believe that bells can be regenerated by
baptism, or be made thereby to receive a living soul capable of spiritual
endowments. (1)
With regard to the deference due to antiquity, we do not hold that
every thing in the conduct, practice, and opinion of a particular
Church,(2) is to be followed, or that any Churches should be held up as
infallible ;(3) nor that Christianity is built upon the foundation of the
Fathers and councils, as upon that of prophets and Apostles ;(*) nor do
d2

52
we put the confessors or martyrs in the place of the Apostles, and think
that all people cease to be christians who decline receiving their
absolute authority:'^' nor do we prefer their precepts and practice to
those of the Lord who bought them with His Own most precious
Blood ; or in any way so think of them, as to give occasion to such
questions as these, "Did any of the Fathers die for you ? Were ye
baptized in the name of the Fathers ?"("'
We do not wish to make the waters of Baptism, or the bread in the
Lord's Supper, or absolution, the means of laying the laity prostrate
at the feet of the clergy :('' nor do we think there is authority, scriptural,
or otherwise, for Fathers or councils or popes or Puseyites to think
for us, and to prevent our thinking for ourselves :(8' nor is there any
sense in which we believe that the laity are more debarred of the
RIGHT OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT than the clergy.C)
So much for the insinuations against us in this " New Tract for the
Times." If they were just, it were perhaps, neither rash nor uncalled
for to say that it was from the working out of "Church principles" that
the "mystery of iniquity" spoken of by St. Paul (2 Thess. ii, 3,) was
to proceed : but they are unjust ; and I am sure that the hearts of
Christians must recoil from such an application of that awful ex
pression of Holy Writ. Some of the insinuations I may have over
looked, for it is difficult to cull the flowers strewed over the surface
of 120 pages: and there is so much difficulty sometimes in discovering
whether Popery or the Church is glanced at, that I may in one or
two instances have left for Papists, the denial of what is charged upon
us. I suspect, for instance, that we are covertly accused of idolatry,
a charge which is directly made against Rome ; and at first I doubted
whether the doctrine of the regeneration of bells, was really imputed
to us : but on a more careful perusal I found it to be deduced (not
very logically) from principles imputed (not very fairly) to Church
men. It was necessary therefore gravely to declare that we do not
believe in the regeneration of bells !
Since the errors imputed to us are not our own, but the invention
of the author, the arguments directed against them must leave us
unscathed.

53
And now, my Christian brethren, I think we are in a
condition to enter at once and fully on the questions I
have said to be at issue, and first we may name that of
REGENERATION IN HOLY BAPTISM.
" I acknowledge one Baptism /or the Remission of Sins." — Nicene Creed.
It is difficult to understand how members of the Church
of England, worshipping daily in her sanctuaries, can
hold the doctrine of Original Sin, and deny that of
Baptismal Regeneration.
" Original Sin," says our Church in her IX Art., " standeth not
in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk,) but it is
the fault and corruption of the nature of every man that naturally is
engendered of the oflspring of Adam."
Now if the statements of this ninth article of our
Church be true, it follows that her solemn services
cannot be intended for any who are in the state of nature.
Her formularies must be designed only for those who
have been born again — only for those who have put on
the second Adam. Theodoret* tells us that "the ancient
Church did not teach the Lord's Prayer to the un
initiated, but to the baptized, or immediate candidates of
Baptism. For no one that was not baptized could pre
sume to say. Our Father which art in Heaven, not
having yet received the gift of adoption. But he that
was made partaker of Baptism might call God his Father,
as being adopted among the Sons of Grace." And
in all essential particulars our Church follows that
* Theod. Epitom. Divin. Decret. lib. 5, Hteret. Fabul, c. 28, as quoted by
Bingham Eccl. Antiq.

54
primitive model which, as I shall shortly show you, she
so highly extols in her Homilies and other public docu
ments. Her Prayer Book, then, being designed for all
who are joined to her communion, if we find prayers in
use which only the regenerate can justly appropriate, then
it is clear that the Church of England identifies the new
birth in infants with their reception of the Holy Sacra
ment of Baptism, and that she holds a like opinion of the
efficacy of the Holy Sacrament when administered to
those who being adults, are properly qualified by fasting,
and repentance, and faith, for its right reception.*
In her general exhortation in the daily service she
addresses the baptized as privileged to call the Almighty
God their Heavenly Father, and in her confessions she
invites them to acknowledge to an Almighty and most
MERCIFUL Father that they have erred and strayed from
His ways. Now Adam's race, unless born again, could
never ej^r and stray from God's ways, for in them they
were not by birth. Then, as we have seen the Lord's
Prayer belongs to the regenerate, and at the suffrages
following the creed the doctrine is most unequivocally
asserted. We are taught to ask God that He will not
" take His Holy Spirit from us." Now when was that
Holy Spirit given us ? So given us that we may pray
against its being taken away from us ? At our birth it '
came not, then we inherited Adam's curse, it could only
then belong to us in virtue of some new relationship to
God : and as the Prayer Book is for members of the
' See first rubric in office for " The administration of Baptism to such as are
«f riper years."

55
Church of England, and all persons lawfully baptized
in England, are ipso facto members of the Church of
England, that relationship must have begun in Baptism,
and this brings me to the dogmatic teaching of our
Church upon the point.
The Church defines her Catechism to be " An instruc
tion to be learned of every person before he be brought
to be confirmed by the Bishop," and none can be brought
to be confirmed by the Bishop but those that are bap
tized and come to years of discretion. And the very
first thing which she teaches the infants of the Church
is, that they are already in covenant with God — that they
are admitted into the membership of Christ's household
the Church — that they are adopted into the family of
God — that they are placed in the way to lay hold on the
promises of eternal life,* that they are the elect people of
God whom the Holy Ghost sanctifieth. Having thus
first taught them that they are by Grace what they were
not by nature, she then goes on to teach them, that certain
vows were made for them by persons who, from the
circumstance of thus supplying those wants, which belong
to them as expectants of immortality, (just as an earthly
parent attends to the requirements of time,) are called
GoD-fathers and GoD-mothers, i. e. fathers and mothers
in the matters which concern them as heirs of an heavenly
inheritance. Having taught them that these vows were
made for them, in the hope that when they came of age
they would take the responsibility upon themselves;
the Church further instructs them, that they are them-
* " Me and all the elect people of Goc."

56
selves bound to believe and do what their GoD-fathers
and GoD-mothers then promised for them. Thus the
obligation to take these vows upon themselves is conse
quent upon their Regeneration in Baptism.
The answer the Church gives to the question : " Why
then are infants baptized, when by reason of their tender
age they cannot perform them," clearly shows that in the
opinion of that branch of which we are members, the
Church Catholic has received from her Great Head, the
power to dispense with the exhibition of faith and repen
tance, in the case of infants. But this will be more
abundantly evident from the office for private Baptism.
In that office there are no sponsors : Baptism is antece
dent to any ascertaining questions, to any spon serial
promises. The Lord's Prayer is to be oflfered, and such
other of the Collects in the Baptismal Service as time
will permit, and then
" The child being named by some one that is present, the minister
shall pour water upon it, saying these words — ' N. I baptize thee in
the Name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost :
Amen.' Then all kneeling down, the minister shall give thanks unto
God, and say, 'We yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father,
that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this infant with thy Holy
Spirit, to receive him for Thine own child by adoption, and to
incorporate him into Thy Holy Church.' "
And lest, from the absence of sponsors, any should seek
to impugn the efficacy of this Baptism, the Church goes
on to say : —
" Ami let them not doubt but that the child so baptised m lanfully
and siifjiciciitltj baptized and ought not to be baptized tigain."

57
The Church further directs that,
" If the child baptized after this sort do afterwards live, it is expe
dient that it be brought into the church, to the intent that if the
minister of the same parish did himself baptize that child, the con
gregation may be certified of the true form of Baptism/'
And further, if the child have been baptized by any other
minister, the minister of the parish is to inquire, accord
ing to certain fixed questions, whether the child has
previously been rightly baptized ;
" And if the minister shall fnd, by the answers of such as bring the
child, that all things were done as they ought to be ; then shall not he
christen the child again, hut shall receive him as one of the flock of
true Christian people, saying thus, I certify you that in this case all
is well done, and according to due order, concerning the baptizing of
this child ; who being born in original sin, and in the wrath of God,
is now, by the laver of Regeneration in Baptism, received into the
number of the children of God, and heirs of everlasting life. For
our Lord Jesus Christ doth not deny His grace and mercy unto
such infants, but most lovingly doth call them unto him as the Holy
Gospel doth witness to our comfort on this wise."
This needs no comment, and leaves room for no
sophistry. Let Tis now look to the Articles of Religion, — ^The first
article in which use is made of the term Regeneration, is
the NINTH, which treats x)f Original or Birth Sin. Its
use in this passage is of the greatest importance, since, at
first sight, to the English reader, there appears to be a
distinction between the terms " them that are regene
rated," and "them that are baptized." Is this difference
real or imaginary ? On the answer to this question very

58
much depends ; for if there be indeed one thing meant
by regenerated, and another by baptized, it would be our
business at once to set on foot an enquiry, how this
discrepancy with other parts of the Prayer Book could
be satisfactorily accounted for. But we are not driven to
any such step. The difference is only apparent, not real;
and the use of the two different words to express the same
thing is strongly confirmatory of the view we have already
taken of what the Church says on this point. In the
Latin copy of the articles (which from Latin having
ceased to be a living language, and not being thus subject
to the fluctuation in signification which words receive
from changes in the habits and manners of life, is often
very valuable in assisting us to determine the sense which
the Reformers attached to the English copy) the words
"regenerated" and "baptized" are both represented by one
and the same word— viz. " renatis."* That the Reformers
of the English Church, who settled our Liturgy and Arti
cles, considered regenerated and baptized as convertible
terms, in the case of persons properly qualified, is there
fore sufficiently clear. They thought it immaterial whether
they said a person thus qualified was baptized, or whether
they said that he was regenerated. They were of the
opinion which had been held uninterruptedly in the
Christian Church for fifteen hundred years — that a person
could not be regenerate unless, having the opportunity,
he were baptized ; and they affirmed on like authority,
based in each case on Scripture, that all who being
i. e. born again or regenerated.

59
properly qualified* are rightly baptized are ipso facto
regenerate. How water can be sanctified to this mystical
washing away of sin we cannot, seeing as we now do,
through a glass darkly, tell ; but that the fact is so is
revealed, and that which is revealed we must believe. If
in Baptism there were only a conditional regeneration,
the sixteenth article would be unintelligible. Here we
have Baptism identified with the receiving of the Holy
Ghost. " To sin after baptism," and to " depart from
grace given after that we have the Holy Ghost" are
used as expressing the same act. Not to multiply this
kind of argument, 1 reprint the 27th Article, and I shall
then have more than sufficiently established my position
— that the Church of England teaches that adults pro
perly qualified by faith and repentance, and infants in all
cases, are in Holy Baptism born anew :
" Baptism is not only a sign of profession and mark of difference,
whereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened,
hut it is also a sign of regeneration or new birth, whereby, as hy
an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the
Church ; the promises of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be
the sons of god by the holy ghost are visibly signed and sealed."
We have here three distinct benefits enumerated as
attendant on Baptism. We are told that these benefits
belong to those who receive Baptism rightly. Now,
before I proceed to re-enumerate the benefits, let us first
settle who they be, who in the judgment of the Church
receive Baptism rightly. For if it shall appear that faith
• " Properly qualified ;'' this term includes all infants, and such adults as have
faith and true repentance.

60
in the recipient, or a promise in his behalf by sureties, of
future integrity of life be necessary in all cases, even that
of infants, then this article will avail us nothing in estab
lishing our point. How then stands the case? On a
reference to the office for private Baptism, where no
sponsors are required, no vow and no profession, we find
that the minister is empowered to pronounce that Baptism
to be sufficient and valid, which has been done with
water, in the name of the Holy and Blessed Trinity.*
And as if to set the matter wholly free from doubt, we
find in the Rubric at the close of the service already
quoted, that two things are mentioned as " essential parts
of Baptism, viz. that the child was baptized with water,
and that it was in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Now, we have here no
mention of faith, nor of vows, nor renewal of vows, and
we are therefore at liberty to conclude that the Church
considers all infants to be rightly baptized, who have
been baptized with water in the name of the three Persons
of the holy and undivided Trinity. We have then
no fears but that all who in infancy were dedicated at the
font of the Church, to Christ, have received Baptism
rightly.f What now are the three benefits which are
* See Rubric immediately following the Thanksgiving in the office for ministra
tion of private Baptism in houses.
t I do not wish to enter here on the question as to the validity of lay-baptism.
That the church condemns lay-baptizers is abundantly clear from the Rubrics ;
which do not even allow a deacon to baptize, save in the absence of the Priest, to
say nothing of Preface to the Ordinal, and the XXIII and XXVI Articles. And
in the case of Bapti.sm by other than the Parochial Minister, although the questions
go to ascertain if the " essential pai-ts " of Baptism have been used, yet the first
question is, " By whom was this child baptized? "

61
conferred on all thus baptized? They are — I. Grafted
into the Church, or taken into the number of God's
elect. II. The promises of forgiveness of sin are sealed
to them by the Holy Spirit. III. The same Holy
Spirit makes them the sons of God by adoption. Now
surely these are the blessings which are comprised in the
term regeneration, and he can be no true son of the
English Church, who denies that all who — ^being free from
impediment to the reception of grace — are rightly baptized
are born of God. If to be grafted into Christ's holy
Church, to be forgiven all the sin and all the punishment
due to the sin of Adam's transgression, and to have
heaven placed within our reach, — if these things deserve
not the name of a new-birth, of a death unto sin, and a
birth unto righteousness, then the covenant blessings of
Christianity are not those which are revealed in the Book
of Eternal Life.
Let us now look at the "order of Confirmation, or laying
on of hands on those that are baptized and come to years
of discretion." Let us take the first prayer, —
" Almighty and ever-living God, who hast vouchsafed to regenerate
these Thy Servants by water and the Holy Ghost, and hast given
unto them forgiveness of all their sins, strengthen them, we beseech
thee, O Lord with the Holy Ghost the Comforter, and daily
increase in them thy manifold gifts of grace, the spirit of wisdom,
and understanding, the spirit of knowledge and true godliness, and
fill them, O Lord, with the Spirit of Thy holy fear, now and for
ever. Amen."
No one will deny that here the children about to be
confirmed, are spoken of as regenerate in the use of water,

62
water being the instrument on man's part. Thus rege
neration is affirmed positively to have already taken place,
and moreover it is predicated of it that it was brought
about by water and the Holy Ghost. Now the Church
could not thus connect regeneration with a proper use of
water, if it depended, as has been alleged by explainers
away, on an inquiry to be made, without the use of any
material symbol ; nor have we any similar command on
her part, in other services, which allows us to suppose
that she could require the Bishop to affirm that, posi
tively, and offer up thanks for its being so, of which he
had no more certain knowledge than a simple affirmation
on the part of the person seeking confirmation. The
opinion must stand upon but a poor basis which requires
such sophistry to support it as is involved in the notion that
the Church^ — so uniformly cautious as she ever is, could
ask her chief officers to declare that, in the presence of
God, as a certainty, which they had then, for the first
time, learnt of man. The Church acts not so rashly.
Her object in directing that this inquiry shall be made
is, that the persons who are about to receive this holy rite,
should not look upon it as a mere idle ceremony, but
should approach it with holy reverence. They are here
reminded of the obligations under which they are placed
by the covenant relations of Baptism, and in order that
the imposition of hands may not be without its intended
effect on those who receive it, they are required as prepara
tory — not to their being declared regenerate but — to their
being admitted to this spiritual ordinance, to answer in the
affirmative to an enquiry which elicits their readiness to

63
take upon themselves, what was promised for them by their
sponsors at Baptism. They are thus enquired of as to
their readiness to renew, in the face of God and the con
gregation, their baptismal vows, not to ascertain whether
they be regenerated (of this the assurance of St. John, that
the Baptism of Christ should be not with water only but
with the Holy Ghost convinces us) but the object sought
to be ascertained is, whether, by attendance on the ap
pointed means of grace, the baptized person has continued
in a state of progressive renewal, and whether, having so
been brought to see the importance of a holy life, he
is prepared to undertake those things for himself, which
his GoD-fathers and GoD-mothers, when he was dedicated
at the font of Christ, had vowed as proxies in his behalf.
Unless he were thus prepared to ratify his part in the
covenant between God and His people, confirmation
would but increase his sin, and be worse than an
unmeaning ceremony. But if he declare his readiness
to renew his dedication-vows, then have we reason to
hope that the laying on of the hands of the Bishop will be
attended with that salutary and confirming grace, which
is sought in the prayer that he, who receives the rite of
confirmation, may be " strengthened," and that the good
gifts of God's Holy Spirit may " increase" in him.
There is reason to hope this is so, but we cannot afiirm
that it is so, since, without steadfastness of purpose, and
a firm faith on the part of him who is admitted to this
holy rite of confirmation, the laying on of hands of the
Bishop will be unproductive of those heavenly fruits,
to perfect which it was designed by the Church in this

64
office. In this case, we can only hope, since God
alone can see hearts. Therefore, wisely has the, Church
avoided the use of the term conversion* in this place,
for God alone can tell who are whited sepulchres,
fair without, but rotten within ! Wisely has she used the
term regenerate, since it implies an unseen work which
is to be believed, on the sure warranty of express declara
tions of Holy Writ, not to be ascertained by the wit of
man. The wind bloweth were it listeth, and no man can
tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth, so also is it
with the operations of the Third Person in the Blessed
Trinity, God the Holy Ghost. He leaves no visible
mark behind Him in Baptism, but we have the infallible
testimony of Scripture, that those who being properly
qualified, are baptized with water, in the name of the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are placed in
a state of grace : as previously they were liable to wrath,
so now are they in the way of salvation. Rightly then
does the Bishop, when praying for additional grace for
those about to be confirmed, say, " Defend, 0 Lord, this
Thy child with heavenly grace, that he may continue
thine for ever and daily increase in Thy Holy Spirit
more and more until he come unto Thy everlasting king
dom." Let it be observed that the person about to be
confirmed is said to be God's child, and the prayer is
that he may continue God's for ever. When then did he
become a child of God ? We have only to refer to the
second answer in the Catechism, and we learn that it was
* In the confusion of these two terms lies the error and the angriness of modern
controversy.

65
Baptism wherein he was made a member of Christ, a
child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of
heaven. A word or two from the Homilies.
In the third part of the Homily on Salvation we read,
" after we are baptized or justified." In the first part
of the same Sermon or Homily, we find that Baptism is
said to be necessary to Christ's sacrifice being made
available for washing away sin.
In the second part we have an assurance that we have
" remission of original sin in Baptism." Baptism and
the Eucharist are in the Homily for repairing of churches
called " the Sacraments and mysteries of our redemption."
Baptism is called "the fountain of our regeneration,"
the Eucharist " the partaking of the Body and Blood of
our Saviour Christ." In the Sermon on the Passion,
it is said, " Yea we be therefore washed in our .Baptism
from the filthiness of sin."
In her Collect for Christmas-day, and for the Sunday
after Christmas-day she prays "That we [being regenerate
and made thy children by adoption and grace'] may daily
be renewed by the Holy Ghost." Here we have a clear
recognition of the difference .between regeneration and
renewal — a clear intimation that though regenerate, we
still require some additional aid; that though sons by
adoption and grace, we may, by violent infraction of the
laws of God, have sentence of outlawry passed upon us,
and be denied the inheritance to which we had a son -like
claim. In her Collect for Easter Even she teaches us
to pray " that as we are baptized into the death of thy

66
blessed Son, our Saviour Jesus Christ, so by continually
mortifying our corrupt affections, we may be buried with
Him, &c. Now, here again, there is a clear reference to
some great benefit which was conferred in Baptism, to
some great privilege which was then entrusted to us, and
which, if rightly used, will be instrumental, for Christ's
sake, to our final salvation.
In the office for the ministration of public Baptism of
infants, we find abundant testimony to show that in the
opinion of the Church those who are rightly baptized,
i. e., " those who have been baptized, by persons duly
authorized, with water, in the name of the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost," become members of one
Body in Christ, and are united in one universal and
holy Church. In the first rubric in this office we learn
that the Church deems it convenient, that the most
public times be taken for the administration of this holy
Sacrament — ^"that the congregation there present may
testify the receiving of them that be newly baptized into
the number 0/ Christ's Church." In the first exhorta
tion we have the words of our Saviour quoted, " that
none can enter into the kingdom of God, except he be
regenerated and born anew of water, and of the Holy
Ghost ;" and again, admission into " Christ's holy
Church" is signified by being " baptized with water and
the Holy Ghost."
In the first prayer. Baptism, after the pattern of St.
Peter, is likened to Noah's ark. This, and the passage
of the Red Sea, being prefigurative of Holy Baptism ;
and in this same prayer, we learn that God did " sanctify

67
water to the mystical washing away of sin." In the
second prayer, she connects remission of sins by spiritual
regeneration with " coming to God's Holy Baptism."
Baptism is, moreover, called " a heavenly washing."
In the prayer before naming the child, we pray to God
to "sanctify this water" (i. e. the water then about to be
used) " to the mystical washing away of sin ; and to grant
that this child, now about to be baptized therein, may
receive the fulness of thy grace, and ever remain in the
number of thy elect children."
Can any language be more decisive than this to show
that the Church believes that in Baptism regeneration
takes place? She does not pray that, on exhibiting
evidences of faith hereafter, he may be grafted into the
Church ; but that, being admitted into that goodly com
pany by Baptism, the recipient of this holy Sacrament
may remain in the number of God's elect. Again, in
the exhortation after the child has been christened, the
Priest is to say, —
" Seeing now, dearly beloved, that this child is regenerate, and
grafted into the body of Christ's Church, let us give thanks unto
Almighty God for these benefits, and with one accord make our
prayers unto Him that this child may lead the rest of his life accord
ing to this beginning." She proceeds — "And humbly we beseech thee
to grant that he (being dead unto sin and living unto righteousness,
and being buried with Christ in hi^ death) may crucify the old man,
and utterly abolish the whole body of sin, and that as he is made
partaker of the death of Thy Son, so may he also be partaker of
His resurrection."
Can language be more plain, or intention more clear ?
A life is begun in Baptism, but this life must be nourished
E 2

68
and cherished by the use of the appointed means, without
which it cannot be sustained.*
* We believe, in accordance with the doctrine of our Church, a doctrine of whose
agreement with Scripture we are thoroughly persuaded, that every baptized person
has entered, in virtue of his Baptism, on a condition so different from his natural,
become entitled to such privileges, and endowed with such grace, that he may be
described as regenerate, or born again from above. He may fail to be finally
advantaged by this adoption into God's visible family. He may not be trained
up as a member of that family should be trained ; there may be no attempt at
making use of his privileges, none at acquiring or cherishing the dispositions which
should characterize God's children, none at consolidating or perpetuating that
membership which was derived to him by his initiation into the Church. But this
is only saying, that, having been made a child of God, he may fail at last to be an
heir of the kingdom, through failing to conform himself to the known will, and
improve the offered mercies of his Father in heaven. Let us pause for a moment,
and endeavour to explain how it comes to pass that there is so little of visible
efficacy in the Sacrament of Baptism. Vi'e would illustrate this from the account
of the restoration of tlie daughter of Jairus ; Christ raised her from the dead by
miracle, but immediately commanded that means should be used for sustaining
the life thus supernaturally communicated. "And her spirit came again, and He
straightway commanded to give her meat.". . . .By command of the great Physi
cian were the children sprinkled with the waters of Baptism, and this made
members of His Church and heirs of His kingdom. There was a miracle — the
child of wrath became a Child of God, the guilt of original sin was removed, and
a right acquired to all those gracious privileges through which, diligently used, the
life may be preserved which is imparted in Baptism. We believe of these baptized
children, that, had they died ere they were old enough to be morally accountable,
they would have been admitted into heaven ; and therefore do we also believe that
they passed, at Baptism, from death unto life, so that, in their case, Baptism was
instrumental to the recovery of the immortality forfeited in Adam. But when
Christ had thus wrought a miracle, wrought it through the energies of the Spirit
brooding on the waters, he issued the same command as to Jairus, and desired that
meat should be given to those whom he had quickened. So long as the children
were too young to take care of themselves, this command implied that their parents
or guardians were to be diligent in instilling into their minds the principles of
righteousness, instructing them as to the vows which had been made, and the pri
vileges to which they had been admitted at Baptism. So soon as the children had
reached riper years, the command implied that they should use, with all earnest
ness, the appointed means of grace ; and especially that they should feed, through
the receiving another Sacrament, on that Body and Blood which are the sustenance

69
Again, in the part of the Catechism relating to Sacra
ments, we have : —
Q. How many sacraments hath Christ ordained in His Church?
A. Two only, as generally necessary to salvation : that is to say
Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.
Q. What meanest thou by this word Sacrament?
A. I mean an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual
grace, given unto us, ordained by Christ Himself as a meanswhereby
we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof.
Q. How many parts are there in a Sacrament?
A. Two; the outward visible sign, and the inward spiritual
GRACE. Q. What is the outward visible sign or form in Baptism ?
A. Water, wherein the person is baptized in the Name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Q. What is the inward and spiritual grace ?
A. A death unto sin, and a new birth unto righteous
ness ; FOR being by nature born in sin, and the children
OF wrath, we are HEREBY* made the children of grace.
of a lost world. And we quite believe, that wheresoever the command is faithfully
obeyed, the life, communicated in Baptism, will be preserved as the infant advan
ces in maturity. But, unhappily, in far majority of instances the command is
altogether disobeyed  Even religious parents are often to blame iu this matter ;
for, not duly mindful of the virtues of Baptism, they address their children as
though they were heathens, in place of admonishing them,, as members of Christ,
to take heed how they let slip the grace they have received.
When, therefore, we are told that notwithstanding the use of the Sacrament of
Baptism the great mass of men have evidently undergone no renewal of nature ;
and when it is argued from this that there cannot necessarily be any regeneration
in Baptism, our answer is simply, that God works by means as well as miracle ;
the means are to sustain what miracle implants ; and that, therefore, the same
appearance will be finally presented, if means be neglected, as if miracle were not
wrought." — Sermons by Rev. H. Melvill, Vol. II. p. 240 — 243.
* Some persons, anxious to oppose what they think the error of Baptismal
Regeneration, and at the same time, desirous of making the Formularies of the
Church square with their opinions, have attempted to disconnect the "hereby" from
the sacrament, and to interpret the passage as if the Church merely enunciated

70
Again Dean Nowell in his Catechism thus in his Part
IV, defines a Sacrament, —
" A Sacrament is an outward testimony of the Divine good will
and kindness towards us, through Christ, representing a secret
and spiritual grace by a visible sign, by which the promises of
God concerning remission of sins and eternal life, given through
Christ, are, as it were, sealed to us, and their truth is more cer
tainly confirmed in us." In the answer to the eighth question, there
are said to be two Sacraments. The ninth and tenth questions with
their answers we subjoin.
"What are these two Sacraments? — Baptism and the Lord's
Supper, of which the use is common among all the faithful ;
for by the one we are born again (renascimur), by the other we are
sustained to eternal life."
M. " Tell me first what you think about Baptism ? — A. Since by
nature we are the sons of wrath, that is, aliens from the
Church, which is the household of God, Baptism is to us
LIKE AS A certain WAY OF ACCESS BY WHICJI (per quem) WE
ARE ADMITTED INTO IT (i. 6. the housekold of God,) and whence
ALSO we receive A most ample testimony that we are now
ALREADY IN THE NUMBER OF THE DOMESTICS and SO of THE
SONS OF God ; as it were, in very deed elected and inserted
IN THE BODY OF ChRIST AND BECOME HIS MEMBERS, AND UNITED
IN ONE BODY WITH HIMSELF."
The same truth is to be gathered from the rubrics in
the communion service, from which it appears, that while
positive qualifications are called for as preparatory to
Baptism, the Eucharist is the privilege of the baptized if
the truth, that by the death unto sin and new birth unto righteousness, we are
made the children of grace, &c. — a death and birth which may as well take place
at any other period as at Baptism. But surely every one must see, on looking at
the scope of the passage, that this notion is altogether inadmissible, and the more
so, when it is compared with the answer to the second question in the Catechism,
" In my Baptism," &c.

71
only they have not sinned away baptismal grace ; and if
so, that grace must be the New Birth, for without the
New Birth there can be no participation of the holy Body
and Blood of our Lord Christ.
" By Baptism, therefore," says the judicious Hooker, " we receive
Christ Jesus and from Him that saving grace which is proper unto
Baptism."* And from nothing will it more clearly appear that our
Church is justified in asserting over and over again the
truth told by her calling Holy Baptism in her xv
Homily, " the laver of Regeneration," than from a
consideration of the following titles which the learned
Mr. Bingham has (in his Antiquities, Book xi, chap, i,)
shown to have been applied to it in the primitive Church,
which our Homilies style " most godly and most pure."
" Indulgence or Absolution and Remission of Sins,"
" Regeneration, " " The Unction, " " Illumination, "
" Salvation," "Mystery," " The Seal of the Lord,"
" The Mark or Character of the Lord," " The Sacrament
of Faith and Repentance," " The Gift of the Lord,"
"The Initiation," and the like.f
We must here stop, for we may well exclaim with Mr.
Melvill— " That the Church of England does hold, and does teach, baptismal
regeneration, would never, we must venture to think, have been dis
puted, had not men been anxious to remain in her communion, and
yet to make her formularies square with their own private notions."
"We really think that no fair, no straightforward dealing can get
• Hooker, Eccl. Pol. B. V, ch. Iviii, 2. t Bing. Eccl. Orig.

72
rid of the conclusion, that the Church holds what is called Baptismal
Regeneration. You may dislike the doctrine; you may wish it
expunged from the Prayer-book ; but so long as I subscribe to that
Prayer book, and so long as I ofiiciate according to the forms of that
Prayer book, I do not see how I can be commonly honest, and yet
deny that every baptized person is, on that account, regenerate."* —
(Sermons, vol ii, p. 237, 238.)
And that I have taken no forced view of the services
of the church the following extracts, from the writings of
those who were instrumental in framing those services,
may be sufficient to prove. The martyred Cranmer has
left the following on record as his opinion on Holy Bap
tism. I quote from the Tracts of the Anglican Fathers.
In a sermon on Holy Baptism, translated from the Latin
and set forth by CRANMER,t he thus writes : —
"And the second birth is by the water of Baptism,
which Paul called the bath of regeneration, because our sins be for-
* Dissenters, who are clear-sighted enough to see how the case stands, laugh at
the idea of any one gravely professing to disbelieve that the Church holds Baptis
mal Regeneration, while they express their pity that " good, evangelical men,"
who themselves reject the doctrine, should yet be weak or prejudiced enough to
remain in the communion of a Church which so plainly teaches it, and in whose
whole services it is so thoroughly interwoven. And we think it must strike every
one as at least very strange, that our Reformers, (who certainly were not in the
habit of dealing tenderly with Popish errors) so far from decisively manifesting
their disbelief of the " heresy " (as moderns term it) of Baptismal Regeneration,
should have uniformly used such language in all our formularies, as almost inevit
ably to lead to its belief. Surely our wise Reformers were on this point most
unfortunate in their choice of language !
t " This is a plain reprint of a Sermon, set forth at the time of our English
Reformation, by the chief of our Fathers, Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury. It
will be observed that this Sermon was originally published a short time after
Cranmer's Sermons of Salvation, Faith, and Good Works (in the Homihes), and
in the same year as the first Prayer Book of Edward the Sixth ; and in that book
the Office for the Public Baptism of Infants is essentially the same as at present."
—Advertisement to Anglican Fathers, Pt. I.

73
given us in Baptism, and the Holy Ghost is poured into us
as into God's beloved children, so that by the power and working
of the Holy Ghost we be born again spiritually, and made hew
creatures. And so by Baptism we enter into the kingdom of God,
and shall be saved for ever, if we continue to our lives' end in the faith
q/" Christ.
" For I would that you should well know this, good children, that
a Christian man's knowledge and life is a more excellent thing
than unlearned people can judge. For a Christian man hath the
certain Word of God whereupon he may ground his conscience that he
is made a Christian man, and is one o/'Christ's Members, which he is
assured of by Baptism. For he that is baptized may assuredly say
thus, I am not now in this wavering opinion that I only suppose
myself to be a Christian man, but I am in a sure belief that I am
made a Christian man. For I know for a surety that I am baptized,
and I am sure also that Baptism was ordained of God, and that he
which baptized me did it by God's commission and commandment.
And the Holy Ghost doth witness that he which is baptized hath put
upon him Christ. Wherefore the Holy Ghost in my Baptism
assureth me, that I am a Christian man. And this is a true and
sincere faith which is able to stand against the gates of hell, forasmuch
as it hath for it the evidence of God's Word, and leaneth not to any
man's saying or opinion."
" Therefore, consider, good children, the great treasures and benefits
whereof God maketh us partakers when we are baptized, which be
these. The first is, that in Baptism our sins be forgiven us, as Saint
Peter witnesseth, saying, ' Let every one of you be baptized for the
forgiveness of his sins." The second is, that the Holy Ghost is
given us, the which doth spread abroad the love of God in our hearts,
whereby we may keep God's commandments according to this saying
of Saint Peter, ' Let every one of you be baptized in the name of
Christ, and then ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
" The third is, that by Baptism the whole righteousness of Christ
is given unto us that we may claim the same as our own. For so

74
Saint Paul teacheth, saying, 'As many of ye as are baptized in
Christ have put upon you Christ.'
" Fourthly, by Baptism we die with Christ, and are buried (as it
were) in His blood and death, that we should suffer afilictions unto
death, as Christ Himself hath suffered. And as that man which is
baptized doth promise to God that he will die with Christ, that he
may be dead to sin and to the old Adam ; so on the other part, God doth
promise again to him, that he shall be partaker of Christ's death and
passion. "And also, God maketh all af&ictions which he suffereth to be
good and profitable unto him, as was the passion of Christ, and not
damnable, as it was to Judas and divers other ungodly persons.
" By this which I have hitherto spoken, I trust you understand,
good children, wherefore Baptism is called the bath of regeneration,
and how in Baptism we be born again, and be made new creatures in
Christ." " Wherefore after Baptism, he doth not trust in his own righteous
ness, but in Christ only. And he is no more pensive or doubtful
considering his own weakness, but he is joyful because he considereth
that he is made partaker of Christ's righteousness. And this again
is a great alteration and renewing of the inward man."
* * ^ * * *
"And when you shall be asked. What availeth Baptism? you shall
answer. Baptism worketb forgiveness of sin, it delivereth from the
kingdom of the devil and from death, and giveth life and everlasting
salvation to all them that believe these words of Christ, and promise
of God, which was written in the last Chapter of Saint Mark, his
Gospel, ' He that will believe and be baptized shall be saved, but he
that will not believe shall be damned."
The following note is well worth reprinting.
"Some modems in the heat of controversy, have affirmed that
Cranmer's doctrine touching Baptismal Regeneration, underwent a
change before his martyrdom. This statement, however, is not

75
grounded in truth ; for, in his last work, his ' Answer to Gardiner,'
he says : —
" * For this cause Christ ordained Baptism in water, that, as surely
as we see, feel, and touch water with our bodies, and be washed with
water, so assuredly ought we to believe, when we be baptized that
Christ is verily present with us, and that by Him we be newly born
again spiritually, and washed from our sins, and grafted in the stock
of Christ's own body, and be apparelled, clothed, and harnessed with
Him in such wise, that as the devil hath no power against Christ,
so hath he none against us, so long as we remain grafted in that stock,
and be clothed with that apparel, and be harnessed with that armour."
Fol. edit. 1551, p. 42.
" Again : — ' The wonderful work of God is not in the water whicli
only washeth the body, but God by His omnipotent power worketh
wonderfully in the receivers thereof, scouring, washing, and making
them clean inwardly, and as it were, new men and celestial creatures.
This have all old authors wondered at ; this wonder passeth the
capacities of all men's wits, how damnation is turned into salvation,
and of the son of the devil condemned into hell is made the son of
God and inheritor of heaven. This wonderful work of God all men
may marvel and wonder at : but no creature is able sufficiently to com
prehend it. And as this is wondered at in the Sacrament of Baptism,
how he that was subject unto death receiveth life by Christ, and
His Holy Spirit : so is this wondered at in the Sacrament of
Christ's Holy Table, how the same life is continued and endureth
for ever, by continual feeding upon Christ's Flesh and His Blood.'
p. 74.
"Again: — 'As in Baptism we must think that, as the Priest
putteth his hand to the child outwardly, and washeth him with water,
so must we think that God putteth to His hand inwardly and washeth
the infant with His Holy Spirit; and moreover that Christ
Himself cometh down upon the child and apparelleth him with His
own self.' p. 444.
' It may be some satisfaction to the reader to see how nearly the
Archbishop agreed with his brother reformers in the aforesaid
doctrine.'

76
" Bishop Ridley calls Baptism regeneration, and the water in
Baptism 'the fountain of regeneration.' Thus,
" And, likewise, when I consider that all that man doth profess in
his regeneration, when he is received into the Holy Catholic Church
of Christ, and is now to be accounted for one of the lively members
of Christ's own body, &c. — Lamentation for the Change of Religion
in England, in Leigh Richmond's Selection from the writings of the
Reformers, p. 142.
"The bread indeed is sacramentally changed into the Body of
Christ, as the water in Baptism is sacramentally changed into the
fountain of regeneration, and yet the natural substance remaineth all
one, as was before.' — Treatise on the Lord's Supper. Ibid. p. 183.
" Bishop Hooper says,
" ' I believe, also, the holy Sacraments (which are the second mark
or badge of the true Church) to be the signs of the reconciliation and
great atonement made between God and us, through Jesus Christ.
They are seals of the Lord's promises, and are outward and visible
pledges and gages of the inward faith, and are in number only twain ;
that is to say. Baptism, and the Holy Supper of the Lord. THE
WHICH TWO ARE NOT VOID AND EMPTY SIGNS,
BUT FULL; that is to say, THEY ARE NOT ONLY
SIGNS WHEREBY SOMETHING IS SIGNIFIED, BUT
ALSO THEY ARE SUCH SIGNS AS DO EXHIBIT AND
GIVE THE THING THAT THEY SIGNIFY INDEED....
" ' I believe that Baptism is the sign of the new league and friend
ship between God and us, made by Jesus Christ ; and it is the
mark of the Christians now in the time of the Gospel, as in time past
circumcision was a mark unto the Jews, which were under the law.
Yea, Baptism is an outward washing done with water, thereby sig
nifying an inward washing of the Holy Ghost wrought through the
blood of Christ. The which Baptism ought as well to be given and
communicated to little children as to those that be great, according to
Jesus Christ. His ordinance, once for all, without any rebaptizing.
This Baptism is the Red Sea, wherein Pharoah, that is to say the
devil, with his army of sins, are altogether drowned 
"'I believe, also, that Baptism is the entry of the Church; a

77
washing into a new birth, and a renewing of the Holy Ghost,
whereby we do forsake ourselves, the devil, the flesh, sin, and the
world. For being once rid of the old man with all his concupiscences,
we are clothed with the new man which is in Jesus Christ, in
righteousness and holiness, and with Him we die and are buried in
His death, to the end that with Christ we may rise from death to
the glory of the Father. And even likewise, being thus new born,
we should walk in newness of life, always mortifying in us that
which is of us, that thereby the body of sin may be utterly destroyed
and plucked up by the root 
" ' By this Baptism we are changed and altered from children of
wrath, of sin, of the devil, and of destruction, into the children of
God, of grace and salvation, thereby to be made the Lord's, heirs
and co-heirs with Christ of eternal life, and for that cause the same
ought to be given and communicated only to reasonable creatures,
which are apt and meet to receive such things, and not unto bells and
such like, which neither can receive, nor use the thing signified by
Baptism." — Article upon the Creed, lviii., lxi. edit. 1583.
" Dr. Lancelot Ridley says, —
" ' Here [Ephes. v. 26,] is shewed, how Christ hath purged His
Church truly in the fountain of water, by His word. Although God
of His mere mercy and goodness, without all man's deserts or merits,
only for Christ's sake, hath washed and purged man from sin ; yet
He useth a mean, by the which He cleanseth men from sin, which is
Baptism in water, by the word of God ; and so in Baptism are our
sins taken away, and we from sins purged, cleansed, and regenerated
in a new man, to live an holy life, according to the Spirit and will
of God. It is not the water that washes us from sin, but Christ by
His word and His Spirit, given to us in Baptism, that washeth away
our sins, that we have of Adam by carnal nature.
" ' In that the apostle saith, that Christ " hath cleansed His
Church in the fountain of water by the word ;" he showeth plainly,
that Baptism is a mean, whereby Christ taketh away original sin,
and maketh all them that be baptized in the name of the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost, according to Christ's institution (Matt.
xxviii.), to be cleansed from all the sin of Adam 

78
"  ' Except a man be born again of the Holy Ghost and
of water, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.' To be born again
of the Holy Ghost and of water, it is to be christened, as Paul
showeth to Titus, (Tit. iii.), where Baptism is called the fountain of
regeneration, and of renewing of the Holy Ghost. Children, there
fore, must be christened, if they shall enter into the kingdom of
heaven, and be partakers of life celestial.' " — Commentary on the
Ephesians, L. Richmond's Fathers of the English Church, vol. ii,
p. 135—137.
"Bishop Jewel* says, —
" 'Again : — Forasmuch as these. two sacraments being both offeree
alike, these men (the Romanists) to advance their fantasies in the one,
by comparison so much abase the other, I think it good, briefly and
by the way, somewhat to touch what the old Catholic Fathers
have written of God's invisible workings ui the Sacrament of Baptism.
The Fathers in the Council of Nice say thus : ' Baptism must be con
sidered, not with our bodily eyes, but with the eyes of our mind.
Thou seest the water : think thou of the power of God, that in the
water is hidden. Think thou that the water is full of heavenly fire,
and of the sanctification of the Holy Ghost.' Chrysostom, speaking
likewise of Baptism, saith thus : ' The things that I see, I judge not
by sight, but by the eyes of my mind. The heathen, when he heareth
of the water of Baptism, taketh it only for plain water : but I see not
simply, or barely, that I see : I see the cleansing of the soul by the
Spirit of God.' So likewise saith Nazianzenus : ' The mystery
of Baptism is greater than it appeareth to the eye.' So S.
Ambrose: 'In Baptism there is one thing done visibly to the eye :
another thing is wrought invisibly to the mind.' Again he
saith : ' Believe not only the bodily eyes (in this Sacrament
of Baptism) : the thing that is not seen, is better seen : the thing
that thou seest is corruptible: the thing that thou seest not is
for ever.' To be short ; in consideration of these invisible effects,
Tertullian saith : ' The Holy Ghost cometh down and halloweth the
water.' S. Basil saith : 'The kingdom of heaven is there set open.'
• This passage is but a specimen of the way in which Bishop Jewel continually
appeals to the Testimony of the Fathers.

79
Chrysostom saith: 'God Himself in Baptism, by His invisible
power, holdeth thy head.' S. Ambrose saith: 'The water hath
the grace of Christ : in it is the Presence of the Trinity.' S. Bernard
saith : ' Let us be washed in His blood.' By the authorities of thus
many ancient fathers it is plain, that in the Sacrament of Baptism, by
the sensible sign of water the invisible grace of God is given unto us."
And again, in his treatise on the Sacraments (p. 263), Bishop Jewel
says, " We are not washed from our sins by the water, we are not fed
to eternal life by the bread and wine, but by the precious blood of our
Saviour Christ, that lieth hid in these Sacraments.' Chrysostom
saith : ' Plain or bare water worketh not in us, but when it hath received
the grace of the Holy Ghost, it washeth away all our sins.' So saith
Ambrose also : ' The Holy Ghost cometh down and halloweth the
water.' And, ' There is the Presence of the Trinity.' So saith Cyril :
' Aswater thoroughly heated with fire, burneth as well as the fire; so the
waters which wash the body of him that is baptized, are changed into
divine power by the working of the Holy Ghost.' So said Leo some
time a Bishop of Rome : ' Christ hath given like pre-eminence to the
water of Baptism, as he gave to His mother. For that Power of the
Highest, and that overshadowing of the Holy Ghost, which brought
to pass, that Mary should bring forth the Saviour of the world, hath
also brought to pass, that the water should bear anew, or regenerate
him that believeth.' Such opinion had the ancient learned Fathers,
and such reverend words they used when they intreated of the Sacra
ments. For, it is not man, but God which worketh by them." —
Reply to Harding, p.p. 249, 250.
Such is the glorious cloud of .witnesses who bear their
testimony to the Scripture doctrine of our new birth in
Baptism. We have already sufficiently shown that the
formularies of the Church go to this point.* It is truly
• Much more might be adduced, but let the above suffice. Any one, we believe,
who will study the services of the Church, with an unprejudiced mind, and will
carefully compare them together, can hardly fail to see that the doctrine of Bap
tismal Regeneration runs through the whole ; that the entire system of the Church
is in fact built upon it ; and that these formularies and services cannot be made
consistent or intelligible on any other principle.

80
difficult to account for the palpable obtuseness of ultra-Pro
testants in supposing that churchmen, when they speak of
Baptism as the laver of regeneration, ascribe the new-birth
to water, the external sign. These persons know well
enough that churchmen describe these things as taking
place in Baptism, because Baptism is a Sacrament. And
they know, further, that churchmen understand a Sacra
ment to be not a mere external rite, but " an outward
and visible sign — of an inward and spiritual grace given
unto us, — ordained of Christ Himself, as a Means
WHEREBY we may receive the same [i. e. the inward and
spiritual grace given unto us,J and a. pledge to assure
us thereof" With these plain words of the Church
Catechism before them, we know not how these persons
can, with the ninth commandment also before their eyes,
dare to persist in saying that the grace of Baptism is,
by churchmen, ascribed to the outward sign, when they
know well enough that the Church ascribes the new-birth
to the agency of God the Holy Ghost, the Third Person
of the ever Blessed Trinity, who acts for this purpose
by brooding over the waters of Baptism, as He did o,ver
the waters of creation.
You will now perceive that as members of the Church
of England you are pledged to the doctrine of Baptismal
Regeneration, which doctrine concisely stated is this —
That God has ordained the administration of water with
a certain form, as the duty on man's part ; to which in
His own inscrutable wisdom He attaches an inward and
spiritual gift of adoption into His Family by the Holy
Ghost as the grace on His part. That this grace and

81
spiritual benefit is experienced only by those who are
properly qualified. That adults are only properly quali
fied when to sincere repentance for past sins, they add
unfeigned faith in the merits of the only Saviour of
man, the Lord Jesus Christ, and a hearty desire of
amendment of life for the time to come. But although
God has been pleased to require these positive quali
fications in the case of adults, He has graciously permitted
the administration of this Holy Sacrament to infants,
with the assurance that little children are to be suffered
to come unto Him, and in no wise to be forbidden.
Infants without any actual sin are partakers of Adam's
fall, and infants without any actual qualifications are
permitted to be partakers of Christ's Death.
Having thus shown you the light in which the Sacra
ment of Baptism is considered in the Church of England,
I come now to consider

THE REAL PRESENCE IN THE HOLY
EUCHARIST.
" What is the inward part, or thing signified in the Lord's
Supper ?"
" A. The body and blood of Christ, which are verily and indeed
taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper." — Church
Catechism. 1 feel how awful is the subject of which I am about to
treat, and I will hope that no remark unbecoming the
holy mystery may escape me : for I have at hand passages
which sicken a Churchman's heart, and cause him almost

82
to weep for the presumption whicli dares to suppose that
because God has revealed some of His plans to us, that
therefore He has left none involved in mystery. The
man in Phcedrus who was asked what it was that was
hidden under his cloak, answered that it "was hidden
under his cloak " — ^meaning thereby that if he had meant
people to know he should not have put it there. And
many Christians would do well to take a lesson hence.
For there are many who use the language without it is
to be fearedj the spirit of Nicodemus, and irreverently
ask, "How these things can be." The tenure of the
gospel life is faith, we walk by faith and not by sight,
and yet there are those who, if I may so speak, sacra-
mentalize faith, meanwhile they demand for every particle
of revealed truth, an evidence of which the senses are to
take cognizance. There is perhaps no single doctrine
which has suffered so much from this disregard of true
gospel faith, as the doctrine of the benefits derived by the
believer from a reverent partaking of the Holy Commu
nion. The Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, of
which our Reformers treated with such holy jealousy, is
lowered into a mere service of registration for the perfect
instead of being regarded as a blessed means of grace for
the perfecting. And this has come about from the ration
alistic view which will not believe unless it can first
explain and understand. There was always as much
variety of expression concerning this Holy Sacrament as
there now is, yet, that in this Holy Sacrament Christ
was indeed given to the faithful, was never doubted,
until of late.

83
I forbear to quote the passages to which I have referred,
but as a sample of the Christian argument employed by
the gainsayers of the doctrine of the real Presence. I
may quote the following from a work recently published
to compare " The Church Principles of Nice, Rome, and
Oxford with the Christian Principles of the New Testa
ment." "Till they were drunken!" (1 Cor. xi. 21.) Had that wine
become the " real presence," it could not have had such an effect ; for
to say that the actual Body and Blood of Christ could by any possi
bility make 'a person lose his sober senses, and plunge him into a
state of intoxication, is a blasphemous absurdity."
And this is intended for grave Christian argum ent in the
enlightened eighteenth century !
It is often objected to the churchman's statements of
the doctrine of the Real Presence that our Reformers did
not all use the same phraseology on the subject. Arch
bishop Bramhall* thus disposes of the objection.
" Yet all the time we find as diflTerent expressions among those Prim
itive Fathers, as among our modern writers at this day, some calling
the Sacrament the sign of Christ's Bodie, the figure of His body, the
symbol of His Bodies, the mysterie of His Bodie, the exemplar type
and representation of His Bodie, saying, that the elements do not
recede from their nature, others naming is the true Bodie and Blood
of Christ, changed, not in shape, but in nature ; yea doubting not to
say, that in this Sacrament we see Christ, we touch Christ, we eat
Christ, that we fasten our teeth in is very flesh, and make our tongues
red in His blood. Yet, notwithstanding, there were no questions, no
quarrels, no contentions among them, there needed no councils to
order them, no conferences to reconcile them, because they contented
themselves to believe what Christ had said, this is My Bodie, without
• Whole Works. Folio edition. Epistle Dedicatory.
F 3

84
presuming on their own heads, to determine the manner how it is His
Body ; neither weighing all their own words so axactly before any
controversie was raised, nor expounding the sayings of other men,
contrary to the analogy of faith."
And the same author thus deals with his Romish
adversary, —
Having viewed all your strength with a single eye, I find not one
of your arguments that comes home to Transubstantiation, but only a
true Real Presence, which no genuine Son of the Church of England
did ever deny, no nor your adversary himself. Christ said. This is
My body ; what He said, we do steadfastly believe. He said not after
this or that manner, neque con, neque sub, neque trans ; and therefore
we place it among the opinions of the schools, not among the Articles
of our Faith."
And again.
Because curious wits cannot content themselves to touch hot coals
with Tongs, but they must take them up with their naked fingers, nor
to apprehend all the stories of Religion by Faith, without descanting
upon them and determining them by Reason, whilst themselves
confess that they are incomprehensible by human Reasons, and im
perceptible by man's imagination. Now Christ, as present in the
Sacrament, can neither be perceived by sense, nor by imagination.
The more iuexcusable is their presumption to anatomize mysteries,
and to determine supernatural, and revealed Truths upon their own
heads which if they were revealed were not possible to be compre
hended by mortal man ; as vain an attempt as if a child should think
to lade out all the water out of the Sea with a cockle shell.
This is the reason why we rest in the words of Christ, This is
My body, leaving the manner to him that made the Sacrament;
we know it is Sacramental and therefore efficacious, because
God was never wanting to His own Ordinances, where man did
not set a Bar against himself.

85
Jeremy Taylor, Bishop of Down and Connor thus
states the question : —
It is bread and it is Christ's body. It is bread in substance, Christ
in the Sacrament, and Christ is as really given to all that are truly
disposed as the symbols are; each as they can, Christ as Christ can
be given ; the bread and wine as they can, and to the same real pur
poses to which they are designed, and Christ does as really nourish
and sanctify the soul as the elements do the body. It is here as in
the other Sacraments, for as there natural water becomes the laver of
regeneration, so here bread and wine become the body and blood of
Christ, but there and here too, the first substance is changed by grace
but remains the same in nature.*
Bishop Bull writes —
" The Lord's Supper is the most sacred and mysterious rite, the
apex, the top and perfection of Christian worship, as the ancients
term it !"
And Bishop Horsley thus charges his clergy: —
" You will instruct them, therefore, in the true nature of a Sacra
ment — that the Sacraments are not only signs of grace, but means of
the grace signified; the matter of the Sacrament being, by Christ's
appointment and the operation of the Holy Spirit, the vehicle of
grace to the believer's soul. The Lord's Supper is in this sense a
Sacrament in the very highest import of the word ; for you will
remember that the Church of England, although she rejects the
doctrine of a literal Transubstantiation of the elements, which is
tauglit in the Church of Rome, denies not, but explicitly maintains,
that the Body and Blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and
received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper," — " though they are
taken after a spiritual manner ;" and " the mean by which they are
received in faith." — Horsley's Charges, p. 115; London edit., 1830.
But let us go more fully into it, and let us see how the
* Bishop Jeremy Taylor, p. 182-^3, Third Folio Edition, 1674.

86
case stands when viewed by the light of Scripture, our
Prayer Book, our Homilies, and our Standard Divines.
In John vi, our Lord thus answers Jews, men of
Capernaum, who murmured at the terms He laid down
as indispensable to the reception of the Gospel, which He
came to promulge — " I am the living bread which came
down from heaven : if any man eat of this bread, he
shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give is my
flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." The
Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, " how
can this man give us his flesh to eat." Then Jesus said
unto them, "Verily — verily — I say unto you except ye
eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, ye
have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh
MY blood hath eternal life, and I will raise him up at
the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my
blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and
drinketh my blood dwelleth in me, and I in him. As
the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father,
so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me."
Now such are the plain words of Scripture, and we
who are Church of England Christians, will receive
Scripture in its plain unsophisticated fulness — against
Scripture we will not erect our individual judgments —
but if Scripture seem to propound that which our present
means of information will not allow us to acquiesce in —
surely the course for us to take is simply this, to be sure
that what Scripture says is truth, and to be resolved on
raising our views to a standard more correspondent
with the Divine mystery, not lowering Scripture to

87
meet our rationalistic views. Thus, with the doc
trine I seek more especially to state when 1 speak
of the Saviour being really Present in the right
partaking of the Holy Communion : I mean what
Scripture teaches, and nothing more — nor anything less.
And I understand Scripture, as it was understood by
those Bishops of our Church to whom we owe our
Reformation ; and their opinions 1 take from their own
statements in our Prayer Book, and in the Homily on
the Sacrament of the Blessed Body and Blood of our
Saviour Christ.
Now, our Reformers in their definition of a Sacrament
followed St. Augustine, and their doctrine about the Sacra
ments is very closely founded upon his. John Calvin* has
a definition of his own, which he very modestly says has
much the same meaning with Augustine's, but is " clearer
and better 1 " However, our articles, and afterwards our
Catechism (for the last part on the Sacraments was added
by Bishop Overall,) keep to St. Agustine's definition—
" Dicuntur Sacramenta, quia in illis aliud videtur, aliud
intelligitur." " They are called Sacraments, because in
them one thing is seen — another is understood." "An out
ward, visible sign of an inward spiritual grace given
unto us, &c." f Now, if that spiritual grace is given unto
us, it must be there present, because the outward visible
sign is also a means whereby we receive the same. What
then is that inward spiritual grace ? It is the life which
the just live ! It is the being one with Christ, and
• Institutes. Book vi, 14. 1 Ed. 1537, fol. 87.
t Church Catechi&m.

88
having Christ one with us. It is the spiritual banquet
already cited from John vi, — it is, as St. Paul tells us —
the Communion (the partaking) of the Body of Christ."
Christ is, therefore, really spiritually present, and is, to
use the language taught by our Church in her Catechism
to the infants of her fold," verily and indeed taken, and
received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper."
Does any man ask how ? Let him beware, and
examine himself with what spirit he asks ! St. Chrysos
tom, referring to the question of Nicodemus on Baptism,
John iii, 49, and that of the people of Capernaum on this
Sacrament, John vi, 52, says, " when Christ hath said
it ; to ask howis a symptom of unbelief" My brethren of
the laity, it would have been well if the Church had always
kept the reverential faith of better times, and never
asked this intrusive question, how these things can be?*
But are we, because this question has introduced
sectarian irreverence, and Romish blasphemy, are we
therefore to deny the words of Scripture — the words
which Christ Himself has spoken. No; assuredly not.
Christ's words have spoken it, and we believe it. The
bread is His body, and the wine His blood. By a change
of their substance ? No : for then it would be no more
what St. Paul calls it, " the bread which we break."
Verily — as when we say Christ is God, we do not take
away from the human nature which in the flesh He bore,
by asserting His Divinity : so neither when we say the
bread is His body, do we take away the nature of bread,
* Cum certum sit ibi esse corpus Christi, quid opus est disputaje num panis
substantia maneat vel non. — Ferus in Matt. xxvi.

89
or bring down Him, our Lord, from heaven, in which He
organically and bodily is.
It was not until after the Norman conquest that the
gross Romish doctrine of Transubstantiation was heard
of in the English Church. Most grievously do they err
who confound the Real Spiritual Presence, which has
ever been the tenet of the faithful disciple of Christ, with
that gross corporeal doctrine of Transubstantiation, by
holding and maintaining whicli, Rome has fostered
idolatry, and cultured irreverence, blasphemy, and false
hood. After the Norman conquest, Lanfranc introduced
this gross doctrine from Italy, but not without a contest.
The work of Berenger, Archdeacon of Angers, his
learned and able opponent, has been in part recovered,
and was printed a few years since at Berlin.
" It was never my assertion," says he, " that the bread and wine on
the altar are only sacramental signs. Let no one suppose that I affirm
that the bread does not become the Body of Christ from being
simple bread, by consecration on the altar. It plainly becomes the
Body of Christ ; but not the bread, which in its matter and essence is
corruptible, but not in as far as it is capable of becoming what it was
not — it becomes the body of Christ — but not according to the man
ner of production of His very Body, for that Body once generated on
earth so many years ago can never be produced again. The bread,
however, becomes what it never was before consecration, and from
being the common substance of bread, is to us, the Blessed Body of
Christ." Now the misfortune was, that this learned and devo
tional man, who saw into the question as clearly as any
of the Reformers of the 15th or 16th centuries, had not
courage to stand against the persecution which threatened

90
him, and thus for lack of opposition and refutation, error
became established.
But when Reformation came, nothing can be more
clear than that our countrymen held to the primitive
doctrine of a true presence of Christ in the Holy
Eucharist. " The controversy," says Ridley, the martyr, " which at this day
troubleth the Church, is not whether the Holy Sacrament of the
Body and Blood of Christ is no better than a piece of common bread
— or whether the Lord's Table is no more to be regarded than the
table of any earthly man — or whether it is but a bare sign or figure
of Christ and nothing else, for all do grant that which St. Paul's
words require, that the bread which we break is the partaking of the
Body of Christ — they do grant him that eateth of that bread, or
drinketh of that cup unworthily, to be guilty of the Lord's death,
and to eat and drink his own damnation : he esteemeth not the
Lord's body. The whole difference," he says, "hangs upon this
one question — what is the matter of the Sacrament ? — whether it is
the natural substance of bread, or the natural substance of Christ's
own Body."
And this question, brethren, we who know that the
just shall live by faith — resolve by saying the natural
substance of bread, which faith by a spiritual and
heavenly process renders to us the Body of Christ.
Poynet, Bishop of Winchester, one of the most learned
of our Reformers, and the compiler of Edward the
Sixth's Catechism, wrote a treatise on this question, full
of very apposite quotations from the Fathers. Quoting
the words of St. Ambrose,
" Those that receivest the bread in that food, partakest of the Divine
substance," he says, " by the authority of this great man we learn,
that it is spiritual not bodily food which we receive in the Holy

91
Sacrament, and that the flesh of which Christ speaks, (John vi,)
is not to be understood according to the proper notion of flesh — as
the people of Capernaum took it, and from the offence it gave them,
walked no more with Him ; but that together with the outward sign
we obtain the grace and virtue of Christ's very nature, and while
we receive the bread, we are partakers of the Divine substance. The
Holy Eucharist, he says, is not the Body of Christ in its own pro
per nature of a body, since it has neither the form of a true body,
and is without feeling or motion, and yet our faith believes that it is
by grace truly His Body."
Now, my brethren, this was not only the doctrine of a
few eminent men in those times, but was generally that
of all the well-informed, to prove which, by quotations,
would occupy too much space to introduce here, but
the following extract from the letter of Robert Samuel,
a godly minister, who suffered for the testimony of the
truth, at Ipswich, in Suffolk, being burnt 18th of August,
1555, will prove the prevalence of the doctrine.
" The other Sacrament, which is the Supper and Holy Maundy of
our Saviour Christ, whereby the Church of Christ is known, I
believe it is a remembrance of Christ's death and passion, a seal and
confirmation of His most precious body given unto death, even to
the vile death of the cross, wherewith we are redeemed, and delivered
from sin, death, hell, and damnation. It is a visible word : because
it worketh the same thing in the eyes, which the word worketh in the
ears. For like as the word is a mean to the ears, whereby the Holy
Ghost moveth the heart to believe ; so this Sacrament is a mean to
the eyes, whereby the Holy Ghost moveth the heart to believe. It
preacheth peace between God and man ; it exhorteth to mutual love,
and all godly life ; and teacheth to contemn the world for the life to
come, when as Christ shall appear, which is in heaven, and nowhere
else, as concerning His human body. Yet I do believe assuredly that
His very body is present in his most holy Supper, at the contempla-

92
tion of our spiritual eyes, and so verily eaten with the mouth of our
faith. For as soon as I hear these most comfortable and heavenly
words, spoken and pronounced by the mouth of the minister, ' This
is MY body, which is given for you,' when I hear, I say, this
heavenly harmony of God's infalHble promises, and truth ; I look not
upon, neither do I behold, bread and wine; for I take and believe the
words simply, and plainly even as Christ spake them. For, hearing
these words, my senses be rapt, and utterly excluded: for faith wholly
taketh place, and not flesh, nor the carnal imagination of our gross,
fleshly, and irreverent eating, after the manner of our bodily food,
which profiteth nothing at all as Christ witnesseth, but with a sor
rowful, and wounded conscience, an hungry, and thirsty soul, a pure
and faithful mind, I do fully embrace, behold, and feed, and look upon
that most glorious Body of Christ in heaven, at the right hand of
God the Father, very God, and very Man, which was crucified
and slain, and His blood shed for our sins, there now making inter
cession, offering and giving His holy Body for me : yea, my body,
my ransom, my full price, and satisfaction, my Christ and all that
ever He hath. And by this spiritual, and faithful eating of this
lively, and heavenly bread, I feel the most sweet taste of the fruits,
benefits, and unspeakable joys of Christ's death, and passion, fully
digested into the bowels of my soul. For my mind is quieted from
all worldly adversities, turmoilings, and troubles ; my conscience is
pacified from sin, death, hell and damnation ; my soul is full and hath
enough, and will no more ; for all things are but loss, vile dung, and
dross, vain vanity for the excellent knowledge' sake of Christ Jesu,
my Lord and Saviour. Thus now is Christ's flesh my very meat
indeed, and His blood my very drink indeed ; and I am become flesh
of His flesh, and bone of His bones. Now I live, yet not I, but
Christ liveth in me, yea I dwell in Him, and He in me; for through
faith in Christ, and for Christ's sake we are one ; that is of one
consent, mind, and fellowship with the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Ghost.
Thus I am assuredly, and fully persuaded, and on this rock have I
builded, by God's Grace, my dwelling, and resting place for body,
and soul, life, and death. " And thus I commit my cause unto

93
Christ, the righteous, and just Judge, who will another day judge
these debates, and controversies ; whom I humbly beseech to cast
His, and tender merciful eyes upon the afflicted and ruinous
churches, and thereby to reduce them into a godly, perpetual
concord. Amen."
And I may not refrain from referring you to the first
Homily on this Sacrament, in which you will read,
"Thus much we must be sure to hold, that in the Supper of the
Lord, there is no vain ceremony — no bare sign — no untrue figure of
a thing absent — but as the Scripture saith the Table of the Lord —
the Bread and Cup of the Lord, the memory of Christ, the Annun
ciation of His Death, and the Communion of the Body and Blood of
the Lord, in a marvellous incorporation, which by the operation of
the Holy Ghost (the very bond of our conjunction with Christ) is
through faith wrought in the souls of the faithful, whereby not only
our souls live to eternal life, but they surely trust to win to their
bodies the Resurrection to, immortality."
And there is much more to the same purpose. In the
exhortation of our service it is said, "Then we spiritually
eat the flesh of Christ and drink His blood." In the
prayer before consecration we say, " Grant us gracious
Lord, so to eat the flesh of Thy dear Son." In the 13th
Article we read, " The Body of Christ, is given, taken,
and eaten in the Supper only after a heavenly, and
spiritual manner. And the means whereby the Body of
Christ is received, and eaten is Faith." " The Body and
Blood of Christ" saith the Catechism, " which are verily,
and indeed taken, and received by the faithful in the
"Lord's Supper." "The Holy Communion of the Body
and Blood of our Saviour Christ," saith the Exhortation,
and again " we spiritually eat His flesh, and drink His

94
blood." " Grant" says one of our prayers that "we receiv
ing these thy creatures of bread and wine, may be partakers
of His most blessed Body and Blood." Then again we
are directed to be grateful for mystical incorporation into
Christ, and that God is pleased to feed us with the
spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood of His
Son our Saviour Jesus Christ. At the end of the first
book of Homilies we read, "Hereafter shall follow sermons
— of the due receiving of the blessed Body and Blood of
our Saviour Christ, under the form of bread and wine."
Again in the exhortation we are told " He hath given
His Son our Saviour Jesus Christ, not only to die for us,
but also to be our spiritual food and sustenance in that
Holy Sacrament." Thus the Church of England leaves
this doctrine in the sacred mystery with which God has
enveloped it, and although " It is not to be denied that
the Roman doctrine of Transubstantiation, facilitates the
mental conception of that mystery, it has the fatal defect
of being opposed to Scripture, and of being unheard of
until the eighth century after Christ."* Let us then
ever hold by a real spiritual Presence f — let us ever
regard it as the aliment of the life of the just which
they must receive by Faith — but let us renounce as
* Rev. AV. Palmer, M.A., History of Church of Christ.
t Heaven is called aKtjvri aXt^Qivrj.
Christ „ the true light.
So also, „ „ the true bread from heaven.
Christian graces are called true riches.
True Circumcision is in the Spirit.
Nathanael aXijOuig 'IffparjXirrjg.
Hence Christ's presence more real because spiritual.
3p. Jeremy Taylor.

95
deadly error anything that may be understood to mean
a gross, and carnally corporeal presence. Surely had
Lanfranc and Anselm lived in a later age they would
have been shocked in their belief if they had heard of
the blasphemous fables, which this gross idolatrous
notion has produced, which perhaps are even now current
in such countries as Spain and Flanders. As for example
how some misbelieving Jews stole the consecrated wafers
from a church at Brussels, and cut and hacked them
with their knives when blood began to flow, how
children were taught to say they saw the Child Jesus
in the midst of a Host, and a thousand other miserable
and impious tales. One may well dread, to think of
the consequences of trifling with an error like Transub
stantiation. It must be exposed and cast off" as we
believe that our Lord is in heaven. But in repudiating
heresy let us not forsake truth, but knowing that the just
live by Faith, let us never draw nigh to the holy Altar
without " discerning the Lord's Body." When eating
bread and wine with our mouths, we may by a lively
faith feel and perceive that God is doing great things
for us, and that in such sort as we can we are eating of
the broken Body and drinking from the pierced side.
One with Christ and He one with us, let us be assured
by this act of Communion that we are fed with the
spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood of
our Saviour Jesus Christ, and that we are very mem
bers incorporate in the mystical Body of God's Son : the
blessed company of all faithful people.

96
We have next to consider that as far as we on earth are
concerned :

THE ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC
CHURCH IS A VISIBLE BODY.
" I acknowledge one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church." — Nicene Creed.
"The Church which is His Body."— Eph. i, 23.
It is a favourite theory with modern religionists that
the covenant blessings of Christianity are individually
promised to all who exhibit certain inward qualifications :
and this irrespectively of the particular outward com
munion to which they belong ; and those who maintain
a different view of this subject are branded with party
names and accused of illiberality, and charged with
lacking charity, and with being deficient in christian
graces. " The plan of the present age,'' says the Rev. Hugh James Rose,
" is to admit that all men, however unfounded, however wild their
schemes are equally right, or equally likely to be so with ourselves —
to fraternize with every class and every opinion — and by the aid of
unmeaning and indefinite expressions to give to falsehood a participa
tion in the blessings and the honour of order and truth. And this is
termed charity — this is dignified by the spacious and imposing name
of liberality, and the outcry is raised against all who dissent from the
practice. A superficial liberality — a false and hollow charity — for
christian charity is something higher, oh ! far, far, higher than this.
The first of all things in the eye of a christian, is truth.*
And to the same purpose the late excellent Bishop Hobart
* Commission and Consequent Duties of the Clergy. — Sermon I. p. 30.

97
thus expressed himself in a charge to his clergy, printed
at New York, in 1818, p. 26.
" What thougli it be said that these principles would limit the
communion of the Church to a small portion of professing christians,
and place in a state of schism a large numberof the christian family? If
these principles be true, their obligation cannot be weakened nor their
importance diminished by the piety or the zeal of their opponents.
The general prevalence of error hitherto permitted by the counsels of
an inscrutable Providence, is a trial of our faith but ought not
to weaken or subvert it. Was not the Revelation of God's will
confined from the beginning to a small number of the human race in
the Plains of Shinar, and in the fields of Jordan ? Are not large
portions of the globe still under the dominion of the prince and power
of darkness ? * *> * » Was there not a period when the
Divinity of His blessed Son was doubted and denied by a large
portion of the christian world — and when a venerable defender of this
fundamental truth was hunted by his persecutors throughout the
earth ? Did not the dark cloud of papal superstition for ages
disfigure and conceal the primitive splendour of the Christian Zion.
* » * * » * * -^ Charity though it
should always soften the rigid features of truth, cannot change her
Divine character, nor dispense with her sacred obligations"*
Twenty years have passed away and Christendom still
exhibits the same phase, there is still. a distaste for truth
and a hankering after expediency. Men forget that God
must be the best Orderer of His own world, and in
forgetfulness of this, they speak of this and that truth not
as it exists in relation to the Divine mind, but according
to its tendency in the shortsighted estimate of mortal
and perishing creatures. If a truth involve difficulties
* The corruptions of the Church of Rome contrasted with certain Protestant
errors, a charge by Bishop Hobart, p.p. 26, 28.
G

98
of which human science and philosophy offer no solution,
or none which it is satisfactory or agreeable to receive,
then, according to modern treatment this truth is to be
rejected. Perhaps there is no single truth to which these
remarks apply with more force than to that article of the
creed which we are now considering. The doctrine of the
One Holy Catholic Church, involves conclusions which
are supposed to be at variance with Christian charity :
although in fact, the charity with which they are at
variance, is but ant.ther name for latitudinarianism or
indifference. That we are to be one in outward ordinances
as well as inward qualifications, does not enter into the
minds of those who bandy about hard names at their
brethren, and who apply the name "heretic," "papist in
disguise," to men, to say the least of it, as learned, as
pious, as devoted, as themselves. Thus we find these
professed members, and in many cases sworn clergy of
the Church of England, continually speaking with
favour of the established Kirk of Scotland: the Rev.
Hugh Stowell makes it one charge against the Tracts
for the Times, that they " hand over the Church
of Scotland to uncovenanted mercies," and says he
" will not pour contempt on the Presbyterian Church:"
and he sits calmly by and without a single protest,
suffers his then* friend aud ally. Dr. Cooke, of Belfast,
to utter the following language— would ribaldry be too
hard a name for what follows ?
* I say then, for Mr. Stowell has since spoken of him as a "fallen star !" The
Doctor having given in his adhesion to the Irish system of Education apart from
" particular religion.''

99
At this meeting. The Reverend Dr. Cooke, of Belfast,
is, in the "authentic report," represented to have; said,
" My Rev. Friend, Mr. Stowell, has necessarily imposed on me
the task of showing part of the ground for my regard for the Church
of England. I regard the Church of England with respect and
affection, not because I think it possesses any advantage of apostolical
descent, or apostolical order, over my mother Church of Scotland.
(Loud and continued cheers.) I believe the Church of England to
be apostolical, and I believe the Church of Scotland to be just as
apostolical as she. (Cheers and a laugh !) The Church of Scotland
is Presbyterian by distinction, but she is Episcopalian by principle. I
am an Episcopalian, Paul being my witness. (Cheers.) Humble
though I be, I hold myself to be as much a Bishop as the Archbishop
of Canterbury. His diocese is a province, mine is a parish — nay, it
is not even a parish, some one mile square — it is a mere congrega
tion out of a parish, like Jerusalem, or Corinth, or Ephesus. The
venerable Archbishop hath several suffragans, and many Presbyters,
mine are some six in number, whom I scarcely hope to increase
beyond a dozen. Why, then, should I be jealous of the Church of
England ? I have all she has in quality, there I stand her equal. She
has more in quantity, and that is the sole difference that I acknow
ledge. The Church of England is built more splendidly than that of
my Mother, must I, therefore, undermine her deep foundations, and
bring down her sculptured minarets ? Her Gothic windows drink in
the sun through stained glass, mine through plain. Must I, there
fore, collect pebbles to demolish those rainbow beauties? (A laugh!)
The Church of England robes her minister in a surplice, I wear a
Geneva gown ; must I therefore, in the zeal of ecclesiastical tailorship
tear her garments to rags? (A laugh!!) She reads lier prayers
from a fixed liturgy, we follow extemporaneous thought and feeling ;
must I, therefore, fling her liturgy to the winds, or bury it in the
earth, or commit it to the fire, and so acquire a niche in the temple of
religious fame — (hear, hear, hear) — where the highest is occupied
by Dr. Doyle, and the lower by the priesthood Maynooth has
nurtured? (Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) Or, what might be more
G 2

100
magnanimous still — because the Church of England employs a fixed
liturgy, the Church of Scotland extemporaneous prayer, shall we
seize upon her liturgy, and liberally compel her either to pray as we
do, or not to pray at all ?
Now I would ask in sober sadness, is this such language
as clergymen of the English Church should permit and
in some sort sanction ? Is it really a thing indifferent to
the constitution of the Church whether she has two or
three orders of the ministry, and if so how came the
discovery of the unimportance of unity in ordinances to
be reserved for the sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth,
and nineteenth centuries after Christ ? Is it to be
credited that Christ's people should be for fifteen hundred
years in error, or misconception upon a point which is
necessarily obvious to the most ordinary capacity. If
Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, two Sacraments, and the
word of God be not essential to the constitution of the
Church, if they be not Apostolical, when were they
introduced ? If they have come in since Christ and His
Apostles, we have at least to ask when ? I would not
willingly impute wrong motives, but 1 confess there does
appear to me to be a strange love of worldly distinction
and worldly greatness in this solicitude for the Established
Church of Scotland. The Rev. Francis Close in a
published sermon, preached on the martyrdom of King
Charles the First, deals hard measure at the pure volun
taries — the unestablished Dissenters, condemning them
as spiritual Republicans, but for the established dissent
of the Church of Scotland, he can find milder terms
and speak of Presbyterianism as episcopacy held in
solution :

101
" A distinction might here be made between the conduct of the
Presbyterians as contrasted with that of the Independents. The
essential elements of Episcopacy seem, as it were, held in solution
in Presbyterianism — especially as exhibited in the Church of Scotland.
Hence the fact that the Presbyterians were generally loyal in these
troubles."* Now, I do not quote this passage for the purpose of
refuting it, nor for asking whether Episcopacy when
solved into Presbyterianism may not, like salt in solution,
have lost its savour : but simply to show how those who
declaim about " that mysterious being. The Church,"!
after all do show a sneaking fondness for some lines and
entrenchments beyond the holding the same tenets of
fundamental faith. They will defer to the nationality of
a Church and receive its establishment by the state
as a note of union : while they refuse to acknowledge
apostolical government % as one test, which may not be
wanting. § But it is not Presbyters alone who speak
"¦ S"ote to p. 24. of spiritual Republicanism, a Sermon by the Rev. F. Close,
London, 1841, t Speech of Rev. F. Close, already quoted.
t "It is evident unto all men diligently reading Holy Scripture and Ancient
Authors, that from the Apostles' times, there have been these orders of Ministers
in Christ's Church, Bishops, Priests, and Deacons."— Preface to Ordination
Service, Book of Common Prayer.
§ Lest I should appear to over-state this distinction between the value set upon
the requirements of the state, over and above those of the Church in her purely
spiritual character, I would again cite Mr. Close, who seems to invite this public
notice, hardly less by the glass house in which, as it appears to me, he lives, than
by the number of stones he throws at his brethren in the Metropolis and in
various towns of the United Kingdom. I have before me the "Corrected
Edition, by the Acthor of a Sermon, preached in the Parish Church of Saint
Mary, Cheltenham, on Thursday, November .5th, 1840, by the Reverend Francis
Close, M.A." and pubhshed in London. The Sermon opens,
" We are assembled this morning, beloved brethren, under the highest sanction

102
thus slightingly of outward tests of Church membership,
the Bishop of Chester, in his last Charge, has propounded
of our Church and nation : the authorities, both ecclesiastical, and civil, — the act
of Parliament, as well as the act of the Church, in Convocation assembled, —
require us this day to celebrate our memorable and merciful deliverance from that
foul treason known by the name of ' The Gunpowder Plot.'
The ministers of the sanctuary are required not only to read the service, but to
preach a sermon, or if there be no sermon, to read one of the six homilies against
rebellion. Thus it appears that on this occasion I have called you together, not of
my own will nor by my own authority, but by the authority of my CImrch; which
no conscientious clergyman can disobey."
Now, Mr. Close must have a very different notion ef " the authority of my
Church" from that which I entertain. When seeking " the authority of my Church"
I look to my Prayer Book, and there I find the following directions :
The Order for Morning and Evening Prayer daily to be said and used
throughout the Year.
The Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used in the accustomed Place of the
Church, Chapel, or Chancel ; except it shall be otherwise determined by the
Ordinary of the Place. And the Chancels shall remain as they have done in times
past. And agaui after the Nicene Creed I find,
" Then the Curate shall declare unto the people what Holy-days, or Fasting-
days, are in the Week folloiving to be observed."
And again,
" Tlien shall follow the Sermon, or one of the Homilies already set forth, or
hereafter to be set forth, by authority.
Then shall the Priest return to the Lord's Table, and begin the Offertory
saying one or more of these sentences following, as he thinketb most convenient
in his discretion."
And in the third rubric, before the office for the ministration of Public Baptism,
I read,
" And then the Godfathers and Godmothers, and the people with the Children,
must be ready at the Font, cither immediately after the last Lesson at Morning
Prayer, or else immediately after the last Lesson at Evening Prayer, as the
Curate by his discretion shall appoint."
And in the first rubric, after the Catechism, 1 read,
" The Curate of every Parish shall diligently upon Sundays and Holy-days,
after the second Lessoti at Evening Prayer, openly in the Church instruct and
examine so many Children of his Parish sent unto him, as he shall think conve
nient in some part of this Catechism."

103
the opinion, that " diocesan Episcopacy, Infant Baptism,
liturgical forms, and Church membership," are subjects
upon which all the congregations of faithful men cannot
be "strictly one." Happy is it for those who think
differently, that their Episcopal submission relates to the
authoritative acts and not to the individual sentiments
of their diocesan. For with regard to this question
of diocesan Episcopacy and Church membership, 1 am
sure there are very many in his Lordship's diocese who
think very differently from himself, and those, too, clergy
men of whom it would be difficult for his Lordship to

Surely these are matters of at least as much importance as observing the
Fifth of November service, and the fifth of November service has grown into as
much disuse as these observances, and yet Mr. Close restores the one but not the
other : nay, I am credibly informed that when necessary to the effect of the
Wednesday Evening Sermon, the Scripture Lessons the Church has appointed,
are altered. Now, upon all this I pass no comment. It is not without scruple
that I allude at all to them; but my readers will judge who it is that are deserting
the principles of the Reformation : the Prayer Book was re-arranged and settled
at the Reformation, high Churchmen seek to defer to its authority wherever
possible, and Latitudinarians only when convenient!
But I must now advert, with great reluctance, to something of a more serious
nature still. The subject is an awful one ; but it must be approached. By the
authority of the Church of England, I learn that the first four general councils are
orthodox, and that according to the decisions of those four councils, the judges of
heresy are, in the Church of England to be guided. Now in the third of these
general councils, held at Ephesus, the Nestorian heresy is condemned. Nestorius
taught that the Virgin Mary was not properly OforoKoc but XpiaroToKos, and that
he who was born was not God, but avSpniTtoq Qsocpopog a man carrying God or
Divinity in him. He thus, in fact, denied that the Lord Jesus Christ is God, — he
denied that in the One Person the two natures are united; and by the council of
Ephesus, every person is anathematized as a heretic who refuses to speak of the
Virgin Mary as " the Mother of God.'' But to distinguish between the Nestorian
heresy and the following statement of Mr. Close, in the sermon already quoted, is
more than I can do.
" As if God could have a mother ! as if God could be born, could live and die !

104
speak in other terms than those of praise. It is impossible
not to speak with respect of the Bishop of Chester, but
it must always be remembered that the private opinion
of a Bishop is not per se binding, especially if it be
opposed to the opinions of those Bishops who, in a
former age, have been regarded as the champions of
orthodoxy in our Church.
And how does the case really appear to stand ?
The Apostle Paul thus writes, to his Ephesian
Converts, " I therefore the prisoner of the Lord
beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation where
with ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness
with long suffering, forbearing one another in love,
endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the
No such ' confusion of substance' is to be found in Scripture: — it was 'Christ
that died,' not God ! And though by mysterious and hidden union he was both
God and man in one Christ, yet we never find in the inspired Word any thing so
revolting to our feelings as an express imputation to the Deity even of the sinless
infirmities of manhood!"
Gracious God ! Is it a clergyman of the Church of England who writes thus,
or a Socinian preacher ? Is this the man who dares to speak of his brethren as
heretics ? Nay, Mr. Close must in words, pray to tlie Lord Jesus Christ in the
Liturgy : but on his principle, is he not an idolater when he says, " 0 Son of David,
have mercy upon us." ? May he pray to the Son of David, if the Son of David be
not God ? Or, are there two Christs ? Is Mr. Close the man to speak of heresy,
when he himself knows not what heresy is ? But is he not as ignorant of Scripture
as lie is of the doctrines of the Church ? Let the reader first peruse, for a second
time, the rationalistic sentence of Mr. Close quoted above, and then ponder the
following passage of Scripture, which may contain a seasonable admonition to Mr.
Close : " Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves and to all the flock, over the which
the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of GOD, which HE
hath purchased with HIS own Blood." — Acts xx, 28.
I have attributed the awful sin of which Mr. Close has been guilty to ignorance,
and, therefore, I do not call him a heretic. If he be a Christian, i.e. a worshipper
cf Christ, he will humble himself in penitence before the Church.

105
bond of peace." And then in order to show what
that bond of peace is, and how the unity of the Spirit is
to be preserved, the Apostle immediately adds, "there
is one Body." Yes, as we know nothing of Spirit
save as it acts in and through matter, so is there no
scriptural unity of the Spirit apart from the unity or
oneness of the Body. There must be unity in ordinances
no less than in doctrine. There must be the breaking of
the bread and continuance in the prayers, or we shall
have realized but little of that for which the Saviour
prayed when He besought the Father that He and His
might be one. The one Body of which the Apostle here
speaks is clearly that Body of Christ in which (Rom. xii,
5) we being many, are one, and every one members one
of another, or as he himself expresses it in another place :
I Cor. xii. 12, 13) " For as the Body is one and hath
many members, and all the members of that one Body
being many are one Body, so also is Christ. For by one
Spirit we are all baptized into one Body. That Body the
Church of which Christ is the Head, and which is the
fulness of Him that filleth all in all."
There is one Body and one Spirit, not one Spirit by
inward acknowledgement of which there shall hereafter be
one glorified spiritual Body, but one Body now, in and
through which the One Spirit influences and animates
the heirs of glory. This one Body we designate the Church,
and next 1 shall seek to define the Church in the language
of that particular branch of it to which we belong.
In the XIX Article the Church of England thus
speaks, " the visible Church of Christ is a congre-

106
gation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of
God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly adminis
tered according to Christ's ordinance in all those things
that of necessity are requisite to the same." The XXIIl
Article runs thus, " It is not lawful for any man to take
upon him the office of public preaching, or ministering
the Sacraments in the congregation before he be lawfiilly
called and sent to execute the same. And those we
ought to judge lawfully called and sent whicli be chosen
and called to this work by men who have public authority
given unto them in the congregation, to call and
send Ministers into the Lord's vineyard." And in the
Preface to the Ordinal we find, " It is evident unto all
men diligently reading the Holy Scripture and ancient
Authors, that from the Apostles' time there have been
these orders of Ministers in Christ's Church : Bishops,
Priests, and Deacons, which offices were evermore held
in such reverend estimation that no man might presume
to execute any of them, exc'ept he were first called, tried, .
and examined, and known to haA^e such qualities as are
requisite for the same : and also by Public Prayer with
imposition of hands, were approved and admitted there
unto by lawful authority. And therefore to the intent
that these orders may be continued and reverently used
and esteemed in the united Church of England and
Ireland. No man shall be accounted or taken to be a
lawful Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, in the united Church
of England and Ireland, or suflTered to execute any of
the said functions, except he be called, tried, examined,
and admitted thereunto according to the form hereafter

107
following, or hath had formerly Episcopal consecration
or ordination." And in the service itself the Bishop is
supposed to have power of using these words, " Receive
the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the
Church of God, now committed unto thee by the imposi
tion of our hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive they
are forgiven, and whose sins thou dost retain they are
retained." On the whole, then, we may consider the case to stand
thus. The Church of England has no sympathy with
those who would represent the Church merely as an
invisible society, she has as little community of feeling
with those who conceive that it is immaterial with
what visible knot of worshippers we are associated :
provided we hold certain cardinal doctrines which the
Protestant world has ruled to be fundamental. She not
only rules that the Church must be one in doctrine, but
that she must be one in Sacraments, Rites and some
Ceremonies ; albeit, her forms for the use of these
Sacraments, Rites, and Ceremonies may somewhat vary.
This is expressed in the title page of the Prayer
Book, which runs thus, " The Book of Common Prayer
and administration of the Sacraments and other Rites
and Ceremonies of the Church according to the use of
the united Church of England and Ireland." From all
these statements taken together, we may judge the teach
ing of the Church of England to be this : that the
Church is a visible Body, and that it is one in form as
well as in Spirit. "There is one Body and one Spirit.'
This one Body consists of those who have made profes-

108
sion of the faith of Christ in Holy Baptism, and who
have become entitled to the name (after the fashion of
the Apostolical Epistles) of "faithful men," among whom
the Holy Bible is read in the vernacular as the law
beyond which there is no appeal, and for whose spiritual
being the Holy Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist
are administered by Clergy in the Apostolical succession,
owning obedience to Bishops as on earth Chief Pastors
of the Flock under Chirst the Great " Shepherd and
Bishop of souls."
Doubtless the objection has already risen to the
lips of some among you. Is there then no communion
which is entitled to the name of Church but those to
whom these notes apply ? Are we to unchurch all other
professing Christians? Now I confess that I do not
understand what is meant by this supposed power of
churching or unchurching. And I must confess that 1
cannot separate the notion of gross irreverence and flip
pancy from the off" hand manner in which we continually
hear very estimable men speak of not unchurching
this one, and of the uncharitableness of denying that
the other possesses the privileges of membership in the
Redeemer's Body. It would be well if men would always
remember, that, who do and who do not constitute the
Church, is a fact, one way or the other, a fact wholly in
dependent of individual opinion, a fact of Divine Revela
tion, a fact which will remain equally undisturbed in the
awful reality of a Divine truth, whether it be believed by
ten persons or by ten thousand. Our feelings and our
wishes, then, must never for a moment be allowed to be

109
mixed up with the settlement of the question. That God
does make a difference between one man and another
cannot for a moment be gainsayed, and that difference will
exist whether we can or cannot see its fitness. God makes
a difference, or why were a handful of Jews the depositary
of His Word and grace, why was the knowledge of Him
confined to a single race while the world was groping in
darkness. God does make a difference, or why should
we be Christians and others be heathens. The fact, then,
that there is one Body as well as one Spirit is revealed,
and is, therefore, wholly independent alike of our wishes
and our opinions. We may dislike the consequences
which may seem to flow from this truth, but with conse
quences we are not further concerned, than that we do
not from an evil heart of unbelief, suffer ourselves to be
unmindful of the obligation to be one, even as Christ
and the Father are one.
The Churches in the Roman obedience seek to embody
this doctrine of the one Body by the compulsory subju
gation of Christendom, under the rule of a temporal or
earthly head, to whom they assign the title of Pope.
Without entering into the question how far our own
system of Archiepiscopal rule as superior to that of the
Episcopal, and the recognition of the monarch as chief
temporal head of our own branch of the Church, indicate
a desire to have some visible centre of unity, we may
safely affirm that such visible Head of the whole Church
is no where enjoined in scripture, nay, we are expressly
told that our Head is in heaven, and that the Church
is His Body. We are to be one body, not by the payment

110
of Peter pence, not by the recognition of the supremacy
of the Popedom, but emphatically by breaking one bread,
and drinking one cup, and by continuing in the use of
the Prayers of the Universal Church.
Dr. Hook in his noble sermon preached at the
Consecration of Bishop Luscombe, in 1825, thus writes:
"That the Church of Rome has unjustly arrogated to herself an
exclu.nve claim to the title of Catholic — that name so dear to all who are
imbued with the love of primitive Christianity — has been too satisfac
torily proved by a succession of the ablest divines, and, indeed, is too
self-evident, to need any discussion upon the present occasion. We
shall rather direct our observations against the error, not only of those
who dissent from our Apostolic Church, but even of too many careless
professors within its pale — who, ignorant or regardless of the primitive
institutions of Christianity, — the restoration to which was the object
of our Reformation,— content themselves with a literal interpretation
of this designation of the one true Church, and thus predicate it
indiscriminately of all believers.
"That their principle of interpretation is erroneous, a little considera
tion will serve to shew. Ascertaining KaBoXiKos to mean universal,
they demand where is to be found an universal Church. They perceive
the disagreement which exists with respect both to doctrines and
ceremonies among the various religious establishments throughout the
world, and finding, strictly speaking, no satisfactory answer to the
question, they, at once, assume the fact, that under the general title of
the Catholic Church, must necessarily be included every sect and
denomination of professing Christians, however different in doctrine,
in discipline, or even in faith, from the primitive Church. But is this
a just or legitimate mode of interpretation? is it the mode of interpre
tation, with which any one who comes impartially to the consideration
of the subject will be satisfied ? If in the study of the literature, the
philosophy, or the political economy of the ancients, we were to meet
with a technical expression or a term of art, should we rest contented
with the imperfect notions conveyed by either, in their first and literal

ni
sense ? should we not rather refer to the writings of the poet, the philo
sopher and the politician, and adopt the term, whether agreeable or not
to its strict etymological signification, in the precise sense to which it
had been restricted by them ? This surely is consonant with every
principle applicable to the investigation of truth, and must, in justice,
be adopted in analyzing any question connected with the first and
greatest of all truths — " the reason of the faith which is in us."
"When, therefore, we adopt and daily repeat the creed of the early
Christians, we are surely bound to ascertain not only the meaning of
their words, but the precise sense in which they were used, and in
which those holy Fathers intended that we should receive them.
"By this test, then, we are prepared to abide ; and we may, without
presumption, challenge the opponents of our interpretation to point out
one instance in which the term Catholic is applied by the ancients in
the indefinite and indiscriminate manner for which they contend. They
will invariably find it used, for a purpose directly opposed to that which
they profess. They will find it used, to speak logically, as a word of
the second intention, to distinguish the one true and Apostolic Church —
the Church which was established at Jerusalem by the preaching of
St. Peter, and existing through all ages the same, by the succession
of its Bishops — from the various sects, heresies, and schisms which
even then brought scandal upon the name of Christians. " Christia-
nus mihi nomen, Catholicus cognomen," the former to distinguish him
from the heathen, the latter from the heretics, was the motto not of
Pacian alone, but of every orthodox member of the Church.
"If earlier than the age of Irenseus the distinction is not so clearly
marked, it is only because the errors of the first and the former part
of the second century, were so gross in their nature that they could
scarcely lay claim to the common term of Christian, and that,
consequently, tl;e line of demarcation between Churchman and Heretic
was too clearly ascertained to require that nice distinction which
afterwards became necessary when Schism as well as Heresy divided
the believers in the name of Christ. But to the writings of Irenaeus,
Tertullian, and St. Cyprian, — the polar star of the Ecclesiastical
Antiquaiy, — we might, with safety, appeal, for the fullest proof of our
assertion ; were it not amply sufficient for the object we have in view

112
to ascertain the meaning which was attached to the term liy those who
first adopted it in the Creed."
The present Bishop of Lincoln writes,
" We form he says, ' a body ; being joined together by a com
munity of religion, of discipline, and of hope.' "
In Bishop Pearson we find.
If then we reflect upon the first Church again, which we found
constituted in the Acts, and to which all other since have
been in matter added and conjoined, we collect from their union
and agreement how all other Churches are united and agree. Now
were they described to be believing and baptized j)ersons, converted to
the faith by St. Peter, continuing steadfastly in the Apostles
doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread, and prayers.
These then were all built upon the same rock, all professed the
same faith, all received the same Sacraments, all performed the same
devotions, and were thereby reputed members of the same Church.
To this Church were added daily such as should be saved, who
became members of the same Church, by being built upon the
same foundation, by adhering to the same doctrine by receiving the
same Sacraments, by performing the same devotions; From whence
it appeareth that the first unity of the Church considered in itself,
beside that of the head, which is one Christ and the life communica
ted from that Head which is one Spirit, relieth upon the original
of it which is one ; even as a house built upon one foundation, though
consisting of many rooms, and every room of many stones, is not yet
many, but one house. Now there is but one foundation upon which
the Church is built, and that is Christ : "For other foundation can no
man lay, than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. And though
the Apostles and the prophets be also termed the foundation, yet even
then the unity is preserved, because as they are stones in the foundation,
so are they united by one corner stone ; whereby it comes to pass that
such persons as are of the Church, being fellow citizens with the
saints and of the household of God, are built upon the foundation of
the Apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ being Himself the chief

113
corner stone in whom all the building fitly framed together, groweth
unto a holy temple in the Lord. This stone was laid in Zion for a
foundation, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone, a sure foundation :
there was the first Church built and whosoever have been or shall be
converted to the christian faith, are and shall be added to that Church,
and laid upon the same foundation which is the unity of origina
tion. Our Saviour gave the same power to all the Apostles which
was to found the Church ; but he gave that power to Peter to shew
the unity of the same Church. — Pearson Ex. Creed, page 339, Ed.
Lond. 1704.
Our Reformer, Jewell, writes,
" We believe that this (Catholic) Church is the kingdom, body and
spouse of Christ; that of this kingdom, Christ is the sole Monarch;
of this body the sole head, of this spouse, the sole Bridegroom ; that
there are various orders of ministers in the Church, that some are
Deacons, others Priests, others Bishops, to whom the instruction of
the people, and the care and management of religious concerns are
entrusted." — Jewell's Apiology, p. 28, Edit. 1829.
In Bonnet's Rights of Clergy we find,
" And that the Church shall be thus perpetual, and last till the
general Judgment appears from diverse places of Scripture, I have
already shown that the Church is Christ's kingdom, and the Angel
assured the blessed Virgin that He shall reign over the house of Jacob
for ever, and of His kingdom there shall be no end.* Our Saviour
Himself also jaromises that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against
His Church, t that is, it shall not be destroyed. And St. Paul
declares that the end then cometh when He shall have delivered up
the kingdom to God even the Father ; when He shall have put
down all rule and all authority and power, for He must reign till He
hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be
destroyed is death. X Now, since Christ must reign till death is
destroyed, and must not till then deliver up the kingdom to God even
the Father, and since, when this is done, the end (viz. of the world)
* Luke i, 33. t Matt, xvi, 18. t 1 Cor. xv, 34—26.
H

114
cometh ; it is plain that His spiritual dominion, and consequently the
Church which is His kingdom, must continue to the end, even till
the general Judgment." — Bennetts Rights of the Clergy, Cap. I.
And Bishop Beveridge thus,
"Though the Church of Christ be one and the same Church both
in heaven and in earth, yet it there differs much from itself as here.
There it is triumphant, not militant ; here it is militant, not trium
phant ; there it consisteth of good only — and not of bad ; here of bad
also as well as good. And to name no more, there it is visible as to
us ; here it is visible unto all. We cannot see the Church as crowned
with glory in heaven ; but any one may see it as established by grace
on earth." — Bishop Beveridge on the Articles, Article 19.
Were it necessary, these quotations might be much
increased in number, but we now pass on to the
consideration of

THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOSTOLICAL SUC
CESSION, AND AS CONNECTED WITH IT,
THAT OF SACERDOTAL ABSOLUTION AND
BENEDICTION.
" It is evident unto all men diligently reading Holy Scripture and Ancient
Authors, that from the Apostles' times there have been these orders of Ministers in
Christ's Church — Bishops, Priests, and Deacons." — Preface to the Ordination
Service. " By His authority, committed to me, I absolve thee." — Office of Visitation of
the Sick.
" Then the Priest, (or Bishop if he be present,) shall let them depart with this
blessing." — Ordei' of the Holy Communion.
That this doctrine is called in question, is too notorious
to require proof: but one is hardly prepared to find a
clergyman of the Church of England calling the doctrine

115
" a leading feature of the heresy of Puseyism."* Under
the Jewish Dispensation the Priesthood was transmitted
by natural generation through a particular family ; in the
Gospel the holy line is passed on from Bishop to Bishop,
in a spiritual genealogy ; and not more certain was John
Baptist of his lineal connexion with Aaron through
his father Zacharias of the course of Abia, and his
mother Elizabeth of the daughters of Aaron, than is
every priest of the Church of England of his connexion
with the Lord Jesus Christ through the Bishop who
ordained him, for he can trace his connexion with
the College of the Apostles, by links not one of
which is wanting from St. Peter or St. Paul to the holy
Fathers in God, by whom he was set as an overseer in
the family of heaven upon earth — Christ's holy Catholic
* " He alluded to the wide spreading infection of what is now called Puseyism,
a heresy of such tremendous consequences to the Church of this country, as well as
to the Protestant religion generally, that if it should not please Almighty God in
mercy to this guilty nation, to check it by the lifting up of His Spirit, it threatened
to overwhelm all that he considered truly valuable as religious privileges. Time
would fail if he attempted to direct their attention to more than one leading feature
of this heresy, he would therefore request them to favour him with their attention
to one of the most important and favourite doctrines of the party in question. He
meant that which was commonly called ' Apostolic Succession.' " — Speech of Rev.
Mr. Sharwood, of St. Paul's Church, to Working Men of Cheltenham, in
January last.
If the public generally were as well acquainted as myself with the pious and
self-denying zeal of this clergyman, they would be as surprised as I am to find that
he should not have been more careful when speaking of a doctrine in which is
involved the very being of the Church. This clergyman, so exemplary in all the
relations of social life, stands out from the self-seeking notoriety of the generality
of the Latitudinarian party, and is not ashamed to observe Saints' Days in his
Church. And the foregoing sentences must be attributed rather to the system
with which he is assimilated, than to the individual ; and it is as illustrative of the
system, rather than of the man, that they are quoted.
h2

116
and Apostolic Church. But before I enter upon the
subject, 1 would repeat here the warning I gave in con
nexion with the last question, against the supposition, that
because man is required to confine himself to particular
methods, that God cannot, when he sees fit, dispense with
them. Let us always remember that the salvation of others
is in God's hands, not ours ; and that as we are forbidden
to judge, so are we incompetent to legislate. It is not for
us to settle who are, and who are not in the Church ; it
is not for us to settle who are, and who are not Christ's
ministers. These are facts ready determined to our
hands, and our business is to receive with humility that
which God has decreed. We may not make terms with
error. We may not palliate error. We must proclaim
and act truth — and yet we may humbly hope that there
are very many who, though in error, yet sincerely seek
the truth ; and that " the good Lord will pardon every
one that prepareth his heart to seek the God of his
Fathers, though he be not cleansed according to the
purification of the sanctuary." We may hope this — but
Avlien God has been so condescending as to reveal to us
His will, and give us certain definite principles upon
which He requires us to act, it surely is a great and
unwarrantable presumption to trust to what may be,
instead of acting upon what is.
Let us then in this spirit proceed to consider the doctrine
of the Apostolical Succession, and for that purpose let us
recur to the circumstances of the first vacancy in the
Apostolate. The Lord Jesus Christ called Twelve
Apostles as attendants on his ministry, and, as the future

117
heralds of His Gospel. But the whole twelve did not
remain faithful. One betrayed his Master. Judas by
transgression fell, and you Avill find in the first chapter
of the Acts of the Apostles, the steps taken by the eleven
to complete their original number, and how St. Matthias
was elected into the vacant Bishopric. Let us for a
moment prosecute the thoughts to which this fact gives
rise. It occurs to us to ask — Why this solicitude that
there should be Twelve. You will remember our Lord's
promise to the Twelve ; Judas being then one of the
number. Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the
twelve tribes of Israel. Twelve thrones in heaven then
there are prepared for twelve Apostles : assigned not
individually to the twelve of whose choice I have just
spoken, but to the College of the Apostles, and to those
individuals so far as they were true to the opportunities
of their position. Judas first betrayed his Lord and
then died in the mortal sin of self-murder; we may,
therefore, be sure that he the most accursed traitor of a
rebellious generation shall not have a throne in the
kingdom of Messiah. But a throne is prepared and
assigned to the apostleship which he forfeited,* what
then is the course taken ? — another is appointed to the
vacant post, " his oflice," or as it is in the chapter just
referred to " his bishopric let another take." And because
certain qualifications on earth are the pre-requisites for the
enjoyment of all thrones in heaven, this precaution is
taken, viz., to have him whom they chose, " one who had
* The reader is on this subject referred to a Sermon on Predestination, in a
volume of Occasional Sermons, recently published by the Rev. Dr. Hook.

118
companied with the Apostles all the time the Lord Jesus
went in and out amongst them, beginning from the
Baptism of John unto that same day that He was
taken up from them," that so he might be " ordained to
be a witness with them of His resurrection." Now it is
important in order to our argument that these facts should
be kept in mind. We see in the case of St. Matthias,
the first intimation of the manner in which our Lord
purposed to fulfil His promise to be with His Church, lo
alway unto the end of the world. We are by this example
taught that the power of ordination was from the
beginning entrusted to men, under Divine guidance then
as now, but still to men also then as now. The vacancy
in the Apostolate was caused before our Lord quitted
earth, and a casual observer would expect that the Great
Head of the Church would have filled up this vacancy
Himself, but thanks be to His unspeakable mercy such
was not the course He pursued. Had He done so there
would have been room for the cavil that ministerial
powers such as our Bishops and Priests are invested with
could not be transmitted from man to man by outward
imposition of hands ; but that there must be a direct and
immediate interference on the part of the Great Bishop
and Shepherd of souls. All plea for this cavil is now
removed, and it is clear that our Lord has confided to His
spouse, the Church, the power of commissioning men to
bless, to bind, and to loose in His name. In few words,
the history shews us, that what the Apostles were in
virtue of their call by Christ Himself, that was St. Mat
thias in virtue of his call by Peter and the other Apostles.

119
We see moreover in the appointment of a twelfth Apostle
at all, an intimation that the Apostolic order was to be
maintained by a continued succession, and that as the
treachery of Judas not invalidating his commission proves
that the wickedness of a minister does not render his
office ineffectual, the efficacy of the ordinance depending
not upon the qualifications of the Minister, but on its
Divine institution and the blessings with which God has
endowed its right use ; so the election of Matthias points
out to us the agency which our Lord employs for the
perpetuation of His rule among the ministry. Jesus
does not appoint a twelfth Apostle, but just previously to
His ascension, they met Him by His appointment at a
mountain in Galilee. And Jesus came and spake unto
them, saying, "All power is given unto Me in heaven
and earth ;" and then exercising that power, and address
ing them as the words themselves, and the sequel prove
in their corporate capacity as the College of Apostles,
He says to them, " Go ye therefore and teach, [make
disciples] of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,
teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
commanded you, and lo 1 am with you alway unto the
end of the world." Now into this ministry and apostle
ship Matthias was elected to take part, and this not by
Christ Himself immediately and directly, but by the
Apostles acting in Christ's name. And if it be but
once established that the eleven had power to number a
twelfth with themselves, possessing corresponding powers
and equal jurisdiction, it must of course follow that they

120
had the power to hand on the holy line and that they
were chartered and commissioned for the purpose of
continuing in the Church of God a special ministry and
holy priesthood. It is clear that our Lord addressed the
Eleven as the Apostolical College. He viewed them as
a Corporation — a chartered body. For, individually they
like other men were mortal and individually they like
other men did die, and although St. John lived to a long
age and survived his companions, yet he too has been
laid in the grave, although the end of the world had not
come. There must be a sense, and a direct sense in which
the Saviour's words are true, when he says, I am with
you always even to the end of the world. Admit the
incorporation of the Apostles as a society with undying
succession, and all difficulty vanishes. But apart from
this supposition, our Lord's words become a mockery of
our wants, and a difficulty is suggested far beyond the
actual state of the case. There is, however, no sufficient
ground for doubting that the Eleven were considered by
our Lord to be essentially " the Apostles" just as a college,
or a committee retain their full corporate functions and
their corporate name even though there be some vacancies
in their number.
Another point is to be observed in this election of
Matthias, he was elected before the special outpouring
of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, and therefore,
by the Holy Ghost descending upon all, the deed of
the Eleven was abundantly recognized, and their
power to commission in Christ's name fully ratified.
A full power there was, therefore, in the Eleven as

121
derived from our Lord to elect another into their
office, full power also had they to perpetuate their office
for our Lord's commission as recorded by St. Luke,
runs thus, " Behold I send the promise of My Father
upon you," and again it is recorded, "As My Father sent
Me so send I you." Now Christ was sent from the Father
with a power to send others, and therefore, the Apostles
also were sent from Christ with a power to send others,
and that power they exercised.* I will not enter into all
the particulars connected with the miraculous conversion
of St. Paul ; but I may fairly invite your attention to
this fact, viz., that although specially called and directly
anointed from heaven to be the Apostle of the Gentiles,
yet he was directed to the reception of an " outward rite"
at the hands of Ananias, probably one of the seventy. But
be this as it may, when the Lord Christ interferes He is
quite competent to introduce an exception to His own
appointment, and none may cavil or question. All that
Churchmen contend for is, that a state of things has been
ordered and settled from which we are not at liberty, on
our own responsibility, to alter. We hold that Christ has
given to His Church a form and order of government from
which they cannot with safety depart. He gave its outline
* St. Ignatius, who succeeded Euodius (See Euseb : Eccl. Hist., Book III, Ch. 22)
in the See of Antioch, consecrated thereunto by St. Peter, its inrst Apostle, must have
been conversant with the design of our Lord, as embodied in the practice of His
Apostles, and in His Epistle to the Trallians he thus writes, " It is therefore neces
sary that ye do nothing without the Bishop, even as ye are wont, and that ye be
also subject to the Presbytery as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ our hope, in
whom, if we walk, we shall be found (in him). Phil, iii, 9. The Deacons also as
being the (ministers) of the mysteries of Jesus Christ must by all means please
all," — Chevallier's Translation, p. 96. Here the three orders are fully recognized.

122
to His Apostles and to them He gave the power of filling
it up, and arranging it in all its details. And this power
it is most clear they exercised, and in this way.* In the
churches they founded there were three orders of Ministers,
one whicli alone had the office of ordaining others of
superintending their doctrine and conduct, and settling
questions about those matters of worship which were not
enforced by any Divine command : and two subordinate
orders, the one employed immediately in teaching the
doctrine of Christ, and administering the Sacraments,
the other in an assistant capacity about the same duties;
and in works of charity, which if he discharged well, he
was after probation admitted to the next order. In
Tim. ii, 2, is an instance of the power enjoyed by the first
order as regards ordaining, " that commit thou to faithful
men," and the like power is to be found in a comparison
of 1 Tim. V, 22, with Acts xiii, 3, and Titus i, 5. That
they had the power of superintending the doctrine and
conduct of those who had been ordained, we gather from
1 Tim. i, 3, and v, 1, 19, and a comparsion of Titus, i, 5,
and 1 Cor. xi, 34, shows how the regulation of
worship and discipline in matters not divinely settled was
committed to their care. The other offices of the ministry
were comprehended in his, but without his act and
co-operation, there could be no handing on the minis
terial function. That the Apostles had the power of
* I would here gratefully acknowledge the use which, in the following account I
have made of " Letters of a Reformed Catholic, No. 4, on the Apostolical Succes
sion." These Letters are generally attributed to the pious, learned, and judicious
Rector of Creyke, the Rev. Canon Churton, M.A., and there are evident marks of
his expedition, temper, and research.

123
calling others to the enjoyment of their own privileges is
clear from the case of Matthias, that those thus called had
a like power is clear from the command in Tim. ii, 2, and
thus we see at once the provision made for the perpetua
tion of the sacred ministry. In the age immediately
following the Apostles, and before the death of St. John,
we find these three orders were distinguished by the
three scriptural names, Bishops or Overseers, Priests or
Elders, and Deacons or Assistants. If you ask whether
these names are kept distinct in the New Testament as
they are in the earliest writers after the Apostles I answer
No. The names are not kept distinct, but the offices are
not in any manner confounded. The Apostles call
persons of the second order Bishops or Overseers, as well
as Priests or Elders, Acts, xx, 27, 28. Tit. 1, 5, 7. So
also they call themselves by the name of Priests or Elders,
1 Peter, v, 1, 2 John, i., 3 John i, or even Deacons,
1 Cor. xiii, 5, Eph. iii. 2 Col. i, 25. Yet it is quite plain
that in other places these names are used to denote
distinct orders. Acts xiv, 23, xv, 4, 23, 1 Tim. iii, 8, 13.
But it will be said the name of Bishop is not so used,
and it will be asked — what is the reason of this?
Now, it is clear, the Apostles gave their own title
to those whom they selected for the first order of
the ministry. Thus St. Paul calls Titus and others
2 Cor. vii, 23, and Epaphroditus Phil, ii, 25, Apostles
and he shares his own title with Timothy and Silas
or Silvanus, 1 Thess. ii, 7. And it is easy to see
the propriety of this name in the times when it was
thus bestowed. For those to whom they gave this name

J 24
were companions of their travels, and were sent to govern
the Churches founded by them to whom now we confine
the title of Apostles ; they came into a new place, where
after setting the Church in order they were again recalled
to join those who sent them, and perhaps to go on other
missions. They were as we should now call them and
as their name signified " Missionary Bishops." To the
same purpose is the name given to them by St. John in the
Book of Revelation, " the Angels " or " Messengers of the
Churches " — the same name which was given to St. John
the Baptist. It is plain for instance that the minister or
ofl&cer addressed as the angel of the Church of Ephesus,
was an individual who had the care of superintending
the ministry and doctrine of that Church.* And as to
the next address to the angel of the Church of Smyrna,
the words are an exact prediction of what happened in
the persecution when Polycarp, the disciple of St. John,
and Bishop of Smyrna, sufffered.t That the Jews should
especially display their malice against him, (they shewed
it by urging on the Gentiles to destroy him, and after he
was burnt, by preventing the Christians from gathering
up his ashes,) and that others should suffer with him,
(there were twelve in all,) that he should be kept some
days in tribulation or suspense, (he retired for a time
into the countiy to conceal himself,) and the crown of
martyrdom is not obscurely hinted in these words : " Be
thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of
life." Hence, knowing that the prophetic address was
fulfilled in the closing scene of Polycarp's life, and that
* Rev. ii, 3. + Rev. iv, 8.

125
he was, as authentic Church history informs us. Bishop
of Smyrna, appointed by St. John, there is no room to
doubt that Episcopacy was the order of ministry estab
lished on Divine authority in the churches of Asia, by
the Apostles, and that the persons called in the New
Testament Apostles, Angels, or Messengers of the
Churches, were what we call Bishops.
And do you ask, why did not the first followers of the
Apostles keep the name ? For a very pious reason. They
wished that some peculiar honour of name should belong
to those who first received the title from Christ Himself,
and to Paul and Barnabas, the Divinely appointed
Apostles of the Gentiles. The primitive Christians
honoured the memory of those who were the chosen
companions of their God and Saviour ; just as in days
of ancient freedom, it was decreed that no man should
take to himself the name of those who died for their
country. They took the next title for the presiding
pastor of their churches, who thenceforward was called
Bishop. That such was the fact, we have no kind of
reason to doubt. Church history bears witness to it, and
gives us the names of the Bishops of the three principal
Churches in Europe, Asia, Africa — Antioch, Alexandrina,
and Rome, in succession, for near three centuries from
the Apostles. There are abundant proofs that the
Churches in every considerable city and province were
governed by Bishops, and nothing can be brought to
prove that there was any exception in this system.
But we are told we must prove our line to be unbroken.
It is easily done. Of the 64 steps from St. Peter and

126
St. Paul to Gregory the great. Bishop of Rome, in the
year 596, there is no question ; the particulars are acces
sible to every reader of Church history. And this
Gregory sent Augustin into Britain, who was made a
Bishop by some Bishops of Germany before his arrival.
It is true the Britons had embraced Christianity long
before this ; many learned men maintaining that St.
Paul himself trod our shores. But then they and their
Bishops were, at the time of which we speak, under the
dominion of the Pagan Saxons, except those who were
still independent in Wales. Augustin's mission was to
the Saxons, many of whom were converted : he was
their Bishop, and his successors have ever since been
Archbishops of Canterbury, which he took as his see,
being the capital of the kingdom of Kent, where he
began to preach. There were Bishops of York, of
London, and of St. David's, and other Welsh sees before,
while the Britons held them ; but by degrees the Saxons
got possession of all, except St. David's, which held out
until after the Norman conquest. About the beginning
of the twelfth century, the Churches of England aud
Wales were united. The succession has ever since been
maintained, the present Archbishop of Canterbury being
twentieth in descent from Cranmer, as Cranmer was 67
from Augustin, and Augustin 64 from St. Paul and St.
Peter, one of whom sent Linus, the other Cletus, to
whom Clement succeeded. I would refer those who
seek further information on this point, to two admirable
works, each of which, in a very small compass, set the
question at rest to those who inquire for the sake of

127
conviction — " The Episcopal Succession Vindicated," by
Rev. John Sinclair ; and " Perceval's Apology for the
Doctrine of the Apostolical Succession."
And now as to the practical nature of the doctrine.
The doctrine of the Apostolical Succession is just such a
fact as we should expect from the analogy of God's deal
ings with man. In Scripture fearful woes are denounced
upon those who are guilty of schism, upon those who
have the guilt of separation from the One Body of which
Christ is the Head, and in which the One Spirit animates
and influences the heirs of glory. Now we may be quite
sure God would not thus denounce schism, if to ascertain
what was and what was not schism, were a hard and difii-
cult matter. Unless He supplied His people with tangible
tests of the authority of those acting in His name, we
may fairly infer that there would be less of that censure
of the sensuality of those that separate themselves, than
we actually find in the Epistles. That gracious Lord
who so earnestly prayed the Father that He and His
might be One, we may feel sure has provided help to
that unity. But apart from the doctrine of the Apostolical
Succession, how are we to decide between parties each
claiming to act in God's name ? The man who urges
I have a direct commission from God, of which my
inward feelings are the seal, may be deceived. The man
who says I preach true doctrine and am therefore an
authorized minister, speaks no more conclusively than the
quack who urges his possession of the true panacea, as his
substitute for the license of a practitioner, or than the private
individual, who, with the statutes at large before him, and

128
Blackstone and Chitty's Practice in his hand, claims to
be a judge. But if it once be established that Christ
instituted His Apostles chief governors in His kingdom
of grace, and if it be found that they appointed succes
sors such as Timothy and Titus, with power to hand on
their order, with power to commit the truth to faithful
men that they might teach others also : and if it be
further found that there never has been a time since
Christ when this order did not exist, the presumption, to
say the least, is strong, that it must have been miracu
lously preserved on earth, and that being Divine, it claims
our allegiance. It is a tangible doctrine, and we are
authorized to expect tangible proofs of things being
Divine, and once convinced they are Divine, then we are
to exercise implicit faith. Thus the Holy Scriptures are
to be implicitly believed, but we may require tangible
evidence of their being the Scriptures, and that we have
in their custody by the Church, which is their witness and
keeper. The Jews had a family lineage, we have a cor
porate lineage. And inasmuch as our adversaries cannot
show the time when this lineage was interfered with, and
the proof lies with them, we may fairly thank God that
He has thus blessed us, and use our privileges with thank
fulness. Any thing short of the Apostolical Succession
requires a miracle. Because, though the derived autho
rity may be complete up to a certain point, at that point,
if it be later than Christ and His Apostles, there must be
a miracle to show that it is of God.
No man taketh this honor to himself but he that is
called of God as was Aaron. Now Aaron was called

129
outwardly by Moses who had direct commission from
God to do so, and hence we find the Church of England
deciding that ;
" It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public
preachmg, or ministering the Sacraments in the Congregation, before
he be lawfully called, and sent to execute the same. And those we
ought to judge lawfully called and sent, which be chosen and called
to this work by men who have public authority given unto them in
the Congregation, to call and send Ministers into the Lord's vine
yard."* And she thus defines a "lawful minister" in her Preface
to her Ordination Services : —
" No man shall be accounted or taken to be a lavrful Bishop, Priest,
or Deacon in the United Church of England and Ireland, or suffered
to execute any of the said Functions, except he be called, tried, exam
ined, and admitted thereunto, according to the Form hereafter
following, or hath had formerly Episcopal Consecration, or Ordi
nation." In the second of her Ember collects, she speaks of
"divers orders" in God's Church being appointed by
"¦Divine Providence," and this coupled with the following,
shews that she holds the Apostolical Succession. The
" divers orders " are these : —
It is evident unto all men diligently reading the Holy Scriptures
and ancient Authors, that from the Apostles' time there have been
these Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church ; Bishops, Priests, and
Deacons. Which Offices were evermore had in such reverend estima
tion,, that no man might presume to execute any of them, except he
were first called, tried, examined, and known to have such qualities
as are requisite for the same; and also by publick Prayer, with
• Art. xxiii.

130
Imposition of Hands, were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful
authority. In the Litany we pray for the illumination not of all
self-constituted ministers and preachers, but of all
" Bishops, Priests and Deacons," and in the xxvi article
the "clergy are said to administer the word and sacraments
not in their own name but in Christ's, and to minister by
His commission and authority." And the Sacraments are
said to " be eflectual because of Christ's institution and
promise, though they be ministered by evil men." It
would be very easy to multiply c|uotations on this point,
but I content myself with one from the present learned
Bishop of Lincoln :¦ —
" The episcopal office, according to Tertullian, was of Apostolical
institution. In the tract "de Prasscriptione Hsereticorum," he throws
out the following challenge to the Heretics. " Let them shew," he
says, " the origin of their Churches ; let them trace the succession
of their Bishops, and thus connect the individual who first held the
office, either with some Apostle, or some apostolic man who always
remained in communion with the Church. It is thus that the Apos
tolic Churches shew their origin. That of Smyrna traces its Bishops
in an unbroken line from Polycarp, who was placed there by St.
John : that of Rome from Clemens, who was placed there by St.
Peter : and every other Church can point out the individual to whom
the superintendance of its doctrine and discipline was first committed
by some one of the Apostles." The same statement is repeated in
the fourth Book against Marcion.'*
That the church recognizes the fact is most clear from the
two collateral branches into which this head of the subject
runs, viz., that of Sacerdotal Absolution and Benediction.
The Church of England thus consecrates her Bishops :
* Eccl. His. by John Bp. Bristol, pages 233 to 234. Ed. Cambridge 1826.

131
Then the Archbishop and Bishops present shall lay their hands upon the head
of the elected Bishop kneeling before them upon his knees, the Archbishop saying,
Receive the Holy Ghost, for the Office and work of a Bishop in
the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our
hands; In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost. Amen. And remember that thou stir up the grace of God
which is given thee by this Imposition of our hands : for God hath
not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and love, and soberness.
And thus she orders her Priests : —
WJien this Prayer is done, the Bishop with the Priests present sliall lay their
hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth the order of Priesthood :
the Receivers hximbly kneeling upon their knees, and the Bishop saying.
Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the
Church of God, now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our
hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven ; and whose
sins thou dost retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful
Dispenser of the Word of God, and of His Holy Sacraments; in the
Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Amen. How can you suppose it possible that the Church
would use such awful words as these if she did not
consider her chief Ministers empowered as ambassadors
for Christ in succession from His Apostles ? The grace
of God is here expressly said to be given by the Imposi
tion of episcopal hands, and the power of imparting the
Holy Ghost for the remission of sins is assumed. But
more than this it is exercised, first in the Daily Service,
then in the Order of the Holy Communion, and in an
unequivocal form in the oflice for the Visitation of the Sick.
It is, I am aware, distasteful to the disciples of modern
theology to admit that a worm of earth can be invested
with a power to absolve his fellow sinner ; but that the
I 2

132
Church of England exercises the power there can be no
doubt. In Baptism she administers a Plenary Absolution,
and in the Eucharist she absolves, and in the Exhortation
giving notice of the administration of the Communion, she
directs those troubled in conscience to come to a Minister
t43 " receive Absolution." In the Absolution in the daily
service the Priest and the Priest alone is to use the form.
The Priest first says that God has given to His Minister
power to pronounce His pardon, and then proceeds to act
upon the assertion. The form of words, " He pardoneth
and absolveth all them that truly repent and unfeignedly
believe His holy gospel," being the form of absolution in
some sort equivalent to the salutation " Peace be to this
house,"* the pronouncing of which secured peace if the
Son of Peace was there, that is to those qualified to receive
it. And what the Church does her children thus main
tain : Bishop Andrews thus writes: —
I take it to be a power distinct from the former, and (not to hold
you long) to be the accomplishment of the promise made (St. Matt,
16, 19,) of the power of " the keys " which here in this place and in
these words is fulfilled ; and have therein for me the joint consent of
the Fathers. Which being a different power in itself, is that whicli we
call the act or benefit of Absolution, in which (as in the rest) there is
in the due time and place of it, an use for the remission of sins.
M'^hereunto our Saviour Christ, by His sending them, doth institute
them and give them the key of authority : And by breathing on them,
aud inspiring them, doth enable them and give them the key of
knowledge to do it well ; and having bestowed both these upon them
as the stewards of His house," doth last of all deliver them their
commission to do it, having so enabled them and authorized them as
* See a Sermon on this text in Dr. Hooli's "Occasional Sermons on various
subjects."

133
before. So much for the powers which are written to the intent that
we should believe, that whatsoever God's Ministers do to us by
God's commandment are as much available, as if God Himself
should do the same. For whether the Ministers do excommunicate
open malefactors and unrepentant persons, or do give absolution to
those which be truly repentant for their sins, and amend their lives :
these acts of the ministers have as great power and authority, and be
confirmed and ratified in Heaven, as though our Lord Jesus Christ
Himself had done the same. Wherefore, good children learn these
things diligently ; and when you be asked, how understand you the
words before rehearsed ? Ye shall answer, I do believe that whatso
ever the Ministers of Christ do to us by God's commandment, either
in excommunicating open and unrepentant sinners, or in absolving
repentant persons, all these their acts be of as great authority, and as
surely confirmed in heaven, as if Christ should speak the words out
of heaven. — Tracts Ang. Fathers, p.p. 28, 29. Ed. Lond. 1839.
And again thus Archbishop Cranmer in the sermon
set forth by his authority : —
Wherefore, good children, give good ear to this doctrine, and when
your sins do make you afraid and sad, then seek and desire absolution
and forgiveness of your sins of the Ministers which have received a
commission and commandment from Christ Himself to forgive
men their sins, and then your consciences shall have peace, tranquillity
and quietness. But he that doth not obey this counsel, but being
either blind or proud, doth despise the same, he shall not find
forgiveness of his sins, neither in his own good works, nor yet in
painful chastisements of his body, or any other thing whereto God
hath not promised remission of sins. Wherefore despise not absolu
tion, for it is the commandment and ordinance of God, and the Holy
Spirit of God is present, and causeth these things to take effect in
us, and to work our salvation.
And this is the meaning and plain understanding of these words of
Christ, which you heard heretofore rehearsed.
And again. Bishop Andrews.

134
" And because he speaks it authoritative, in the name of Christ
and His Church, he must not kneel but stand up. For authority of
absolution, see Ezek. xxxiii, 12, Job xxxiii, 13, Num. vi, 24, 2 Sam.
xii, 13, St. John xx, 23." — From MSS. Notes of Bishop Andrews.
And if you wish to master the subject, a study of the
works of the Ecclesiastical polity of the learned and judi
cious Hooker, will lend you most valuable aid. He
thus writes :
" The Holy Ghost which He then gave was a holy and ghostly
authority, authority over the souls of men, authority a part whereof
consisteth in power to remit and retain sins: receive the Holy Ghost:
whose sins soever ye remit they are remitted ; whose sins ye retain
they are retained. Seeing, therefore, that the same power is now given,
why should the same form of words expressing it be thought foolish ?
Besides, that the power and authority delivered with those words
is itself Xapio-ua, a gracious donation which the Spirit of God doth
bestow, we may most assuredly persuade ourselves that the hand
which imposeth upon us the function of our ministry, doth under the
same form of words, so tie itself thereunto, that he which receiveth
the burden is thereby for ever warranted to have the Spirit with
him and in him for his assistance, aid, countenance and support in
whatsoever he faithfully doth to discharge duty. When we take
ordination, we also receive the Presence of the Holy Ghost, partly to
assume unto itself, for the more authority, those actions that appertain
to our place and calling. We have that for the least and meanest duties
performed by virtue of ministerial power, that to dignify, grace, and
authorize them, which no other offices on earth can challenge.
Whether we preach, pray, baptize, communicate, condemn, give abso
lution, or whatever, as disposers of God's mysteries, our words,
judgments, acts and deeds, are not ours but the Holy Ghost's." —
Hooker's Eccl. Pol. Book VI, xxvii, 7, 8.
And closely connected with this subject is that of-
Sacerdotal Benediction, for my views upon which I may

135
be allowed to quote from a sermon* of my own, pub
lished about a year and a half ago. All will admit
that in God's ancient Church the Priests had power to
bless, and what proof is there that matters changed
then, since Christ came. Have not ministers of
the Christian Church the same office? That our
Church believes they have, is abundantly clear from
her solemn services.t But let us see in what manner
the priesthood has been handed down to us. The
Church of God is, and ever has been, one ;J and there
can be no Church without a priesthood. || Our High
Priest, Christ Himself, appointed Priests under Him.§
He commissioned His Apostles,^ and they and their
successors, in virtue of His promise, have ever since
commissioned others, knowing that He is with them,
and will be with them "alway unto the end of the
world."** That there is still a priesthood in the Church
of God, admits, therefore, of no question. The point
we have to consider is, whether the power of blessing
others, is part of the office of the priesthood in the
Christian Church. The salutations of the Apostles in
aU their epistles sufficiently prove that the Church in her
outset was invested with it.tt The benedictions with
which they close, go to the same point,:!::]: and above
* " The Ministerial Blessing." London : Burns. Cheltenham : Hill.
i Seethe Benedictions in Daily Service, Office for Holy Communion, Visitation of
the Sick, &c. &c.
t Col. i, 18. II Cf Sermon on Priesthood of the Church of God, by the
Rev. R. W. Evans, M. A., Rector of Tarvin.
§ Luke X, 1-16. t Luke ix, 1, 2. * * Matt, xxviii, 20.
ttRom.i,7. lCor.i,3. 2 Cor. i, 2. Gal. i, 3. Eph. i, 2. Phil.i,2,&c.
ttRom.xvi,24. 1 Cor. xvi, 23, 24. Gal.vi,18. Eph. vi,23, 24. Phil. iv,23,&c.

136
all, those words which the Church has always appro
priated as a ministerial form of blessing. " The grace
of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and
the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all."
Vl^hen was there a form so full of deep meaning, so rich in
words of spiritual blessing ! Think how much is implied
in the grace of the Author of the covenant of grace!*
The favour of Him who brought man once again into
favour with GoD.f The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ!
What unutterable perfection is there, which these words
do not include ? Verily they are full of mighty meaning.
And then, the love ofGoB — the love of that Father
who so loved us, that He gave His only begotten Son to
die for us. J The love of Him who so felt for us, as to
soften, if we may thus speak. His justice in our behalf || —
who irradiated with the golden beams of mercy, the
depth of darkness consequent upon our transgressions— ^
the love of Him who feels for us as a Father ! § And
the communion of the Holy Ghost — the participation,
that is, of all those great and glorious blessings which
were to follow upon the coming of the Holy Ghost^" — •
the peace and joy in believing which Avas to follow the
presence of the Comforter* *¦ — the hope and the assistance
which should flow from Him, who, proceeding from the
Father and the SoN,tt came to realize to the Church,
blessings of such importance — that, to secure them, it
was expedient for the children of the bridechamber that
* Heb. viii, 6. t Isaiah liii, 6. 1 Tim. ii, 5, 6.
t John iii, 16. || Rom. v, 15,16. ^ Matt, vii, 11. if John xvi, 8— 15.
** John xiv, 17, 18, 26, 27.
+ 1 See Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, and John xiv, 26, xv, 26.

137
the Bridegroom Himself should go away.* Choice
indeed is the blessing which these words convey as they
come at the close of our daily service : and none who
appreciate their beauty and their force, but must feel
that it does belong to the office of the Ministers of Christ
to bless in the Lord's name !
And if we go to our Prayer Books, we shall in our
occasional offices, find recognitions of the office of her
clergy to bless the people. The office is given first in
Holy Baptism, where the very form is a Benediction —
" In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost" — and the grace conveyed is the choicest
of all blessings — a blessing, without which, all that
follows in the formation of Christian character is
unmeaning ; even that blessing of our new birth f which
is the foundation stone of the Christian Temple in
the hearts of each one among us^for how can we live
unto God, if we have never been born unto Him ?
Again, in Confirmation, the Bishop uses a most impres
sive form of words : " The blessing of God Almighty
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost be unto you
and remain with you for ever." The Priest is invested
with the like authority in the office for the Visitation of
the Sick,'^and more especially in that oiHoly Matrimony.
In the former case there is the precedent of early
Christian times even of James the Apostle our Lord's
brother, and first Bishop of Jerusalem : || and for the
* Compare Matt, ix, 15, and John xv, 7.
t Gal. iii, 36, 27. Mark xvi, 16. Rom. vi, 3, 4. 1 Peter iii, 21. Col. ii, 12.
X See Benediction in the Office for Visitation of the Sick. || James v, 14, 16.

138
blessings in solemnizing the type of the mystical union
between Christ and His Church, for the Priest's blessing
in Holy Matrimony, we have very early precedent : and
if parties gave their attention to the Church Services on
the point, they would be loth to forego the privileges of
which modern neglect, or indolence, or over pressure of
duty too often deprives them. In the book of Ruth, we
find a precedent for a priestly blessing in marriage. "And
the people that were in the gate, and the elders said. We
are witnesses. The Lord make the woman that is come
into thine house like Rachel and like Leah, which two
did build the house of Israel ; and do thou worthily in
Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem. And let thy
house be like the house of Pliarez, whom Tamar bare
unto Judah, of the seed which the Lord shall give thee
of this young women." * And at a still earlier period,
we read that those who then exercised the Priest's office
blessed Rebekah on a like interesting occasion. " Be
thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed
possess the gate of those which hate them."t
But most of all, the Priests of God have this office in
the Holy Eucharist. Here they are necessary to the
due administration to man of food such as angels eat, the
heavenly manna of the Gospel. St. Paul speaks of the
cup of blessing which we bless ; that is, we the Apostles
and their successors in all coming time. St. Paul knew
that there were other cups of blessing, and therefore he
affirms, "the cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the
communion of the blood of Christ ? The bread which
•' Ruth iv, 11, 12. t Gen. x.xiv, 60.

139
we break, is it not the communion of the body of
Christ ? " This cannot be true of all bread, or of all
cups ; but it is true of the cup blessed by the Apostle, or
by one exercising like authority. It is true of the bread
broken by the Apostle, or one to whom Apostolic functions
are committed. It is true therefore of the bread and cup
blessed and broken by the Priests of the English Church ;
for every duly ordained Clergyman of the English
Church can trace his connexion with the Apostles, and
through them, with the Great Head of the Church, by
links, not one of which is wanting nor imperfect, since
the time when our Lord first committed to man the
ministry of reconciliation in the memorable words, " Go
ye, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father,- and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost, and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end
of the world." But not only do the Priests of Christ's
Church bless through the ministry of the holy effaces to
which we have alluded, their daily ministry in the
sanctuary, where Jehovah has placed His Name, is a
ministration of blessing — for God has promised that in
all places where His Name is put, there will He come
unto His people and bless them.
The doctrine of the Apostolical Succession, and as
connected with it, that of Sacerdotal Absolution and
Benediction, are therefore clearly the doctrines of the
Church of England ; and if in the unhappy strife now
pending, there are those who reject these doctrines as
Popish, it is for them to leave the Church whose doctrines
they dilute and explain away ; and it little becomes them

140
to abuse and revile High Churchmen as treacherous to
the Reformation, seeing that our Prayer Book was settled
at the Reformation, and that by that Prayer Book High
Churchmen abide, not simply because it was settled at
the Reformation, but because to it they have sworn their
unfeigned assent and consent : this oath having been
taken in the belief that the Prayer Book is at once
Catholic and Scriptural.
The subject which next engages our attention is
the revealed fact, taught and held in the Church of
England, of a
JUDGMENT ACCORDING TO WORKS.
" From whence He shall come to judge the quick and dead ; at whose coming
all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own
works." — Creed of St. Athanasius.
Next after the doctrine of our new birth iu Holy
Baptism, there is perhaps no truth to which the religious
world take more universal exception than that we shall be
judged according to our works : and Dr. Pusey's having
given to the world his views on this subject, may be
another reason why those who maintain Church princi
ples, are branded with a party name, and the truths they
teach stigmatized as " Puseyism." The earliest heralds
of the gospel did not escape the charge of worshipping
the God after a way which was called " heresy," and
they were soon known as "a sect every where spoken
against." Nay, our Master has warned us to beware
when all men speak well of us, and to regard slander and

141
misrepresentation as the inheritance of the truth, seeing
that He Himself escaped not the designation of Beelze
bub. We must not, therefore, be deterred from speaking
the truth, however loudly the storm of persecution may,
from so doing, rage. This will hold of every Christian
verity, and it more especially holds of the Day of Judg
ment, for surely he who fears the terrors of this world
sufficiently to deter him from reiterating what is revealed
concerning the process by which those of the next world
will be determined — -will be in sorry case when the
trumpet shall sound and he be called upon to give
account for every idle word which he has spoken. There
is something fearfully awful in the contemplation of the
Day of Judgment, so awful as to cause it to be terrible
not to those who perish only, but also to those whose
blessed privilege it shall be to come forth from the fiery
trial unscathed and clad in the garments of salvation.
Upon this sacred and solemn subject I do not purpose at
any length to enter. I only wish to show you from the
Prayer Book that it is the opinion of our Church that,
although salvation is of grace, that yet we shall be judged
according to our works : nor was the doctrine ever
doubted in the Church of Christ, until John Calvin's
adoption of the tenet of indefectible grace, rendered
a literal acceptation of the twenty-fifth chapter of St.
Matthew's gospel incompatible with his " harmonized"
scheme of the Divine verities. Men who will not
receive supernatural truths on trust, cannot expect to
escape error, and thus it has come about, that men
unable to account for the free will of man, as

142
co-existent with the sovereign grace of God, have refused
to believe that man is free to receive or reject salva
tion, and as a necessary consequence of scepticism
on this point, they deny that on the last great day of
assize there will be anything more than a mere separa
tion of the good from the bad. Those who have
imbibed Genevan doctrines deny the plain meaning of
plain texts of Scripture, such as, " For every idle word
that men shall speak they shall give account in the Day
of Judgment." We must all stand before the Judgment
seat of Christ to give account of our works," to be
judged for " the deeds done in the body." But with
this setting aside of Scripture the Church of England
has no sympathy. She professes her belief in the three
creeds of Universal Christendom. She calls upon her
children to profess daily that Christ "shall come to judge
the quick and dead," and to the same purpose is this
article in the Nicene Creed : while in the creed commonly
called the Creed of St. Athanasius, it is enunciated with
greater fulness: we are there taught to say that Christ
" Shall come to judge the quick and dead, at whose coming all
men shall rise again with their bodies ; and shall give account for their
own works. And they that have done good shall go into life
everlasting, and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire."
The difficulty with those of the Genevan or Latitudinarian
schools, who reject a judgment according to works, is
this, that they do not distinguish between the causa
mercedis and the regula retributionis. We admit with
them, that the Incarnation of Christ is the cause of our
gain, but we hold that our works are the Divinely

143
appointed rule of award. Thus some would interpret
judge as though it were the correlative of condemn, and
applied only to those who have not the mark of the
lamb on their foreheads. But this cannot be received as
just interpretation by any who hold our Fourth Article,
for there it is asserted that Christ shall sit in heaven
"until He return to judge all men at the last day."
In the litany we pray for help not only in the " hour of
death," but " in the Day of Judgment." Now, why
should we seek help in a day of separation merely ?
Believe that the last day is a day of trial, when Christ
will be the judge, and the Devil the great Accuser, *
and all the events of every man's life, all his thoughts,
all his words, and all his actions the subjects of inquiry :
the Holy Angels and an assembled universe the specta
tors, and then none need wonder that we should be
instructed to ask God to "help" us in that dread day. To
quote all the collects which prove that our Church
regards holiness of life and a faithful use of appointed
ordinances, as the conditions to be fulfilled by us in order
to our acquittal in the Judgment Day, would occupy too
much space, and as the evidence is accessible to all, to it
I would refer you, and would conclude with the following
passages from two of our able Divines, Bishop Pearson
and Dr. Barrow. The latter thus writes of the Judg
ment Day :
4. That then all persons so raised shall be presented at the bar of our
Lord, to answer and undergo their trial ; I saw, saith St. John, the
great and small standing before God's throne ; and. We must all,
' Ai,a/3oXoe, I.e., Accuser.

144
saith St. Paul, be made appear, and he set forth at the judgment seat
of Christ ; and. The Son of man, saith our Lord, shall sit upon the
throne of His glory, and all nations shall be gathered together before
Him.
5. That then and there every thought, every word, every work of
men shall be thoroughly disclosed and discussed ; so that it, together
with its due quality and desert, shall plainly appear ; all the designs
and pretences of men shall be laid bare; every case shall be considered;
every plea heard and scanned ; the merits of every cause weighed in
an even balance, according to truth and equity; men's neglects and
omissions of duty shall also come under consideration ; an account
will be exacted of all the talents entrusted to any man, (of the abilities,
opportunities, and advantages he ever had of doing God service,) and
of what improvements answerable he hath made; what men have
done themselves, and what they have done by others, from the influence
of their advice, their persuasion, or their example, shall be searched
out and poised ; God, saith St. Paul, will bring to light the hidden
things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of hearts; and,
of every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an account
at the day of judgment, saith our Lord ; and, after a long time, saith
he again, the Lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them,
Sfc, and every work, saith the Preacher, God shall bring into judg
ment, with every secret thing, whether it he good, or whether it he evil
6. That upon each man, according to the true quality of his doings,
thus detected, examined, and stated, a definitive sentence shall pass,
whereby he shall be acquitted and approved, or condemned and
reprobated ; Then, saith St. Paul, praise shall be to each one ; praise,
that is, generally, (by a favourable manner of speech,) a due taxation
and esteem, according to merit : then. Well done, good and faithful
servant, and, O thou bad and slothfid servant, shall be pronounced to
one or the other sort of men, respectively, according to their demeanour
here."* And Bishop Pearson urges : —
" Thirdly,— It being thus resolved the Son of Man shall be the
• Barrow's Theological Works, Vol. V. Oxford, 1830.

145
Judge, our next consideration is, what may the nature of this
judgment be; in what that judicial action doth consist; what he
shall then do, when he shall come to judge. The reality of this act
doth certainly consist in the final determination, and actual disposing
of all persons, soul and body to their eternal condition : and in
what manner this shall be particularly performed is not so certain
unto us ; but that which is sufficient for us, it is represented under a
form,al judiciary process. In which first there is described a throne,
a tribunal, a judgment-seat ; for in the regeneration the Son of Man
shall sit in the throne of His glory ; and that this throne is a seat not
only of majesty but also of judicature, appeareth by the following
words spoken to the Apostles, ' ye also shall sit upon the throne,
judging the twelve tribes of Israel.' As in that vision in the
revelation, ' I saw thrones and they sat upon them, and judgment
was given unto them.' And ' I saw a great white throne, and him
that sate on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away.'
This throne of Christ is expressly called His judgment seat, when
the Apostle tells us, ' we shall all stand before the judgment seat of
Christ,' and ' we must all appear before the judgment seat of
Christ. In respect then of the Son of Man, he shall appear in the
proper form and condition of a Judge, sitting upon a throne of judi
cature. Secondly, — There is to be a personal appearance of all men
before that seat of judicature, upon which Christ shall sit, for we
muH all appear, and we shall all stand before that judgment seat.
I saw the dead, saith the Apostle, stand before the throne of God.
Thus all nations shall be gathered before Him, He shall send His
Angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather
together His elect from the four winds from one end of heaven to
the other. For the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ is our
gathering together unto Him. Thirdly, — When those which are to
be judged are brought before the judgment seat of Christ, all their
actions shall appear. He will bring ;t light the hidden things of
darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts : He will
bring every work into judgment with every secret thing, whether it
be good or whether it be evil. To this end, in the vision of Daniel,
when the judgment was set the books were opened ; and iu tliat ol"

146
St. John ; the books were opened ; and the dead were judged out of
those things that were written in the books according unto their
works. Fourthly, — After the manifestation of all their actions, there
followeth a definitive sentence passed upon all their persons according
to those actions which is the fundamental and essential consideration
of this judgment ; the sentence of absolution in these words expressed,
* Come ye blessed of my Father inherit the kingdom prepared for
you from the foundation of the world ; ' the sentence of condemnation
in this manner, ' Depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire
prepared for the Devil and his angels.' Lastly, — Afl;erthe promulgation
of the sentence followeth the execution ; as it is written, ' And these
shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life
eternal.' Thus appeareth Christ's majesty by sitting on the thone ;
His authority by convening all before Him ; His knowledge and
wisdom, by opening all secrets, revealing all actions, discerning all
inclinations : His justice in condemning sinners ; His mercy in
absolving believers ; His power, in His execution of the sentence.
And thus the Son of Man shall come to judge, which is the last
particular subservient to the third consideration of this article." —
Bishop Pearson's Exposition of Creed, p. 297 — 300, Lond. 1704.
The last point to whichi shall direct your attention is the
question of the interpretation of Holy Scripture. On this
subject men's eyes have been blinded with much unneces
sary dust, and those who defer to antiquity have incurred
much undeserved odium and obloquy. I invite you then
to consider
THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH IN
CONTROVERSIES OF FAITH.
" An Article of THE Va.\th."—Art. VI.
" The Church has authority in Controversies of Faith."— ^ri. XX.
" Whosoever will be saved before all things it is necessary that he hold the
Catholic Faith." — Athanasian Creed.
To hear the dogmatizing of the religious world at the
present day, one might suppose that the present state

147
of Protestantism at home and on the continent, exhib
ited a satisfactory proof of the unanimity resulting from
the exercise of the so called right of Private Judgment.
There is something very awful in the manner in which
this right is sometimes asserted. In a tract already
referred to, the power to choose between good and evil,
by an abuse of which, Adam fell, is called the right of
Private Judgment. Surely such a right is a thing not
for boasting, but for carefulness and fearfulness. If
men would talk more of the responsibility of Private
Judgment and less of the right, they would be the less
liable to abuse it. There is on man the fearful responsi
bility that he choose the good and refuse the evil. He
is bid prove all things, but it is no where said that he is
to discover them. In science, when we wish to arrive at
the truth, we look to the latest discoveries ; but it is not
so in Christianity; in that we must look to the beginning
to discover the truth. Science rises in darkness, and
every step it takes increases in light. Christianity started
into view, in full and glorious light, and successive ages
have served not to make more resplendent its inherent
brilliancy, nor to add to its mass of facts, but only to show
that it is heaven-born, and enduring. The reason of this
is obvious. Science is matter of discovery ; Christianity
is matter of revelation. Hence, to find out what Christi
anity is, we must go back to the New Testament. Here
arises a difficulty. The books of the New Testament
were written in a language or languages now strange to
us. Customs then in use are now obsolete, and hence
allusions then obvious and plain are now obscure and
k2

148
perplexing. These and other considerations render it an
easier matter to say that we take our opinions from the
New Testament, than to be sure, that we do so, without
any extraneous assistance. Doubts are every day occurring
as to the meaning of different passages in the inspired
volume. To what sources can we go with so much safety,
for a solution of our difficulties, as to the contemporaries
and immediate successors of the men whose writings we
wish to understand ?
There is no question that we possess advantages for
conducting this enquiry not enjoyed by some of our
predecessors ;* but inasmuch as there has been no new
revelation, we can arrive at no new fact. It will thus be
seen that even if all the phantasies of modern interpre
tations, and all the fanciful applications of recent divines
have their counterparts in the early Christian Fathers,
this will no more invalidate the evidence of the Fathers,
than it will establish the theological reputation of their
copyists. The Fathers are better evidence, both as to
fact and doctrine, than moderns can possibly be.
Moderns may arrive at wise conclusions on minor
points, but the most erudite modern is of small value
as evidence in determining the catholicity of a doctrine ;
while the most ignorant ancient is valuable and trust
worthy (for this same purpose of evidence) in the exact
ratio of his antiquity. Ridicule cannot invalidate
the claims of the Fathers to be considered as the best

* For example the epistle of Clement of Rome, one of the most valuable of our
illustrative documents, the most valuable record of Apostolical times next to the
New Testament, was not known in this country at the time of the Reformation.

149
evidence to the teaching of Christ and His Apostles.
And it is not easy to tell why because they conversed with
Apostles, and the immediate successors of Apostles, they
should be denuded of all authority by those who pay an
almost slavish deference to the dicta of some favorite
Apollos of modern times. Our own Church stands out
from the Reformed religious communities of continental
Christendom, in nothing more conspicuously than her
studious respect for antiquity. It is the merest bugbear
in the world to allege that high Churchmen exalt
tradition* above Scripture, or that they give to any other
set of documents an authority equal to that of the Scrip
ture. The fact is that the desire of Churchmen to give
to the consentient voice of antiquity, its proper authority
arises from their high regard for Scripture, and their
unwillingness that Scripture should be misinterpreted.
It is great folly to speak of this as derogating from the
authority of Scripture, for if Scripture do not speak
differently to different minds, how is it that the Socinian
and the Independent appeal both alike to these sacred
records ? That Scripture condemns the Socinian the
Churchman believes, but on his own principles the
• " It is curious," says the learned Mr. Canon Parkinson in his usually clear
manner, " to observe how much confusion of thought, and therefore unnecessary
controversy, has arisen from overlooking the distinction between the too widely
different senses in which the word Tradition is often properly used. It is sometimes
a mode of evidence, and sometimes the thing evidenced ; sometimes tradendi modus,
sometimes traditum. In the first sense in reference to theological matters it is
invaluable ; in the second, unless the thing evidenced be shewn to have originally
issued from Inspiration it is of no value whatever. Yet the confusion of these two
meanings is commonly found, not only in the same author, but even in the same
Piasa.ge."— Appendix to No. IV. Hulsean Lectures, 1839, by Rev. R. Parkinson,
B. D., Canon of Manchester.

150
Independent has no right to censure the Socinian. John
Calvin burnt Servetus for being a Socinian heretic, but
on the right of Private Judgment principle, this was the
triumph of might over justice !
The authority of the Church in controversies of faith,
is thus stated by Bishop Jeremy Taylor : —
" For the religion of our Church is, therefore, certainly Primitive
and Apostolic, because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of
the Old and New Testament, and nothing else as matter of faith ; and
therefore, unless there can be new Scriptures, we can have no new
matters of belief, no new articles of faith. Whatsoever we cannot
prove from thence we disclaim it, as not deriving from the fountains
of our Saviour. We also do believe the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene,
with the additions of Constantinople, and that which is commonly
called the Symbol of St. Athanasius; and the four first general
councils are so entirely admitted by us, that they,
together with the plain words of scripture, are made
the rule and measure of judging heresies amongst US;
and in pursuance of these, it is commanded by our own Church,
that the Clergy shall never teach anything as matter of 'faith,
religiously to be observed, but that which is agreeable to the Old
and New Testaments, and collected out of the same doctrine by the
Ancient Fathers and Catholic Bishops of the Church.' This was
undoubtedly the faith of the Primitive Church; they admitted all
into their communion that were of this faith, they condemned no
man that did not condemn these ; they gave letters communicatory
by no other cognizance, and all were brethren who spake this voice.
' Hanc legem sequentes, Christianorum Catholicorum nomen jubemus,
amplecti ; reliquos vero dementes, vesanosque judicantes haeretici
dogmatis infamiam sustinere ; ' said the Emperors Gratian, Valen-
tinian, and Theodosius in their proclamation to the people of Constan
tinople. All that believed this doctrine were Christians and
Catholics, viz : all they who believe in the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost, one Divinity in equal majesty in the Holy Trinity ; which

151
indeed was the sum of what was decreed in explication of the
Apostles' Creed, in the four first general councils.
And what faith can be the foundation of a more solid peace, the
surer ligaments of Catholic communion, or the firmer basis of a holy
hfe, and of the hopes of heaven hereafter, than the measures which
the Holy Primitive Church did hold and we after them V — Works
of Bishop Jeremy Taylor, Vol. X.
And referring to the Canon of 1571 above quoted by
the Bishop, Mr. Faber an independent testimony on
the present question writes : —
" 'If we of the Clergy dislike the regulation, as encroaching upon
what is sometimes (perhaps without full consideration) denominated
the Protestant right of private judgment, we are quite at liberty,
without any persecuting, let or hindrance to throw up our ministry ;
but I see not how we can honorably retain our office within the pale
of the Church, if we professedly despise or openly reject the regula
tion. We are free to act as men, but we are not free to act as honest
Churchmen. A pledge has been given and accepted, and by that
pledge we are bound, I should think, to abide, so long as we exercise
our ministration in the Church of England.' And with regard to
the wisdom of the regulation, this same writer says, ' the wisdom
however of the regulation with all due respect to the nineteenth
century, I deem more especially apparent, because it takes the middle
course between the Romish doctrine of unwritten tradition on the one
hand, and the vulgar modern notion of insulated private judgment on
the other hand : the former of which would cause us to rejoice in the
teaching of a single Pope ; while the latter, by making every man bis
own Pope, claims to have produced a ' Bible made easy.' "
The Rev. Dr. Hook thus maintains the Church of
England view of Tradition, in his Sermons preached
before the University of Oxford : —
" But here we are met by the sneering sceptic, who, from the days
of Pontius Pilate to the present hour, has been accustomed to ask.

152
'What is truth?' It may be all very well to propagate the truth,
but, after all, where is it to be found, and what is it ? The Papist
lays claim to it, and the Ultra-Protestant lays claim to it, and both the
Papist and the Ultra-Protestant assert it to be what- you of the
Church of England refuse to admit. Why must they be wrong ?
and why must you, of necessity, be right ? '
Now, my brethren, what does this very popular insinuation, that
there is no such thing discoverable as religious truth, amount to ? It
amounts to nothing less than a virtual denial of the existence of
revelation. I say that to insinuate that religious truth is not to be
ascertained, is to insinuate that God has not revealed His will to man;
and he who is guilty of the insinuation, be his professions what they
may, is only an infidel in masquerade. If there be a revelation of
God's Will and Word, then it follows as a matter of course that in the
record of that revelation religious truth is discoverable. Thus the
Gospel is expressly declared by St. Paul to be the word of truth, for
truth, as well as grace, came by Jesus Christ.
But, says the adversary, the question stiU recurs, because, among
those who receive the Bible, disputes exist as to what the Bible
really says. It may be so. It is so. And the question, now, there
fore is, whether this difi'erence can be accounted for.
Now this is certain, that to any thing asserted by Scripture there
cannot be two contrary meanings attached. All these difierence,
therefore, must be occasioned by some defect, not in the object
contemplated, but in the persons contemplating it. Though the thing
seen may be the same, it may be seen through a discolouring or
distorting medium, or the eye seeing it may be diseased; when,
therefore, there is some known wrong principle in the interpreter of
Scripture, we are not to wonder, if, in some instances, the truth is
hidden from his mental vision. Now that the mental eye, both of
the Papist and of the Ultra-protestant, is jaundiced on those points
where they diSer from ourselves, appears from this, that both parties
come to the interpretation of Scripture influenced by principles which
they would not acknowledge as correct for the interpretation of any
other ancient book.
The Papist first of all exalts tradition to an equality with Scripture,

153
and then receives as tradition, not what is really such, that is, what
has been received as such by the Catholic Church, but what has at
any time been decreed by that branch of the Church which is in
slavery to the Court of Rome. Thus the canons of the Councils of
Trent are received as traditions. The Papist, therefore, interprets
Scripture, not as we do, by the light of tradition, properly so called,
by reference to the opinions and practices of the Primitive ages, and
by deference to the authority of the Church Catholic, but according
to certain dogmas of a comparitively modern date of the Roman
Church.* The Ultra-protestant meets the Papist, though they start from
the very opposite extremes. He avowedly puts aside the tradition
which the Papist only virtually rejects. Instead of seeking to ascer
tain how the Scriptures were understood by-those to whom they were
in the first instance addressed, how they were interpreted by the
Church universal before those divisions existed, which we have now
to deplore, and when, therefore, (by means of corresponding churches
and general councils,) the opinion of the universal Church could be
known, he relies entirely on his private judgment, and thus, while
rejecting with indignation and scorn the claim to infallibility made by
the Pope of Rome, he, in eflfect, converts every individual teacher,
either into an infallible Pope, or into a mere sceptic. I do not deny
the right of private judgment as a political privilege, but to contend
for it, as some persons do, as a sure guide to truth, is not only absurd,
but cannot fail to involve those who do so in inconsistency as well
as error.
We see, then, why these parties are not able to discover the truth,
although the Bible may be open before them ; there is always some
thing intervening to prevent them from seeing the truth clearly ; and
» See Waterland on Ecclesiastical Anticxuity, Chap. vii. Patrick on Tradition,
p. 41. StiUingfleet's Rational Account, Part 1, Chap. v. Marsh's Comparative
View, p. 45. Beveridge on the Nineteenth Article, Works IX, 393, and especially
Jeremy Taylor's Dissuasive from Popery,X,485. Bellarmine, Tract, de Potest. Sum.
Pontif , plainly declares " that the modern Church of Rome has power not only
to declare and explain, but even to constitute and command what shall belong to
the faith."

154
we all know how very small a substance held close to the eye will
eclipse the sun at its zenith. I wish not to throw blame upon them.
Whether the dimness or obliquity of their vision be a misfortune or a
fault, or rather, when it is the one or the other, it is not for us to
determine who are forbidden to judge, it can be known by Him only
to Whom all hearts are open, and from Whom no secrets are hid. The
object, in alluding to the subject now, is simply to show that their
having missed the truth is no proof that the truth is not discoverable
by those who (to adopt the words of one to whom this Church is
much indebted. Archbishop Cranmer,) ' follow the judgment of the
most sacred word of God, and of the Holy Catholic Church.' " —
Hook's Sermons. Oxford : D. A. Talboys, 1837.
And again, the same fearless Divine urges : —
" And this was the principle on which we find the Fathers of the
Church to have acted. The heretic, professing his reverence for
Scripture only, would put upon the words of Scripture his own
meaning, and then agree that, since they could bear that construction,
he was justified in abiding by his conclusions. And thus by Scripture,
capriciously interpreted, could every vagary ofthe intellect be justified;
for we have only to look through the coloured medium of our
imagination to read in Scripture whatever we please. The argument
of the Fathers with these persons was short and conclusive — ' we
have no such doctrine ;' they would say, ' neither the churches of
God.' They appealed to what had been universally received and
acted upon in the Apostolical Churches ; and they argued, if this
doctrine can be established by the written word, this is the doctrine
which was actually revealed, and 'ought consequently to be received,
however specious your argument for what is merely a private opinion,
originating either in pride of intellect, the weakness of superstition, or
the reveries of fanaticism. The question was not, and is not, what
sense will the Scripture bear, but what has, in fact, been revealed. It
is by bearing this in mind that we make consistent, passages in the
Fathers which might otherwise appear inconsistent, and thus gain a
strong argument against the Papist ; for instance, when we find them

155
at one time referring to the tradition of the church as a guide that
they would be most unwilling to forsake, and at another maintaining
with all the vigour of their argument that Scripture, and Scripture
alone, was the rule by which the truth of any doctrine could be
proved. Tradition supplied the hypothesis, the Church asserted the
proposition, and Scripture gave the proof." — Hook's Sermons.
Oxford: D. A. Talhoy's, 1837.
And again : —
" And was not this the principle upon which our ancestors here in
England acted, when three centuries ago they banished from the
Church of their forefathers the abominations of popery ? Did tkey
imagine so vain a device as that every man might go to the Bible,
and that too a translated one, and carve from thence a religion for
himself? If they did, how strangely inconsistent was their conduct in
publishing their "institutions" and "necessary doctrines," their injunc
tions and articles, and catechisms and canons, and homilies, — how much
more inconsistent their having recourse to legal means to silence those
who, as they thought, were corrupting, instead of correcting, the
opinions of the age? Censures have been past on distinguished
foreign reformers for their inconsistency in asserting for themselves
the right of private judgment, and yet anathematizing others, when,
by the exercise of the same right, they came to opposite conclusions.
How they are to be defended it is not for me to say. Suffice it for
us to know, that against our own ancestors no such charge can be
established. If they did not admit the right of private judgment in
others, they did not attempt to exercise it themselves. They deferred
to catholic tradition on all doubtful points, — but they took leave to
enquire what catholic tradition really was, and thus to distinguish it
from popish assertion. We have only to refer to their writings to see
how sensitive they were when any one insinuated that they wished to
depart from Catholicism. This might very easily be proved, if the
time permitted, by an induction of particulars ; — as it is, I will simply
refer to one of the latest and most elaborate works of one of our
reformers, whose disposition inclined him perhaps to defer, more than

156
others, to the opinion of foreign Protestants, — I allude to Cranmer's
answer to Gardyner, and there we shall find him declaring, that the
sense of our Saviour's words must be sought from the old writers,
that he impugns not the true catholic faith, but the false papistical
faith ; that he spurns with indignation the idea of his meaning to set
aside the word catholic, or of his going about, — I use his own words, —
of his ' going about by his own wit, to prove his doctrine, howsoever
Scripture hath hitherto been understood.' Nay, speaking of the
Lutherans, of whom Gardyner had said that they took his view ofthe
subject, Cranmer remarks, that supposing they did, yet the ancient
authors which were next to Christ's time may not give place to these
new men, although they were men of excellent learning and judgment ;
while in his last solemn appeal to a general council at his degradation,
he declares : (Archbishop Cranmer's Remains, published by the Rev.
Henry Jenkins, Vol. 2.) 'Touching my doctrine ofthe Sacrament
and other my doctrine, of what kind soever it be, I protest it was
never my mind to write, speak, or understand any thing contrary to
the most holy Word of God, or else against the Holy Catholic Church
of Christ, but purely and simply to imitate and teach those things
only which I have learned of the sacred Scripture and of the Holy
Catholic Church of Christ from the beginning, and also according to
the exposition ofthe most holy and learned fathers and martys ofthe
Church. And if any thing hath, peradventure, chanced otherwise
than I thought, I may err, but heretic I cannot be, forasmuch as I
am ready in all things to follow the judgment of the most sacred word
of God, and of the Holy Catholic Church.' There is more to the
same efi^ect ; and consequently, if at any time this great man, amidst
his many cares, deviated from Catholicism, while we correct his error,
we should remember to attribute it not to any defect in his principle,
but merely to a mistake in its application. The principle which he
professed was acted upon by Ridley, and Parker, and Jewell, and
their worthy successors, at the Hampton Court and Savoy conferences,
and procured for the members of the Church, from Neal the historian,
the designation in mockery of 'traditioners.' "
" And acting upon this principle, what was it that the great and

157
good men who conducted the Reformation in this country did? Having
found an hereditary religion in the land, they compared it, as they
were bound to do, and as we are bound to do, with Scripture ; and
they soon discovered many practices and opinions prevalent, inconsis
tent therewith, and contradictory thereto. Patiently pursuing these
errors to their source, they soon discovered that they were mere innova
tions of a comparatively modern date, — fungous excrescences which
might be easily removed without injury to the tree to which they were
attached; and their endeavour was to eradicate from the hereditary
religion all papistical novelties, leaving uninjured and untouched what
was really Catholic. Their object was not to obliterate the old trans
mitted religion, but merely to correct certain abuses then in existence —
to restore it, in short, to its Primitive lustre and fragrance, — not to
pluck the fair rose of Sharon, but to crush the serpent which lurked
beneath its leaves, — not to stop the sun in its course, or to force it
from its orb, but to dispel the clouds by which it had become partially
eclipsed, — ^not to destroy the body, but to remove disease from the
hmbs, not to dash away the cup out of the people's hand, and thus
to leave them without the means of spiritual refreshment, but to
precipitate to the bottom the deleterious drugs which an enemy had
thrown in ; — they found in existence a stream which, flowing from
the living rock, had followed the spiritual Israel of God from the
first ages of Christianity, but of which complaint was made that in
this part of the world the waters had become bitter ; and in the spirit
and power of Moses and Elisha, these commissioned prophets of the
Most High, together with the rulers of the people, went forth unto
the springs of the waters, and cast into them the salt of God's word,
and said, ' Thus saith the Lord, I have healed these waters — and so
the waters were healed unto this day.' " — Hook's Sermons. Oxford :
D. A. Talboys, 1837.
The late Regius, professor of Divinity in Oxford, the
learned and pious Dr. Burton urges : —
" It cannot fairly be said, that, in making this appeal to antiquity,
we are attaching too much importance to human authority, or that we
are lessening that reverence which ought to be paid exclusively to the

158
revealed word of God. It is because we wish to pay exclusive reverence
to the Scriptures that we endeavour so anxiously to ascertain their
meaning; it is only where our interpretation differs from that of others,
that we make an appeal to some third and impartial witness. We think
that we find this witness in the early Christians, in those who lived not
long after the Apostles ; and though we fully allow that they were
fallible like ourselves, and though in sound critical judgment their
age may have been inferior to our own, yet there are many reasons
why their testimony should be highly valued." — Burton Hist.
Churchman, page 11, Introduction. Ed. Lond. 1836.
The present Bishop of Lincoln well says : —
"If we mistake not the signs of the times, the period is not far
distant when the whole controversy between the English and Romish
Churches will be revived, and all the points in dispute again brought
under review. Of those points none is more important than the
question respecting Tradition ; and it is, therefore, most essential that
they who stand forth as the defenders of the Church of England
should take a correct and rational view of the subject — the view in
short which was taken by our Divines at the Reformation. Nothing
was more remote from their intention than indiscriminately to condemn
all Tradition. They knew that in strictness of speech Scripture is
Tradition — written Tradition. They knew that, as far as external
evidence is concerned, the Tradition preserved in the Church is the
only ground on which the genuineness of the Books of Scripture
can be established. For though we are not, upon the authority of the
Church, bound to receive as Scripture idle fables, or precepts at
variance with the great principles of morality — yet no internal evidence
is sufficient to prove a booh to be Scripture, of which the reception,
by a portion at least of the Church, cannot be traced from the earliest
period of its history to the present time What our Reformers
opposed was the notion that men must, upon the mere authority of
Tradition, receive, as necessary to salvation, doctrines not contained
in Scripture. Against this notion in general, they urged the incredi
bility of the supposition that the Apostles, when unfolding in their

159
writings the principles of the Gospel, should have entirely omitted
any doctrines essential to man's salvation. The whole tenor indeed
of those writings, as well as of our Blessed Lord's discourses, runs
counter to the supposition that any truths of fundamental importance
would be suffered long to rest upon so precarious a foundation as that
of oral Tradition. With respect to the particular doctrines, in defence
of which the Roman CathoUcs appeal to Tradition, our Reformers
contended that some were directly at variance with Scripture ; and
that others, far from being supported by an unbroken chain of
Tradition from the Apostolic age, were of very recent origin, and
utterly unknown to the early Fathers. Such was the view of this
important question taken by our Reformers. In this, as in other
instances, they wisely adopted a middle course : they neither bowed
submissively to the authority of Tradition, nor yet rejected it alto
gether. We in the present day must tread in their footsteps and
imitate their moderation, if we intend to combat our Roman Catholic
adversaries with success. We must he careful that in our anooiety to
avoid one extreme, we run not into the other ; and adopt the
extravagant language of those who, not content with ascribing a
paramount authority to the written Word in all points pertaining to
eternal salvation, talks as if the Bible — and that too the Bible in our
English translation — were independently of all external aids and
evidence, sufficient to prove its own genuineness and inspiration, and
to he its own interpreter." — Eccl. Hist, by John Bp. of Bristol, page
299 to 300. Edition Cambridge, 1826.
Nor is the following unworthy attention : —
" It will appear by the writings of the Apostles that they com
mitted the doctrine of Christianity to them whom they trusted with
the founding and governing of the Church ; for the instructing of
them that were to be baptized, and formed into Churches, whereof
the whole Church was to consist. So that as they to whom the Apos
tles' writ having received their Christianity from those that were so
trusted, were to limit the meaning of their writings within that
faith which they had received : so is all interpretation of Scripture
still to be confined within that, which the Church from the beginning

160
hath received by their hands. * *»*«¦* g^^ since as much
is necessary to salvation hath been already declared by the consent of
the Church ; to confine all interpretation of Scripture within that
which all the Church every where at all times hath received, can
make no man Lord over the faith of the Church." — Just Weights
and measures, ^c, by Herbert Thorndike. Cap. VI.
And again, to quote Mr. Canon Parkinson : —
" It may be necessary, however, to remind the reader, that the
great controversy between ourselves and the Church of Rome, regard
ing Tradition, (a fact which is now sometimes lost sight of,) has
reference to neither of the above senses of the word, but to the force
and weight of oral or unwritten Tradition ; that is a Tradition that
cannot be written, but is written in the hearts of the authorized inter
preters of the truth, for the purpose of enabling them to correct the
necessary imperfections of any written word.* It was the maintenance
of this mystical doctrine that opened the widest door to the spiritual
domination of the Romish Priesthood. For a full discussion of the
question of oral Tradition, though with far too much laxity of view
on the part of the Archbishop, see Tillotson on ' The Rule of Faith'
especially, sect. 2, vol x, works." — Parkinson's Hulsean Lectures.
To the same point are the following short extracts : —
" It is sufficient prescription against any thing which can be alleged
out of Scripture, that if it appear contrary to the sense of the Catholic
Church from the beginning, it ought not to be looked upon as the
true meaning of Scripture. All this security is built upon this strong
presumption, that nothing contrary to the necessary articles of faith,
should be held by the Catholic Church, whose very being depends
upon the belief of those articles which are necessary to salvation." —
Bishop Stillingfleet. Rational Account, c. 2, p. 59.
" Preachers shall not presume to deliver any thing from the pulpit, as
of moment, to be religiously observed and believed by the people, but that
which is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and New Testament,
and collected otit of tlie same doctrine by the Catholic Fathers
* See Petri Dens Theologia, Tom. 2, p. 108.

161
and Bishops of the Ancient Church."— Canon of the Church of
England, 1671. Sparrow Collect, p. 237.
" It is a calumny to affirm that the Church of England rejects all
tradition." — Bishop Patrick on TVac^iYiow, p. 48. A.D. 1683.
One great use of Antiquity is to guard the natural construction
against unnatural distortions. — Dr. Waterland.
" If a man should say, ' There is no Catholic Church,' it followeth
immediately hereupon that this Jesus, whom we call the Saviour,
is not the Saviour of the world." — Hooker — Sermon on Justifi
cation, ^c.
To depart from the Judgment and Practice ofthe Universal Church
of Christ, ever since the Apostles' times, and to betake ourselves to a
new invention, cannot but be, besides the danger, vehemently scanda
lous. * * * How ill doth that become the mouth of a
Christian divine, which Parker hath let fall to this purpose ! who
dareth to challenge learned Casaubon for proposing two means of
deciding the modern controversies. Scriptures and Antiquity ? What
more easy trial can possibly be projected ? Who but a professed
noveUist can dislike it ? rii a^x'^ia (the ancient things') was the old
and sure rule of that sacred council ; and it was Solomon's charge —
Remove not the old landmarks. — Prov. xxiii. 10. — Joseph Hall,
Bishop of Norwich.
Among the means for the right Interpretation of Scripture, the
Authority of the Church, building her faith upon the Scriptures, and
professing to be the keeper and witness of Holy Writ, claims our chief
regard. — Bishop Van Mildert.
Shortly, my brethren, let us hate Popery to the death ; but let us
not involve within that odious name those holy forms both of adminis
tration and devotion which are both pleasing unto God, and agreeable
to all Christianity and godliness. — Bishop Hall.
" It is much to be suspected, that many pretend a zeal for Scripture
who mean nothing by it, but to have its fences taken down that they
may deal the more freely or rudely with it. They would exclude the
Ancients to make room for themselves, and throw a kind of sliglit
upon the received interpretations, only to advance their own. Such
commonly has been the way, and therefore there is the less regard to

162
be paid to magnificent words. They complain sometimes that inter
preting Scripture by the ancients is debasing its majesty and throwmg
Christ out of His throne ! But we think that Christ never sits
more secure or easy on His throne than when He has His most
faithful guards about Him ; and that none are so likely to strike at
His authority, or to aim at dethroning Him, as they that would
displace His old servants only to make way for new ones." — Dr.
Waterland — The whole of the Seventh Chapter of the able treatise
on the Trinity, whence this is taken, is a powerful argument in
favour of Antiquity.
" We do also believe the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene with the
additions of Constantinople, and that which is commonly called the
Symbol of Saint Athanasius, and the four first general councils are
so entirely admitted by us that they, together with the plain words qf
Scripture are made the rule and measure of judging heresies among
us." — Bp. Jeremy Taylor's Dissuasives from Popery.
In the Preface to Archbishop Bramhall as quoted by Mr.
Parkinson, we find, " We keep ourselves to the old faith of the
whole Christian world, that is, the Creed of the Apostles — explicated
by the Nicene, Constantinopolitan, Ephesine, and Chalcedonian
Fathers ; the same whicli was professed by them of old at their
Baptism, and is still professed by us at our Baptism; the same
wherein all the Christian world, and themselves among the rest, were
Baptized." — Schism Guarded, Tom. 1, Disc.ix.
1 have been thus voluminous in the extracts 1 have
made, in order that you may learn from various sources
of an unimpeachable character, the value set on the con
sentient voice of Christian antiquity. In asserting this
doctrine we are sometimes met with an experimentum
crucis. When appeals are made to antiquity, and to the
creeds of the Church, it is retorted — " What, then — do
you mean to say that the Bible is not of itself sufficient
to teach a man his religion?" To this query, the

163
Churchman will, if he is wise, reply — " That he is neither
called upon to affiy^m nor to deny the sufficiency of
Scripture for this purpose." He is not called upon to
deny it; because he cannot presume to say with what
power God might be pleased to arm the words of Scrip
ture, supposing He had not instituted His Church as the
pillar and ground of the truth. Were there no Church —
no Divinely-appointed ordinance for the preservation of
truth — then possibly God would not allow His holy and
inspired Word to be found insufficient. And, on the
other hand, we are not called upon to affirm that
Scripture has this power ; because, as yet, we know of
no instance in which such power has been displayed by
Scripture. We have never yet met with the man whose
knowledge has been derived from Scripture, and Scrip
ture only. We do not say that Scripture might not, in
God's hands, be used for teaching a man his creed, as
well as for giving him Divine warranty for that creed,
when so obtained; all we allege is, that hitherto Scripture
never has been called upon to perform, and never has
performed this office. The Church has been the enun-
ciator of Christian truths : the Scripture has been the
test of their genuineness. Point out the man who has
learnt — we do not say found or proved, but learnt — his
creed from Scripture, and then we are prepared to meet
the enemies of antiquity on another ground. Then we
will reason with them; now we deny their right to
challenge us in argument. When some one shall be
produced who has discovered the truths of the Trinity,
the Incarnation : of our state by nature and by grace,
l 2

164
and all this without any traditionary help whatever,*
then shall we be prepared to show that private judgment
is merely shifting the venue of infallibility from the
Vatican, to every individual's power of conscience. Till
then, we deny that the exalters of reason above the
uniform testimony of the Church, have any right to call
upon us to extricate ourselves from the imaginary "horns
of a dilemma," on which they flatter themselves they
have placed us.
There are another class of objectors who in their
wilfulness or their ignorance, allege that because the
Fathers do not agree in some points, that therefore, they
are to be rejected in all. It is curious people cannot
see that this only enhances their value, as witnesses to a
doctrine, when they agree — and it is only when they
agree that they have any deference as authorities paid
to them by high Churchmen If And even where the
* The dogma of a day or a year ago, is a tradition to-day : and what I mean
by learnt their creed is finding it out without ever having heard of God, or His
nature, aud His kingdom from others.
t For the Fathers, it is a vain speculation to believe that the Fathers concurre
all in one exposition of all places of Scripture. And if we must take them where
they all agree, we shall find many places which they do not expound alike, yet
where they all agree, as in articles of faith and matters fundamental, wherein we
flnde a joynt harmony, their exposition ought to be received, for therein they
deliver the fence of the whole Catholick Cliurch derived from the Apostles, which
in such points is by Christ's promisse free from errour, otherwise Christ might
have no Church. — Introduction to Bishop Andrews, p. 56,
He that says the Fathers are not our Masters, speaks consonantly to the words
of Chkist ; but he that denies them to be good instructors, does not speak
agreeably to reason or the sense of the Church. Sometimes they are excellent
arbitrators, but not always good judges ; iu matters of fact they are excellent
witnesses ; in matters of right or question they are rare Doctors, and because they
bring good arguments are to be valued accordingly. — Bp. Jeremy Taylor hi his
Epistle dedicatory to his Si5fj/3oXov OtoXoyiKoj'.

165
'poor Fathers do contradict each other they are of some
use, ex. gr.: — Justin, Clement, and Tertullian (from
Isaiah liii,) conclude our Saviour to have been deformed.
Jerome and others represent Him to have possessed
extraordinary comeliness : — hence we may conclude that
the first Christians had no images nor pictures, else surely
there would have been some more certain tradition.
The Dissenter stands upon a consistent, although
untenable ground, when he derides an appeal to anti
quity ; but the member, and still more the Clergyman
of the Church of England, is without excuse. The
Church in her homily on Holy Scriptures, quotes " that
godly doctor, St. John Chrysostom," thrice — Fulgentius,
once — and St. Augustin, thrice — and in this self same
homily, in the second part, we have the following : —
" And whosoever giveth his minde to Holy Scriptures,
with diligent study, and burning desire, it cannot be
(saith St. Chrysostome) that he should be left without
helpe. For either God Almighty will send him some
godly Doctour, to teach him : as he did to instruct the
Eunuch, a nobleman of Ethiope, and Treasurer unto
Queen Candace, who having affection to reade the Scrip
ture (although he understood it not) yet for the desire
that he had unto God's word, God sent His Apostle
Philip to declare unto him the true sense of the Scripture
that he read : or else, if we lacke a learned man to
instruct and teach us, yet God Himselfe from above will
give light unto our minds, and teach us those things
which are necessary for us, and wherein we be ignorant."
Here it is plain God is only affirmed to miraculously

166
and immediately interfere where there is no godly doctor
at hand, and, therefore, clearly He is not said to do so
when His Church is nigh ! Again, in the preface to the
Ordinal, " Holy Scripture and ancient authors" are
made of paramount authority in settling the question
on which hinges the due and valid administration of the
Holy Sacraments. High Churchmen, in demanding
respect for antiquity, exalt Scripture ; nay it is respect
for Scripture that leads them to consult antiquity. They
are unwilling to place a wrong meaning on Holy Scrip
ture, and therefore they avail themselves of all the helps
for understanding it aright. And to those who deride the
notion that the Primitive Church was far purer than our
own, I shall oppose nothing of mine own, but simply a few
passages selected almost at random from the Books of
Homilies, by which it will appear that the writers of
those Sermons, with all their hatred against Popery, had
not quite run to the modern length of abusing the
Primitive Church :- — •
" In the Primitive Church, which was most holy and godly, and in
the which due discipline with severity was used against the wicked,"
&c. 2nd Tome, 2nd Part. Of the right use of the Church, page 9.
Edition : London, 1635.
" Contrary to the usage of the Primitive Church, which was most
pure and incorrujJt." 2nd Tome, 1st Part. Against P er ill of Idolatry ,
page 12.
" And therefore the Primitive Church, which is specially to be
followed, as most incornipt and pure, &c. 2nd Tome, 3rd Part.
Against Perill of Idolatry, page 44.
 " those dales, which were about four hundred years after
our Saviour Christ, there were no images publiquely used, and
received in the Church of Christ, which was then much less corrupt.

167
and 7nore pure than now it is. Tome 2nd. Against Perill of Idolatry,
2nd Part, page 24.
" The Primitive Church which was most pure and uncorrupt" 
" and that when Images began to creepe into the Church, they were
not only spoken and written against by godly and learned Bishops,
Doctours, and Clarkes, but also condemned by whole Councils of
Bishops, and learned men assembled together." 2nd Tome, Against
Perill of Idolatry, Part 2, page 38.
" Soe, unto the time of Constantine, by the space of above three
hundred yeares after our Saviour Christ, when the Christian
Religion was most pure, and indeed golden, &c. 2nd Tome, Against
Perill of Idolatry, 3d Part, page 67.
" And there is no doubt but the primitive Church next the Apostles
time was most pure. 2nd Tome, Against Perill of Idolatry, 2nd
Part, page 32.
" And afl:er this wise to bee justified, only by this true and lively
fayth in Christ, speake all the old, and ancient authors both Greekes,
and Latines, of whom I will specially rehearse thee Hilary, Basill,
and Ambrose. St. Hilary sayth these words 
These bee the very words of Saint Basill and Saint Ambrosse, a Latin
author, sayth these words  These, and other like sentences,
that we be justified by faith only, freely, and without works, we doe
read oft times in the best, and ancient writers. As beside Hilary,
Basill, and Saint Ambrose, before rehearsed, we read the same in
Origen, Saint Chrysostom, Saint Cyprian, Saint Augustine, Prosper,
Oecumenius, Proclus, Bemardus, Anselme, and many other authors,
Greek and Latine." 1st Tome. 2nd Part of the Homily on Sal
vation, page 161.
" And that the Law of God is likewise to be understood against
all our images, as well of Christ, as his Saints, in Temples and
Churches, appeareth further hy the judgment ofthe old Doctours, and
tlie Primitive Church. 3rd Part, Against Perill of Idolatry, 2nd
Tome, p. 43.
Aud not only do the homilies abound in quotations from the
Fathers; but the following passage states the ground on which they arc
appealed to.

168
" You have heard (well-beloved,) in the first part of this homily,
the doctrine of the Word of God, against idols, and images, against
idolatry, and worshipping of images, taken out of the Scriptures of
the Old Testament and the New, and confirmed by the examples as
well of the Apostles as our Saviour Christ himself. Now although
our Saviour Christ taketh not, or needeth not, any testimony of
men, and that which is once confirmed by the certainety of His eternall
truth, hath no more need of the confirmation of man's doctrine and
writings, than the bright Sunne at noontide hath need ofthe light of
a little candle to put away darknese, and to encrease his light : yet for
jovlv further contentation, it shall in this second part be declared (as
in the beginning of the first part was promised) that this truth, and
doctrine concerning the forbidding of images, and worshipping of
them, taken out of the Holy Scriptures, as well as of the Old Testa
ment as the New, was believed, and taught of the old holy Fathers,
and most ancient learned Doctours, and received in the old primitive
Church, which was most uncorrupt and pure. And this declaration
shall be made out ofthe sayd holy Doctours owne writings, and out of
the ancient Histories Ecclesiasticall to the same belonging." — Against
Perill of Idolatry, page 21 .
This is the Churchman's view : — Antiquity is never
appealed to as to the law — but "for further contentation"
as a proof that the law is rightly understood. To whom
can we go better to learn the state of mind to which the
Holy Spirit brought the Apostles in their writings than
to those who were the immediate companions, fellow-
labourers, and pupils of those Apostles ? Such seems to
have been the opinion of the authors of the Homilies,
and most liberally did they avail themselves of the stores
of the Fathers, for scarcely a page is without one or more
quotations from them. This argument from the Homilies
is, however, so forcibly handled by the Rev. Mr. Professor
1. 1. Blunt, that I hope he will forgive my making a long

169
extract from the lecture I have already quoted, and with
that extract I shall close this head of my subject, in the
full consciousness of having established my position
that to defer to the consentient teaching: of Primitive
Antiquity is a characteristic of the Church of England ;
and that therefore they are the true disciples of the
EngHsh Reformation, who defer to Primitive Tradition,
when they seek to interpret Scripture. " I consider," says
Professor Blunt : —
" I consider it then conducive to these ends so much to be desired,
that our young Divines should be directed to turn their attention, next
after the Scriptures, to the Primitive Fathers ; not with blind allegi
ance, as authorities to which they must in all things bow, but with
such respect as is due to the only witnesses we have, of the state and
opinions of the Church immediately after the Apostle's times ; and
such as the Church of England herself encourages. Who indeed
could dispute this, who considered of what venerable antiquity is the
substance of her ritual ; who compared it in numerous places with
short and incidental fragments of a primitive one, to the same efiect,
and often identical with it in expression, to be gathered by a careful
reader out of these earliest writers; who looked to the ancient
liturgies in which such fragments are embodied; and which have
so many features in common (even when the Churches which used
them were remote from one another) as to bespeak a settled form to
have prevailed from the foundation of the Church ? But if this be
not enough, call to mind what were actually the directions by which
Archbishop Cranmer and his colleagues were to be guided when they
prepared the First Book of Common Prayer in the second year of
King Edward the Sixth ; and when Popery, be it remembered, was
the great abuse against which they had to contend ; and against which
they had to make their own cause good. They were these, that they
should ' draw an order of Divine worship, having respect to the
pure religion of Christ taught in the Scriptures, and to the practice

170
of the Primitive Church.' And accordingly when they had com
pleted their work, they recommended it to the people in a preface
which it still retained, saying, ' here you have an order for Prayer,
as touching the reading of Holy Scripture, much agreeable to the
mind and purpose of the old Fathers.' In another preface, that
to the service for the Ordaining of Deacons, we are told, 'it is
evident to all men diligently reading the Holy Scripture and ancient
authors, that from the Apostles time there have been these orders of
ministers in Christ's Church.' In the twenty-fourth Article the
language used is this, — ' It is a thing plainly repugnant to the word
of God, and the custom of the Primitive Church, to have public
prayer in the Church, or to minister the Sacraments in a tongue not
understood of the people.' Again, in her Communion Service,
' Brethren,' says she, ' in the Primitive Church there was a godly
discipline, that at the beginning of Lent such persons as stood
convicted of notorious sin, were put to open penance, and punished
in this world, that their souls might be saved in the day ofthe Lord.'"
"Further, in her Homilies, (these again still written very mainly to
counteract popery, and to confirm the reformed faith,) reference is
perpetually made to the Primitive Church. In the Homily on salva
tion, — ' After this wise to be justified only by this true and lively
faith in Christ, speak all the old and ancient authors, both Greeks
and Latins' In the Homily against peril of Idolatry, — ' Contrary
to the which most manifest doctrine of the Scriptures, and contrary
to the usage of the Primitive Church, which was the most pure and
uncorrupt, and contrary to the sentences and judgments of the most
ancient, learned, and godly doctors of the Church, (as hereafter shall
appear,) the corruption of these latter days hath brought into the
Church infinite multitudes of images.' Again, in the same, — ' Ye
have heard, well-beloved, in the first part of this Homily, the doc
trine of the Word of God against idols and images, against idolatry
and worshipping of images, taken out of the Scriptures of the Old
Testament and the New, and confirmed by the examples as well of
the Apostles, as of our Saviour Christ Himself. Now, although
our Saviour Christ taketh not or needeth not any testimony of men,
and that which is once confirmed by the certainty of this eternal truth

171
hath no more need of the confirmation of man's doctrine and writings,
than the bright sun at noon-tide hath need of the light of a little can
dle to put away darkness, and to increase his light : yet for your
contentation, it shall in this second part be declared (as in the
beginning of the first part was promised) that this truth aud doctrine
concerning the forbidding of images and worshipping of them, taken
out of the Holy Scriptures, as well of the Old Testament as the New,
was believed and taught of the Old Holy Fathers, and most ancient
learned doctors, and received in the old Primitive Church, which
was most uncorrupt and pure.' In the Homily on Fasting, — 'Fasting
then, even by Christ's assent, is a withholding of meat, drink, and
all natural food from the body, for the determined time of fasting.
And that it was used in the Primitive Church, appeareth most
evidently by the Chalcedon Council, one of the four first general
Councils.' In the Homily concerning the Sacrament, — ' In respect of
which straight knot of charity, the true Christians in the Primitive
Church called this supper, love : as if they would say, none ought to
sit down there that were not of love and charity. This was their
practice.' In the same, — ' Before all things, this we must be sure of
especially, that this supper be in such wise done and ministered, as
our Lord and Saviour did and commanded to be done; as His
holy Apostles used it; and the good Fathers in ihe Primitive Church
frequented it.' In the Homily for Whitsunday, — ' The true Church
hath three notes or marks, whereby it is known ; pure and sound
doctrine; the Sacraments ministered according to Christ's holy
institution; and the right use of Ecclesiastical discipline. The
description of the Church is agreeable both to the Scriptures of God,
and also to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers, so that none may
justly find fault therewith. Now if you will compare this with the
Church of Rome, not as it was in the beginning, but as it is presently,
or hath been for the space of nine hundred years and odd, you shall
well perceive the state thereof to be so far wide from the nature of the
true Church, that nothing can be more. So clearly does the Church
of England, when she had to purge herself of Popery and to make
good her own revision, recommend us to search both the Scriptures
and the Fathers of the Primitive Church, by the language she adopts
in her Homilies."

172
And then after many quotations from the writings of
the Reformers, too long to quote here, our Author
proceeds : —
" Such was the language of the champions of the Church of
England whilst they had to defend her against the Romanists ; and
to vindicate against them the position they had taken up for her. And
we may rest assured, that if our Church is in fact constructed upon
one principle, and we undertake to advocate her cause as if she was
constructed upon another, we shall soon find ourselves involved in
more difficulties than we contemplated." — Blunt, on the Early
Fathers, Cambridge, 1840.
I trust that more need not be said upon this topic to
make clear the view I seek to uphold in connexion with
the legitimate interpretation of Holy Scripture : and yet
I would fain endeavour to concisely state the substance
of the foregoing remarks. I conceive that man is so con
stituted by God as that he is necessarily either the bene
factor or corrupter of his kind. He exerts an influence
upon his fellow either for good or evil : and the Author of
the Christian dispensation has so accommodated the scheme
of the Gospel to the capabilities of that nature which it
is designed to relieve and elevate, that to men has been
committed the conversion of men. Bv this I mean that
the commission is to me7i, as contradistinguished from
books. In other words conversion and spiritual edification
belongs to The Church, and not as far as we know to
the Bible. The Bible is " the sword of the Spirit,"
but a sword is powerless unless there be some to wield
it. To the Church is committed the power of wielding
the sword of the Spirit. She is "the witness and keeper

173
of Holy Writ," and hence, when differences arise as to
the meaning of Scripture, to the Church we look as the
arbitress of those differences. To her we look as though
she were a Doctor Dubitantium, and whatever will
stand the test* of the quod ubique, quod semper, quod
at omnibus, we hold to be scriptural truth. We surrender
no right ; we conceal no responsibility. We own that
each man is responsible for his private opinions, and we
accordingly beg him to be very cautious how he takes up
those opinions. We beg him to suspect himself if the
verdict of the Church Universal is against him, and yet
we tell him not to believe any dogma of the Church
which is contrary to Scripture, nor to admit any to a
place among the Articles of the Faith unless it may be
proved from Scripture.
And now having reviewed the several points upon
which, as it appears to me, the most marked difference
exists between the two parties in the Church, I would
seek to obviate an objection which is almost sure to be
made, because I have not touched upon sundry matters
of doctrine and practice upon which the writers in the
Tracts for the Times are alleged to hold opinions which
are only very partially received in the English Church. It
will be said that these writers justify Prayers for the dead,
that they speak with unbecoming tenderness of Romish
errors, and that they are equivocal in their sentiments
concerning certain sorts of Invocation of Saints ; and a
• I do not say can be " probed by," but can " stand the test of "—for this rule
of Vincent of Lirens is of negative rather than positive application, i. e., its chief
value is to detect error.

174
certain kind of Purgatory and the like. To all this I have
simply to say that I am not only not concerned with the
defence of all the private opinions of these writers, but
that I wholly disclaim the vindication of these gifted indi
viduals, even in their maintenance of the truths upon
which I have touched. My object has not been to defend
persons but to vindicate truth. The able authors of the
Tracts for the Times need not any defence which it is
in my power to offer, neither would they in all probability
accept it, even in the particulars in which they appear
to me to have maintained doctrines which the Church of
England sets forth as integral and necessary portions of
the faith once delivered unto the saints. I have endea
voured to show that the new birth is connected with
Baptism, and that the new life is sustained in the Holy
Eucharist. That the Church is One Body, no less than
animated by One Spirit; that the government and min
istry of this body is in Bishops, Priests and Deacons, — that
in the two higher orders of the ministry are vested the
powers of blessing and absolving in the Lord's name,
and that in the consentient voice of antiquity we shall
find the true interpretation of Scripture. With these I
have grappled because I conceive that in them, and in
the recognition of our present responsibility and future
accountableness, is to be found the real gravamen of the
charges made against' High Churchmen.
Whatever may be the private opinions of isolated indi
viduals as to other questions, by litigation upon which
the Latitudinarian party, within and without the Church,
seek to draw off attention from the points really at issue.

175
I have no hesitation in asserting that these writers have
never put forward as essential articles of belief, their own
private opinions ; and that to the defence of these private
opinions they are abundantly competent.- I wish to
impress upon your minds, my brethren of the Laity, that
the cry now raised, of Puseyism, is a mere scare-crow :
and that under that nick-name the principles of the
Church of England, as taught in her own documents,
and held by her worthiest sons in a past age, are ever and
anon condemned. That there are in the Church, parties
holding extreme opinions need occasion no surprise to an
attentive observer of human passions, and that the truth
should lie between two extremes is not more of an axiom
than it is natural, that, according to Aristotle's theory,
the traveller on the via media should be regarded by the
devotee of each extreme as lost in the mazes of its
opposite. The spiritual lethargy of the last century was
aroused by the extreme opinions of zealous minded
men, deriving the complexion of their religious views
from such writers and teachers as Mr. Venn, and Mr.
Simeon, and the spiritual excesses of the present century,
have been met in no inconsiderable degree by the vigor
ous energy of those who, in the main, hold with the
writers of the Tracts for the Times. A few years ago
all who loved and practised zeal and preferred the
warmth of the Gospel to the barren coldness of a mere
ethical philosophy, were branded as Simeonites: and
so now, all who have accomplished the reception of
Divine truths without rejecting what is mysterious — all

176
who cultivate faith without despising ordinances — all who
— regarding the edification of the man spiritual as a pro
gressive work beginning at the regenerating font,
checked in the hour of death, and to be consummated
only in the day of final judgment — like not to pull down
the scaffolding* which is essential to the building of
the Christian Temple — all, in a word, who are religious
without cant, and earnestly zealous without irregularity
are called Puseyites. Neither name is sufficiently
explicit for the purpose to which they both are applied ;
and thousands are called by both the one and the other,
to whom the terms are severally inapplicable.
The Church of God is never alone : visibly she is a
widow ; but spiritually her Lord is ever with her. When
what was popularly called Simeonitism raged, the steady
light of old fashioned principles was burning, but it was
only here and there ; and even in these spots a bushel
shut in the rays within narrow compass ; and now, that
so called Puseyism is attracting attention, it is the same
pur^ light been streaming forth, although occasionally the
embers from the altar have been in unhallowed censers.
There never have been wanting in the Church of England
consistent asserters of the true middle way, between
* " It is, in fact, the error of the earlier mystic, without his redeeming features of
abstraction from the world, and intense devotion. How much healthier is the
tone of that true-hearted man, who from his cell in Saxony, raised his voice
indeed against the errors of the Popish system, but who could not bear the jargon
which teaches us to attain high ends by throwing oflf the only means of reaching
them ! With homely earnestness he charges on the devil the delusion, which, con
tinually crying, " Spirit ! spirit ! spirit ! destroys the while all roads, bridges,
scaling-ladders, and paths, by which the Spirit can enter; namely, the visible
order established by God in holy Baptism, in outward forms, and in His own Word."
—Preface to Epcharistica, by Ven. Archdeacon Samuel Wilberforce, M.A.

177
fanaticism on the one hand, and superstition on the other.
The theological sea has its Scylla and Charybdis. Geneva
and Rome alike threaten destruction to the vessel freighted
with Catholic truth ; and in the channel between them
lies the safe track of the spiritual mariner. And, that I
may not seem to speak at random in asserting that there
have never been wanting some consistently to maintain
the via media, I will call the present Vicar of Leeds as
one witness in his own person, to the fact as regards the
last twenty years. His published works attest the fact
of his consistent walk between the two extremes, which
have in their turn been sufficiently powerful to harrass
the Church. I find Dr. Hook nearly twenty years ago
writing of the Church of England, in his sermon at
Bishop Luscombe's consecration, as he does now.
" Resolute against error, yet cautious of innovation, the divines of
England consulted Scripture by the light of antiquity. That tradi
tionary comments of the Fathers and the authoritative decrees of the
four first general Councils were a check upon the presumption and
too prevailing error of self-interpretation. Truth, not the spirit of
party animated their Councils, itv^' inftpae^ovrtg jxriS' inroaejioi'Tsg, was
their motto. The doctrines which were rejected by them had never
been the doctrines of the Primitive Church, and while they scrupu
lously abscinded all that was popish, they tenaciously adhered to every
thing which was Catholic. Thus through their agency, under the
guidance of Providence, was reformed that Catholic Church for the
high privilege of belonging to which, on bended knees and with
uplifted hearts, we should pour forth our praises and thanksgivings
to the Almighty ' giver of all good things.' We conscientiously
beheve that this Church thus restored to primitive purity,— restored
in countries, wherein it is by law established, to the state in which it
M

178
existed in the days of Constantine, — restored in countries like this *
and America where it is simply tolerated, to the state in which it
existed in those still purer ages, which boast of a Cyprian, an Iren
aeus, an Ignatius, even of the Apostles themselves, — is that true
Catholic Church, ' against which,' (He, whose words shall remain
firm, though heaven and earth pass away, has declared it) ' the gates
of hell shall not prevail.'
Under this view of the subject, we shall easily perceive our relative
position with respect to the leading sects of the Reformation on the
one hand, and the Romanists on the other. To both can we hold out
the hand of Christian charity, with neither can we enter into entire
communion. We consider the former in error for having seceded
from that Church which required reformation, but which we were
forbidden, as the institution of our Saviour and His Apostles, to
overthrow; the latter we regard as a branch of that Catholic Church,
to which we ourselves belong — but a branch so scathed by time and
cankered in the sap, that we dare not rest upon it our hopes of salva-
tion.f The one, in short, we censure for having revolutionized
instead of reformed, the other for pertinaciously defending instead of
correcting errors — unknown to antiquity — the creatures of barbarism,
ignorance, and superstition.
And that the day indeed will come when those branches of the
Christian Church which still lie obscured under the corruptions of
Rome, in the same state now, or nearly so, in which we were three
centuries ago, will gradually be reformed according to our example,
and by its own members be restored to that primitive purity to which
we have returned, Christian charity commands us to hope — that the
day may not be far removed Christian charity induces us to pray ;
still Christian humility instructs us to wait, in patience, for God's
own time for the accomplishment of this glorious event."!
* It is to be remembered that this Sermon was preached in Scotland.
t The same may be said of the Greek Church.
X Let it not be supposed that I mean to insinuate Dr. Hook is the only living
example of a consistent maintenance of the principles he avows, during the period
over which his testimony extends. I have quoted him on account of his having
early published his views on the subjects now agitated. Each reader will doubtless
call to mind some similar, if not exactly parallel example.

179
Of recent perversions from the Catholic Church in this
country, to the schismatic Romish communion amongst us,
I could speak with more pertinency, did I not feel that
most of my observations must be more or less tinctured
with personal reminiscences and the correspondence of
one of the gentlemen whose secession has been hailed with
such avidity by the palmy " Mistress of Christendom" as
to cause her in spite of herself and her usual principles
to recognize recantation of schism as a passport to the
ministry ! Miracles certainly yet exist in the Romish
communion ! This, however, I may not omit to say,
that the less the Genevan party say of these perversions
the better, unless they seek to establish the tendency
their own principles have to unsettle the religious faith
of those who imbibe them. Were recrimination my
object I might call public attention to the defections
of the Latitudinarian party into the ranks of the
Plymouth Brethren. But I will content myself with
observing that of the three cases of perversion to Popery
of which we have heard so much, Mr. Sibthorp was
trained in the Low-Church School, and was a great
favourite among them. Mr. Grant is, I believe, the
son of an eminent Low-Church Clergyman, and Mr.
Wacherbarth was brought up in the constant proximity
of persons holding the views of those, the loudest in
their uncharitable remarks upon his recent addition to
the number of his strange conceits.
That the feelings of the extreme party who for the
most part sympathize with the writers of the Tracts for
the Times are not shared by the writers themselves is clear
M 2

180
from the letters of Dr. Pusey and Mr. Newman ; and
the same fact is attested in the following beautiful
thoughts of the learned and pious author of the Harmony
of the Passion of our Blessed Lord. They occur in his
newly published volume. The Baptistery : —
B. " If lowliness of heart and reverend faith
Be with us, we through these conflicting tides
May reach our heavenly haven : if these guides
Be wanting, we alike shall fail at last.
Whether we stretch our canvass to the gale,
Or creep along the shore : yet in these days
I would hold back and fear. There are 'tis said
Spirits abroad impatient of our Church,
Her weakness and her children's which is great,
Or driven by harshness to unfilial thoughts.
And yearn for union with intruding Rome.
A. This union in His Church is God's own gift,
Not to be seized by man's rude sinful hands,
But the bright crown of mutual holiness.
Therefore such leanings find in me no p)lace.
So b7'oad I feel the gulf 'twixt her and us,
Form'd by her dark and sad idolatries.
That I would rather die a thousand deaths
Than pass it: sure I cannot others lead
To thoughts which foreign are to all I love,
And find in me no sympathetic chord.
Then may I not unfold my parable
In visions such as holy Hermas taught.
Seeking the warm light of antiquity.
The gospel's glorious morn, and the first love
Of the immortal spouse ? Let u^ the while
In these most perilous and restless days
Cling the more close to our maternal church
As to a guardian angel — hold her hand —

181
With her rove haunts of hoar antiquity,
To which she leads and marshals us the way
As to our true and sacred heritage, —
And thus pursue her principles and powers
Develop'd from her shrines and Liturgies,
Covering her faults, supplying her defects ;
Such filial loyalty I deem our light.
Like the dim moon given to our wintry clime.
The duteous child compares not, questions not."*
It is not to be concealed that our church has like every
thing in which man and earth are concerned her dark as
well as her bright side, but to use the saying of Ambrose,
quoted by Archbishop Ussher in his defence of the
EngHsh Church from the ban of novelty, " Ecclesia
videtur sicut luna deficere, sed non deficit, obumbrari potest,
deficere non potest." t " The church may like the moon
seem to grow less, but she does not come to an end — she
may be darkened she cannot cease." And if the whole
Church Catholic concerning which Christ has pro
mised that it shall stand against even the gates of hell,
can be darkened, need we wonder that the unholiness of
her members may throw the beauty of a particular and
defectible branch of that Church into the shade. Let us
for this darkness blame ourselves and not our Church.
There is little doubt that some Jeremiah of our own day may
take up the lament of the Jewish Prophet, and gazing
upon the spiritual Zion, say, " Is this the city that men
call the perfection of beauty, the joy ofthe whole earth."
And lest "our unhappy divisions" should cause the
" Baptistery. Pref. Thoughts, p. 10.
t Ambros. Hexam : Lib. iv, Cap. 2.

182
enemy to take it up in taunt, let me request you to go
with me as we seriously and affectionately consider it.
My brethren of the laity, we are members of the Church
of England, and we justly are thankful that we are thus
privileged, we rejoice in our purity, and give prominence
to a claim of Apostolicity ! We recount the glories of
the Church Universal, and set up our title to share in
them: we view the excesses of continental Protestantism:
and thank God that our Bishops reformed on the Primi
tive model : we praise while we are grateful, and boast
while we joy, and therefore it becomes us not to expose
ourselves to the onslaught of the enemy, it behoves us to
be the first to awaken to a sense of those imperfections,
which arise from our own negligence, and to say with a
view to amendment : before the enemy cries with taunt,
and an eye to destruction : Is this the city that men call
the perfection of beauty, the joy of the whole earth ?
Addressing myself, then, to you, as lay members of the
Church, I would say that the Church of God should be
the perfection of beauty, that it should be the joy of the
whole earth. She should be the perfection of beauty, by
adorning herself in the bright ornaments of ti^uth, and
arraying herself in the glittering attire of those rich
gems, which repay a diligent and humble search, made
in a prayer-like spirit, in the mine of revealed truth, the
Holy Bible. She should be the perfection of beauty, I
say, by setting forth the Scriptures of the living God in
their unadulterated purity, and in the vernacular : the
mother tongue of the people of her charge : or in other
words, by the pure word of God being preached within

183
her in a tongue understood of the people. She should be
the perfection of beauty in the holiness of her members,
in the purity of their faith, and the exemplary propriety
of their lives : in order to the latter she should be d, faith
ful and diligent administerer of the Holy Sacraments
according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that
are of necessity requisite to the same, and that the faith
of her children may not waver, she will set before them the
truths of Scripture, which it most behoves them to know,
in the three Creeds of Universal Christendom, and these,
she will enjoin to be thoroughly received and believed.
She should also be the perfection of beauty, in the
assiduous diligence of her members to worship the Lord
in the beauty of holiness, and that they may not lack the
opportunity of shining in this grace she will have about
her, her garment of many colours, i. e. the liturgy in the
vernacular of the several climes comprehended within
her sway : she will treasure the forms of Primitive devo
tion, and echo on from age to age the pious aspirations
of the saints, confessors, and martyrs of her story. The
Lord's own form of Prayer will be specially honored,
and studiously appended to every separate address to the
Father of lights, lest the command " When ye pray,
ye shall say, our Father," &c., be broken, or seem to be
set lightly by, and remembering that the preacher has
bid us use few words, since God is in heaven, and we on
earth, and that St. Paul has enjoined prayer with the
understanding as the proper companion, and proof indeed
oi prayer with the Spirit. Extempore addresses will not
receive formal recognition at her hands ! but fixed forms

184
will be in use, that so those who occupy the place of the
unlearned, may say Amen. And moreover, she will be
the perfection of beauty, in that her strain of praise will
be full and continuous, and that she will anticipate on
earth the songs of the Redeemed ; being practiced now to
sweep the harps of angelic melody, and to chant the
song of Moses and the Lamb ! In few things, indeed,
will the perfection of her beauty more appear than in the
purity of her hymns, and the successively authorized
spontaneousness of her sacred songs. For in this should
the Church show her adaptation 'to each successive age,
and it should not be that the outbreaks of Christian
hearts should be confined to the language inspired under
the earthly dispensation of Moses, language which, since
it is inspired, can never be out of place, but which might
yet be used for meditation, while hymns essentially Chris
tian should afford scope for our praise. We do not confine
our prayers to the language of the Old Testament, and
why should our praises be refused an utterance agreeable
to our advanced privileges ? A part of the perfection of
beauty it questionless is to sing God's praises in the voice
of Christian melody. But further, the Church should be
the perfection of beauty in the piety and devotedness of
her clergy. If all Christians are to be examples one to
another, so the clergy are to be examples to these exam
ples. How fearful then is our responsibility !
But not only is the Church to be a city which men
call the perfection of beauty, she is also to be the joy of
the whole earth. This she must be in the Catholicity
of her principles, and in her recognition of her missionary

185
responsibility : she must hold the faith in purity at home,
she must proclaim it with diligence abroad. Her voice
must be heard among all nations, and her sound go forth
in all lands ! The charter of the Church's incorporation,
is a missionary charter. Go ye into all the world and
preach the Gospel to every creature, was the command
of her Founder and the commission of His early heralds :
and this perfection of beauty and joy of the whole earth,
the Church is especially called upon to be, by evincing a
spirit of unity, and a bond of charity. To be of one
mind and all to speak the same thing, to return railing
with blessing, and be filled with love : this it is to be
perfect in beauty, and to rejoice the whole earth I
Now, although I have hitherto spoken of the Church
at large, of the whole of that visible body which the
Prayer Book, in the XIX and XXIII Articles, and the
Preface to the Ordination Services, defines to be a society
governed by Bishops and Priests, assisted by Deacons,
with the Holy Scriptures as the test of truth, and the
two Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper as
tests of membership and especial means of grace: although
I have hitherto spoken of the whole of this collective body
of the faithful, yet it is plain that each particular branch
of this universal vine, is calculated so to bear fruit, as
to be in some sort, the perfection of beauty, the joy ofthe
whole earth.
Now we hold that the Church of England is a true
branch of the Universal Church : that she is the Church
of Christ in this land ! that whatever lot God may
have in store for those who are committing the sin of

186
schism in ignorance of their guilt, and in consequence of
the bias of early education and training, that whatever
may be their lot, this is certain, that it is not the same
lot as that which awaits faithful members of our Church.
It may be a lot equally good, it may be one less exalted—
and if in heaven it will of its kind be perfect, yet it will
not be the same, for, for heaven we are to be prepared on
earth, and Church discipline provides a different prepara
tion from schismatic interference ! This then we assert,
that those who wish to participate in those particular
blessings which are promised to the Church of Christ,
must if they are born and live in this country, work out
their title to such blessings by consistent filial compHance
with the requirements ofthe Church of England. While
then, we put forth this claim on behalf of our Church, let
us anticipate the question of the sectaries and ask. Is this
the city that men call the perfection of beauty. The joy
of the whole earth 1 And in answering the question, let
us first compare our actual condition with that which we
have described as forming the true characteristic of the
Church Universal, and then let us take faithful counsel
as to the course laid upon us by the result of such com
parison. The perfection of beauty then, I have alleged to consist
in the proper appreciation of the Holy Scriptures : in
the holiness of Priests and People : in Purity of Faith
protected by the Creeds : in exemplariness of conduct
ministered unto in the Holy Sacraments, and other subor
dinate means of grace : in the primitive scripturalness and
intelligibleness to all, of set forms of devotion, and in the

187
possession of appropriate, and even contemporary hymns
and spiritual songs, as the proper outlets of christian joy 1
And thejoy of the whole earth, I have supposed to spring
from a due recognition oi missionary responsibility, and I
have supposed both combined to have their full exhibition
where there is an abundant measure of unity and love.
. How then does the Church of England stand on these
particulars ? How theoretically and practically 1 Theo
retically, her chief defection will be found to consist in her
lack of authorized hymns, and her partial avowal of her
prerogative to disseminate the gospel Truth, and gospel
Grace of which she is the Divinely authorized depository.
Practically, our notes gather sadness as we look at our
privileges, and then at our coldness, and ask is this the
city that men call the perfection of beauty, and thejoy of
the whole earth ?
Let us, then, take the several particulars just enumera
ted and let us see how far theory and practice coincide,
and how far either or both are right. First, as to the
appreciation of Holj'^ Scripture. Theoretically nothing
is wanting. Its sufficiency for salvation is asserted in our
Sixth Article, and the provisions made in her Calendar
for reading of the Holy Scriptures in her service, are such
as that all shall be done in order, without breaking one
piece from another," and thus " the Old Testament is
read through once, at Morning and Evening Prayer,"
in the year. " The New Testament is read over orderly,
every year, thrice, besides the Epistles and Gospels :
excepting the Apocalypse out of which there are only
certain proper lessons and services appointed on divers

188
feasts : and the Psalter is ordered to be read through
once every month ! Scripture then is in theory and in
her own practice bound upon the frontlet of our Church!
But how stands the case with regard to the actual prac
tice of her members. The great majority do not go to
Church to hear the Bible thus read, but do they even
fully read it at home?* If men would only bring them
selves to see the fitness of obedience, they would contrive
in private and family reading, to read through the Psalms
and Lessons daily, and thus, like the Jew Apollos, we
* The question of Daily Prayers in our Churches is perhaps one of those subjects
upon which the Churchman is compelled at once to mourn and rejoice. He rejoices
that in so many places the Daily Services are in course of restoration — he mourns
that to pray to God in His own house should be condemned as Puseyism, and
viewed as an approximation to Popery. The writer has in several instances heard
of his leanings to Popery being indisputable, for, " besides all, he Itas Prayers in
his Church twice a-day ! " The following letter which appeared in the Morning
Post, last year, may not be %vithout its interest :
"DAILY SERVICES IN CHURCHES.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING- POST.
Sir, — Among the results which, in your paper of Monday, you attributed to the
great reaction in favour of Church principles, you have omitted the revival of the
daily service. In the beginning of the eighteenth century seventy churches and
chapels in London celebrated the daily service, of which forty-three enjoyed the
great privilege of public prayer t%vice a day ; six, three times a day ; and five, four
times a day. It might be well to mention those houses of God in which the prayers
of the Saints were thus frequently ascending to God's throne — St. Anne's Soho ;
St. James's, Westminster; King-street Chapel; St. James's ; the Archiepiscopal
Chapel, at Lambeth ; and St. Paul's, Covent-garden. Ten years ago it is believed
that not a single church, with the exception of the cathedrals, and Lambeth Chapel,
celebrated the daily service. It would be well to know in how many churches now
the bell tolls for daily prayers— some of your correspondents might, perhaps, fur
nish a complete list, to commence which I can testify to the following :— St. James's,
Piccadilly; St. George's, Hanover-square ; Christ Church, St. Pancras ; Lincoln's
Inn Chapel; St. Thomas's, Arbour-square; Christ Church, Hoxton; St. John's,
Hackney ; St. Paul's, Bunhill-row ; Margaret Chapel, Marylebone ; and, I think,
St. John's, Westminster. A CHURCHMAN."

189
should be so instructed in our Scriptures as to be mighty
in them as he was in his. And, those who talk most
about the Bible, it is to be feared, are not less guilty
than others, for though they read, it is oftimes only to
build themselves up in favorite theories, and even of
those who read the Bible regularly through, how few
think it worth while to read the chapters in the
course which the Church orders ? How few value
reading the same chapters, and praying for illumination
in the reading of the same chapters, as those, in the study
of which the collective braach of the Church of which
they are members, is on the same day engaged! Next,
we come to the holiness of Priests and People, as evinced
in purity of faith, and exemplariness of conduct. Here
again the Church's theory is unimpeachable, vows
and subscriptions bind, and declarations instruct the
clergy, and exhortations and helps incite the laity : the
Creeds of the Universal Church are the bulwarks of
faith, and the Holy Sacraments which Christ ordained
are duly ministered for the sowing of heaven's seed, and
the nurturing of heaven's plants ! But when we come
to practice, alas ! that we must hide our heads, and plead
that Christianity has been nowhere so much impeded as
in the unworthy lives of its professors, alas I that we
should see on so many sides vows broken, pledges disre
garded, means of grace slighted. Prayer forsaken, and the
Sacraments of Christ treated as beggarly elements.*
* There is indeed a return to better things amongst all both Clergy and Laity.
And that the High Church Clergy are not behind in this race, I may be suffered
to quote the recorded opinion of my Diocesan in his late charge. A portion of the
charge by the way, which, although the nearest akin to authoritative decision of

190
Let us now apply our two tests to that feature of beauty
which consists in the possession and use of set forms of
Primitive and Scriptural devotion in the vernacular tongue.
Here our Church is theoretically the very perfection of
beauty, and there is in her wise adaptation to her own
wants all that can bespeak the Providence of God, and
enlist the thankfulness of her members. While others have
maimed the spirit in destroying the body, we have retained
what is essential, while we disencumbered ourselves of
much that was in the way, and perhaps of some things
which we might have been permitted to retain, had they
not been perverted to superstitious uses. But how little,
speaking comparatively, is the Prayer Book valued by
Churchmen. The Daily Service therein set forth is sadly
disregarded, the beautiful offices for Holy-days are lightly
esteemed, and in this particular we are very far deficient
in practice from that to which we even assent in theory.
With regard to hymns and spiritual songs, our capa
bilities for practice are, perhaps, better than our theory ;
and the day may yet come when from sources such
as these whence is issued the Christian Year, and others
the whole document, has been studiously kept in the back ground by those who
have vaunted his Lordship as condemning High Church opinions, because he has
demurred to the misconceptions which might arise from the statements of the
Tracts on three points. The Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol is pleased thus to
express himself in his last Charge. " I am, however, well acquainted with some
persons, members of my own diocese, whom report numbers among the supporters
of the system which those writers [of the Tracts for the Times] recommend and
uphold. And I bear my willing testimony to the exemplary purity of their
lives, their doctrine, and their opinions. Persons more diligent in every pastoral
duty, more charitable towards all who differ from them in sentiment, or more
fraught with all the virtues which are the genuine fruits of Christ's religion, I
never knew ! "

191
of a like character, our authorities may give us a suitable
hymnody ; until then, let us not cease to be thankful
that we have the Psalms of David : and the evangelical
hymns which occur in the course of our daily service.
What can be more beautiful than these hymns ? Would
that they were joined in, heart and voice, by our congrega
tions."* I now come to the Missionary character of the
Church. Here, too, the Church has actually done more
than her public documents avow her object to do ! And
yet both theory and practice are far below her oppor
tunities. She seems to be but just awaking to a sense
of her duties, to the conviction that, a Missionary
zeal is a sure test of Christ's Presence with His
Church : for although American christians call us
Mother, and Indian worshippers acknowledge that
through us they were born to Christ, yet Australia, New
Zealand, the Canadas, and other our dependencies, charge
upon us the guilt of neglecting our own flesh and blood,
the crime of leaving bone of our bone and flesh of our
flesh to eternally perish ! Let us in the Colonial Bishopric
Fund, the fresh zeal and renewed strength of the Society
for Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, and
the approximation to better principles in the Church
Missionary Society^ — see the earnest of a brighter promise,
the dawning of a happier day, the rising of a more genial
sun : and at home and abroad let us do what we can for
Christ and His Gospel ! It now only remains that we
bear in mind that the perfection of beauty and the joy
* The general disuse of Chanting, and of the Anthem in its proper place, are
glaring defects in our practice.

192
of the whole earth, no city can be unless there be Unity,
and unless Love be the cord which binds the members in
that unity. Apply this test to our Church and what shall
we say? In theory, in her own constitution* every pro
vision is made for unity, every inducement held out to
cherish love ; but oh ! when we cast our eyes around us,
discord and division is the sad spectacle which meets the
eye. Then it is that we are forced to lament and say — ¦
Is this the city which men call the perfection of beauty — ¦
the joy of the whole earth ? I have endeavoured, my
friends, to rip up the apple of discord which the arch
enemy of souls in his love of a divided Church has thrown
among us, and I hope not in vain has this been done.
The ancient Magi are reported to have had a fable in
whicli the allegory had relation to three hills — on approach
ing the first, a clashing of arms was heard; on reaching the
second, a confused noise was discernible ; but the third
* The circumstances of the last year or two will render it matter for grave consider-
ration whether decisive steps on a large scale ought not to be taken to enforce the
following Canon of the Church of England. 1 have reason to think not a few
"jealous Preachers" might be "suspended" under its operation. It is this,
No Public Opposition between Preachers.
" If any preaclier shall, iu the pulpit particularly, or namely, of purpose, impugn .
or confute any doctrine delivered by any other preacher in the same Church, or in
any Church near adjoining, before he hath acquainted the Bishop of the diocese
therewith, and received order from him what to do in that case, because upon such
public dissenting and contradicting there may grow much offence and disquietness
unto the people ; the Churchwardens, or party aggrieved, shall forthwith signify
the same to the said Bishop, and not suff'er the said preacher any more to occupy
that place which he hath once abused, except he faithfully promise to forbear all
such matter of contention in the Church, until the Bishop hath taken further order
therein : who shall with all convenient speed so proceed tlierein, that public satis
faction may be made in the congregation where the off'ence was given. Provided,
that if either of the parties offending do appeal, ho .shall not be suffered to preach
pendente lite." — C/nion .53.

193
contained no sounds, save the songs of triumph. This
would seem to be no unapt figure under which to speak
of the Church of Christ in this land — the fearful noise
of arms and warfare we have heard already — (God grant
that it be not again in store for us) — we seem now to be
passing over the hill of confusion ; but the day will, we
trust, soon come, when the voices of the Redeemed below
shall be attuned to the heavenly music which sweeps the
harps of the saints in light, and when Hallelujahs to the
Lamb, shall alone resound — and all be quietness and
peace I But this can only be by seeking Unity now.
Let us, therefore, brethren, seek unity by practising love.
Let us not hope to find either in the paths of compromise.
Neither peace nor unity are worth having if they cannot
be purchased but at the expense of Truth. For an union
which has not Truth as its element of cohesion, is only a
mass of dust in a flimsy covering which the first adverse
pressure will burst and scatter into its original uncon
nected particles. Let not your eyes, brethren, be blinded
with any such dust! I speak as unto wise men, judge ye
what I say. A contest is now going on in the Church,
between various shapes of truth, and between truth and
error, and so close and pressing is the warfare, that the
ministers of God like they in the time of Nehemiah, are
constrained with one hand to build the wall and with the
other to hold the weapon, but in this warfare you of the
laity are not necessarily* concerned to be engaged, nay,
rather your duty is to feel confidence in the thought, that
* The Articles are binding upon the Clergy but not upon the Laity, except in
particular instances of subscription.
I shall not be suspected of depreciating the labours of the laity in religious
controversy. I would refer to my dedication page, and to this whole letter, in
N

194
God rules His own world, and that man can do nothing
against the truth but for the truth. Do not be misled by
clamour, above all do not follow the example of those who
should teach you love, but instead of love preach discord,
and are prolific in abusing those from whom they differ.
Do not conclude at once that a thing is new because you
have not heard of it. The children of the bygone age were
denied their proper meat, and for bread they had husks.
Misapprehension under these circumstances is a misfortune
and not a fault. And although there may be those among
your teachers who do not so temper their zeal with dis
cretion, as to act upon the maxim of Dean Jackson, that
" Discipline without doctrine is moral tyranny," do not
you be thereby tempted into the unseemliness of con
demning in the mass and unexamined, principles which,
though you as yet know them not, are nevertheless old
truths, for which Saints have striven, Confessors strug
gled, and Martyrs died. Rather be content to know that
you are happily within the pale of the English Church,
and show your trust in the providence of God, by acting
up to all that Church requires of you in her Book of
Common Prayer ! her whole Book of Common Prayer,
not her Articles only, nor her Creeds only, but her whole
Book of Common Prayer,* and if you do this you shall
be blessed ! The straws thrown up in the air to try the
wind's current will not turn you from your stedfastness.
A spirit of prayer will entail a spirit of obedience, and
disproof of the insinuation. I remember the labours of Robert Nelson with too much
gratitude to depreciate the theological efforts of the laity. And notwithstanding
assertions to the contrary, I am bold to say that High Churchmen are the most
zealous for the proper dignity of the Christian laity.
* The teaching of her Catechism, and the devotion of her services.

195
continual desires for unity shall not be unheard, nor
refused by the God of unity, and the Author of peace
in all Churches of the Saints. Seek to be practical and
humble disciples of Christ, in and through the Church,
rather than polemics, especially on matters confessedly
not necessary to salvation. Disbelieve those whose chief
weapons are invective and abuse, and care not to range
yourselves under human banners. If you cannot fight the
fight of the Cross, save as a company within the Church,
then perforce with that company take up, nor think to
be safe in the debateable country; but call no man
master on earth. Let the unity and peace of the Church
be your earnest aim and desire and your constant
prayer. Be holy, humble, zealous, and consistent sons
of the Church. Act up to the Prayer Book. Read
the Bible, as therein ordered, the Psalms and four
chapters daily. Pray in the heaven-born language there
preserved as the heir-loom of days gone by. Observe
the fasts, and use with reverence the festivals of the
Church, and if you do all this in earnest faith and
sincere self renunciation, you will be a true disciple of
Christ here, and receive His crown of reward hereafter,
for, that will be given, not to those who know, but to
those who knowing do His will. In proportion as we
are true to the Prayer Book, in that proportion shall we
comply with the Bible, and in that proportion shall we
have God for our Protector, the Holy Spirit for our
Sanctifier, Christ Jesus for our Mediator and our
Saviour, and in that proportion will the lament die
away : is this the city that men call the perfection of
beauty thejoy ofthe whole earth? for in that proportion

196
shall we approach " unto Mount Sion and unto the city
of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem and to an
innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly
and Church of the first-born which are written in heaven,
and to God the Judge of all, and to the Spirits of just
men made perfect, and to Jesus the Mediator of
the new covenant and to the blood of sprinkling that
speaketh better things than the blood of Abel ! "
Thither God for Christ's sake and in His own good
time by His Holy Spirit, will lead those who are fit for
His prepared mansions, and that we may not fail of the
inheritance placed within our reach at our Baptism and
guarded for us by many gracious helps since, let us ever
be in a condition to pray :
"O God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, our only Saviour,
the Prince of Peace ; give us grace seriously to lay to heart the great
dangers we are in by our unhappy divisions. Take away all hatred
and prejudice, and whatsoever else may hinder us from godly union
and concord ; that, as there is but one Body, and one Spirit, and
one hope of our calling, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism,
one God and Father of us all, so we may henceforth be all of
one heart, and of one soul, united in one holy bond of Truth and
Peace, of Faith and Charity, and may with one mind and one mouth
glorify Thee, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen'' — Prayer
for Unity — Accession Service.
And now believe me to be.
Christian Brethren,
With all humility and respect.
Your faithful brother and servant,
ALEXANDER WATSON, M.A.
Cheltenham, Easter, 1842.

ADVERTISEMENT.
The preceding pages were written to meet the wishes
of more than one lay friend, who had seen " A New
Tract for the Times" announced, purporting to consider
the Church Principles of Nice, Rome, and Oxford. The
writer's first intention was to notice the pamphlet in
question seriatim ; but on carefully perusing it for this
purpose, he found it to be such a tissue of false
insinuation and vulgar wit, as could be mischievous
only where the door was studiously shut against the
ingress of sound principles : and, under these circum
stances, the present arrangement was resolved upon.
The Letter, as now arranged, is sent forth in the hope
that, at least, it may lead Churchmen to inquire, and to
think before they censure.

LEEDS:
t. w. green, printer,
COMMERCIAL STREET.

errata.
Page 28, line 10 from bottom, for ; read , and dele " but."
 , line 3 „ place comma after, not before merely.
 37, Une 14 „ for his read their.
 51, the numerals in this quotation are wrong.
 96, line 6 from bottom, for spacious read specious.
 102. Note. Line 20 from bottom, insert, " And all Priests and Deacons are
to say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly, not
being let by sickness, or some other urgent cause.
" And the Curate that ministereth in every parish Church or Chapel, being at
home, and not being otherwise reasouably hindered, shall say the same in the
parish Church or Chapel where he ministereth, and shall cause a bell to be tolled
therermto a convenient time before he begin, that the people may come to hear
God's Word, and to pray with him." — Concerning the Service of the Church.
— Book of Common Prayer.
Page 122, last line of note, for expedition read erudition.