DE. PUSEY ANSWERED:

OR AN EXPOSITION OF THE

DOCTRINES AND FALLACIES

SERMON ON THE EUCHARIST.

BY A GRADUATE OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE.

1 The summation, then, of these differential terms of Pusey ism amounts to a bungling
criticism, a gross mistake of Chrysostom's, and a misrepresentation of a very pitiful and
imbecile guess of the good-natured Gregory of Nyssa." — P. 36.

N*f

NEW YORK :
PUBLISHED BY EDWARD WALKER,
114FULTON STREET.
1843.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1843, by Edward Walker, in the Clerk's
Office of the District Court of the Southern District of New- York.

ROBERT CRAIGHEAD, PRINTER,
112 Fulton, comer of Dutch-st.

&

y

&

PREFACE.

It is claimed, that the suspension of Dr. Pusey from the exercise of his
clerical functions was premature, irregular, and unjust ; that the accused
was allowed no hearing, and could make no defence ; and that his innocence
is placed beyond doubt by the array of testimony, produced, where it alone
could be, in the publication of the obnoxious Sermon. Ofthe University code
of discipline, we know little and care less ; all, even his bosom friends, will
acknowledge, that in the immense circulation of that Sermon, carrying its
special apology and relieved of the awkward society of counter-evidence,
Dr. Pusey has had a sufficient and equitable hearing ; his doctrines, and
his plea, are the only matters of moment to us.
It was hoped, that, before this, abler hands would have made an exposition
of this affair with a view to counteract the influence and fallacies of that
Sermon. Under such an impression these pages have been kept back, and
designed to appear in a different quarter ; circumstances, however, seem to
indicate, that they may not be wholly unacceptable in their present form, as
a contribution to the common design of the defence of Protestantism, and
of the exposure of the stratagems of its adversaries.
The term Puseyism, and its correlatives, are retained for their distinct
ive character, and for the purpose of separating, as widely as possible, the
peculiar fancies and ultraisms of Oxford from the real doctrines of the
Protestant Episcopal Church — a purpose, which some strangely interpret
for the opposite intention of throwing ridicule upon the Articles and S er-
vice of that Church.
New York, Sept. 1843.

EXPOSITION, ETC.

" I only wish Dr. Pusey had written a more intelligible Sermon,"
was the candid remark of one, who would not for the world have
it thought, that he held much in common with the opponents of
Tractarianism. The wish will meet with a hearty response from
all who have delved in the Sermon for the real Sentiments of its
author. This last emanation of Oxford, however, has no greater
defects in the matters of method and perspicuity, than its predeces
sors ; the dullness of mysticism is an infirmity, which we have long
since accustomed ourselves to expect from the coryphaeus of the
Tractators, and it is an infirmity, in which he alone of the Oxonian
brotherhood excels.
Before the publication of the " Tracts " was silenced, it was some
consolation, while wading neck deep through the turbid waters of
No. 67, to reflect, that the nerve and lucid order of Newman
awaited us on the opposite shore, to conduct us along well
trodden paths, though the objects and scenes remained unchanged.
The patience of despair is now the cardinal virtue of the disciple.
Could the Bishop of Oxford have foreseen, that the suppression of
the "Tracts" would only give rise to works of greater verbosity,
divested of the relief of variety, — could he have foreseen, that the
obedience of silence in one form would be but the signal for louder
and clearer declarations in another, and that thus his effort was to
be without effect, — could he, foreseeing this, have foreseen also the
publication of this last opaque Sermon, we should pronounce him,
for that vain exercise of the functions of censor, deficient, for him
self, in the organ of intellectual relish, and for us Protestants, in
that charity, which alleviates the suffering it cannot remove. But
the days of prophetic clairvoyance in the Episcopate have passed
forever. Cyprian, Augustine, and Chrysostom, looking down a
vista of one thousand years, could foresee the doctrines and decrees
2

of the Council of Trent, and pronounce, beyond the possibility of
a doubt, upon the Missal and the Breviary ; but a Bishop of this
generation, in the right line of Apostolic succession, with reversion
ary letters patent to the traditive gifts and graces of all the Fathers,
has failed to bring nigh the future events of a twelvemonth, and to
secure, by an Episcopal act of expurgation, a relief to himself and
posterity. Alas ! for the degeneracy of these latter times. We
must be allowed to sigh for the blissful sunshine of ignorance
under the Byzantine Emperors; the leeks, the onions, and the
fleshpots of that Egyptian gloom.
It is no part of our present design to involve ourselves in the
mysticism of Transubstantiation, and its concomitant absurdities.
Presence, real, spiritual, and corporeal; Manducation, essential,
.actual, and spiritual ; Oblation, commemorative, sacrificial, and
(Expiatory ; Sacrifice, unbloody, priestly, and typical ; — these, and a
.thousand others, are the terms, among which the tortuous contro-
y.ertist delights to wind, and imagines that he has found rest, when
he has ceased to move from exhaustion. Nor will it be worth
the while to spread upon our pages long extracts from this Sermon,
and expose the nakedness of the heresy. The interest, which this
.anti-Protestant movement has excited, and the particular excite
ment, which has followed the suspension of Dr. Pusey from the
exercise of the homiletic office within the University, in consequence
of the doctrines of this Sermon, have given to it a circulation
almost unprecedented, and its contents have thus been made known
throughout the entire land. The abettors of Tractarianism in this
country claim, that the Sermon, on its very face, carries a refutation
of the charge, that its teachings are Romish ; and the earnestness,
with which many of them reiterate this opinion, leaves us no room
to question their sincerity. To many, who have read this alone,
and first, of Oxford publications, the boldness and magnitude of the
heresy will be startling ; it cannot come very near the heart of
any diligent student of the Bible, without revolting him. To those,
however, who have narrowly observed the different grades of
Puseyism — setting out with the doctrines of Apostolic succession,
imperfectly alluded to in the Prayer Book, and of baptismal regen
eration, indiscreetly retained from the Romish Breviary, — ad
vancing from these to sacraments of penance, to justification by
works, to priestly absolution, crossings, crucifixes, tapers, images,
matins, vespers, Ave Marias, and all the paraphernalia of the " Man

6f sin," — this Sermon will appear only as one of a series, in good
.character and proportion; and the end is not yet. We shall
endeavor to seize some of its more prominent points, without ad
vancing through all the intermediate steps of its author.
The publication of this " Sermon," as its Preface informs us,
was a source of pain to its author ; " the floods of blasphemy and
outrage," that were to be " poured out" upon so " sacred" a pro
duction by the " heretical" press, and upon the " holy truth" of its
contents, occasioned in Dr. Pusey no httle disquietude and grief.
The shrine of feeling, even of hypocrisy, may he held sacred for
any and every man ; but the raiment thus assumed, while to some it
may glitter as an armor of steel, will to others appear a garment
of sackcloth. The convenient identity, which he assumes to be
thus permanently established between his own opinions and the
dogmas of eternal truth, cost certainly an effort of assurance, which
will not suffer in comparison with that of Ann Lee, or Joe Smith.
Who does not see, that this is the cry of every enthusiast 1 What
-conscientious teacher, perceiving this, ought to suffer himself to
shrink behind so pitiful a mormo for protection 1 Change the
occasion, and the plea is as strong for Swedenborg, as for Dr.
Pusey ; and stronger, if we consider, that from the first quarter it
was natural to expect its use, and from the latter, who prides him
self on his distant removal from all the excesses of Evangelical
piety, its rebuke. But the deification of rites, and the deification
of self, have long ago acknowledged their matrimonial bonds. It
is the invariable effect of truth, to inspire its teacher with indomi
table courage; the votary of mysticism and enthusiasm displays his
indecision and distrust at every step. " Expose not these holy
matters to tinkers and tradesmen," has ever been the warning of
the Vatican ; but we do not learn that either she, or any other
community, arrogating to herself the sole conservation of purity
and truth, has succeeded in adorning herself with such graces,
as good men are taught to admire, or in keeping unsullied
the tables of the covenant. Not, therefore, having a very effectual
dread of the admonition of the mystagogue, — ^s, in&s im, /3i/3n\0i —
we shall pronounce this effort to take shelter underneath a presumed
unity of thought and purpose with the Unsearchable, feeble in its
conception, ineffective in its operation, and irreverent in its use.
The monition is thrown out, that, after " living in the Bible for
the time," Dr. Pusey then held converse with 'j its deepest exposi-

tors," the Fathers ; and has been " careful to use rather their
language than his own," and " to refrain from defining the mode
ofthe mystery." But it will be made to appear, that the unguard
ed expressions of piety have an unwarranted reference, when
coupled with modern systems of theology, and that the vague and
paraenetic phrases of Jerusalem and Constantinople assume a
false and deceptive importance, when propounded in stern Saxon
to the plain common sense of Englishmen. It is but little credit to
his discernment, if he failed to perceive this point ; it is still less
credit to his honor, if, perceiving it, he yet consented for a time
to be unconscious of its reality.
This sympathy of Patristic, with Oxonian, thought and feeling, is-
sought to be established by an array of authority, imposing to
those only, who know not how easily this species of testimony is
procurable for almost any purpose. " Do not palliate your con
duct," says Tertullian,* " by a reference to old customs ; you may
have at your side the whole phalanx of antiquity, and in antiquity
I should still recognize you as an Esau, the hunter, with that mess
of red pottage ;" and again Augustine,f " If you have reference
to ' universality, antiquity, and consent' alone, you can defend
homicides, and adulteries, and every species of flagitious cha
racter ;" and again  no, that will answer for the present ;
we shall have a surfeit of these Fathers, before we have done with
this matter.
This array of authority has also another commendable object in
view ; namely, that the reader in " blaming" Dr. Pusey, " might
not unconsciously blame the Fathers." We hope to make it evi
dent, also, that the Fathers have neither so much fear of, nor
so much aversion to, being blamed, as their disciple ; that having no
antiquity to appeal to, and despising that, which Oxford most
admires, they spent their individual energies upon investigation,
and by this very exercise of a Protestant's liberty, have erected
thorny hedges about their several fields, most troublesome to those,
who would persuade us that antiquity is a Catholic Common, with
out hill, or dale, or unsightly"rock, blooming with all the graces of
unity and charity. Our Sermonizer, then, is enshrouded, as he
supposes, with the mantle of the _Divine Record, with the shirts of
• De fuga in persecutione.
fin quaest. Vet. et Nov. Testamentorum.

mail of the Fathers, and with a " Catena Patrum" of the English
Church, capable of indefinite extension. We hold to the divine
right, because divine necessity, of private judgment ; and we leave,
accordingly, the question of fact as to protection from Holy Scrip
ture, to the judgment of its diligent readers. The opinions of English
Bishops are very opposite, and very equally matched ; and as
they are the creatures of State, and its tools, we seldom value their
professions and principles above the " wedge of gold ;" and we
know, moreover, the confidence to be placed in their candor and
impartiality, when one of their number, Bishop Overall,! whose
authority is most frequently summoned by the Tractarians, has
declared his determination to maintain the propitiatory sacrifice of
the Eucharist with Rome, rather than hold to the plain truth with
the Puritans : " We are prepared to affirm, that with so many and
great authors we prefer to err, than, with Puritans, to speak the
plain truth." The sentiments of the Fathers, because they have
been both grossly misrepresented and grossly misconceived, we shall
-proceed to consider ; it is our aim to illustrate the following points
in Dr. Pusey's Sermon :
I. A disingenuous use of Patristic language.
II. The teaching of the doctrine of the Mass.
III. An abuse of evidence for his support in that doctrine.
D7. The Analogy between Trent and Oxford, and some of their
common fallacies.
If it has been spoken with severity, it was because reference was
had to the doctrines, and not to the character of the man — a char
acter, to which common report awards the ordinary virtues of
probity and gentleness. The energy of Saul on his mission to Da
mascus, and that of Loyola on his to Jerusalem, and that of Laud
' on his to the High Commission Court, in times when toleration was
the offence of lese majesty, constitutes a palliation of equal v alue
with that of apparent modesty and sensitiveness, in these days,
when declamation and earnestness are laid aside under the labels
of rant and enthusiasm.
j: Comment on the Communion Service in the first Prayer Book of Ed
ward VI.

10
I. — A disingenuous use of Patristic language.
It is disingenuous to appropriate the language of the ancient-
Fathers, filled as it is with rhetorical figures and idiotisms, to the
nice, but not, therefore, unimportant distinctions, to which theologi
cal discussion now-a-days tends. It is disingenuous, because, it is
changing rhetoric into logic ; it is reducing to the accuracy of
metaphysical definition the generous and loose expressions of de
voted piety and meditation, and is laying the bondage of the
subtlety of the Schoolmen upon the open and unguarded ejacula
tions of ardent love and gratitude. This latitude of expression,
while it is restrained in some few" points, increases, and grows the
more reckless, the farther we recede from the first century ; it varies,,
too, with the temperament of individuals, and with individuals, in
their lifetime. An illustration of the danger in the employment
of such loose language is ready to our hands. The first Council
of Nice, A. D., 325, propounded, as the teaching of Holy Writ,
the consubstantiality of the Father and Son — a doctrine embraced
by all the Orthodox Churches of Protestant name. The learned/
Origen, whose writings precede this Council by one hundred years,
has been claimed by the Arian party, as the expounder and cham
pion of its creed ; and the matter is not without its difficulties to
this day. Now the unguarded expressions of Origen, in the course
of his voluminous compositions, which gave to the Unitarians some
show of authority, may not, as the Orthodox party rightly contend,
fasten upon him the heresy of Arianism ; because, a writer, without
the intention of denying the coessential deity of Christ, having ab
the time other points more immediately in view, in the rapidity of
composition may give utterance to words, that are susceptible of
an heretical interpretation ; and from such evidence a judge can
seldom be found, who, by the normal of an ex post facto law,,
would pronounce a sentence of condemnation. The case of any
intelligent writer, after the Council of Nice, would be far different...
The use of those doubtful expressions of Origen would be culpa
ble in any Post-Nicene author, or rather, it would be expressive of
the writer's prepossession ; and if the obnoxious terms were wittingly
and perversely retained, they would become demonstration of the
character of his creed. Origen may be pardoned his dangerous.
latitude of expression, and his orthodoxy saved ; but had Augus
tine adopted and constantly repeated the obnoxious phrases, his

11
Arianism would be placed beyond doubt. The first step would be
termed hardihood, the second recklessness, the last heresy.
If, then, the learning and acuteness of Origen could not avoid mis
interpretation, how much less the dullness, and pious fraudulence,
of a large portion of the early writers on the Christian religion 1 If
on a subject so accurately propounded by St. John, as the Oneness of
the Father and the Word, the finest talents of the third century have
not saved their possessor from the suspicion of Unitarianism, how
much the more are we to suspect heresies, lurking in the imbecility,
ignorance, and carelessness, of writers of the succeeding ages,
as the world moved onward, and downward, into mediaeval night ;
writers, treating of subjects different from those agitated at this day,
and confessedly contending for victory first, and then for truth, if
necessarily on their side. If, moreover, to these considerations it is
added, that the Fathers frequently say, what they do not believe,
and believe, what they do not treat of; that they are constantly
pressing upon us, not the judgment of the Church of their day,
but their own speculations and opinions ; that not the hundredth.
part of the works of the first three centuries is now extant ;* that
of what is extant, some is most flagrantly corrupt,! and other,
gross forgery and imposition ;% some, again, tinged with rejected
Montanism, and Gnosticism,§ and other, pretended revelation ;|| ,
and finally, that the writers themselves are charged by the suc
ceeding Fathers with fabrication and falsehood ;1T — it will appear, as
it really is, an impossibility to reach, from their writings, anything
beyond a general outline of the faith, contained in the so called
Apostles' Creed, and that, for most questions of the present day,,
they are worse than valueless.
It is disingenuous, moreover, to appropriate the unmodified lan
guage of the Fathers to the subject of the Eucharist in a dogmatic
discourse, because the Fathers deny, that they speak with authority
* See Cave's Historia Litteraria.
f Ignatius' Epistles. Apostolic Constitutions, and Canons.1
{ Recognitions of Clement. Clementina. Spurious Gospels, Epistles, and
Acts. Liturgy of James, etc.
§ Tertullian, Origen, and Clement of Alexandria.
|| Hermas Pastor.
IT Papias of fabrication by everybody; Dionysius of impiousness by Basil,
(Ep. xii.,) and by Athanasius ; Ignatius of recklessness, by Jerome (Dial, iii.);
and Dionysius complains ofthe adulteration of his own writings, in his own day.

12
on any points, least of all on those, which are to them incidental
matters ; and because they reject one-another's testimony, and
refuse submission but to the Bible and its clear dogmas and disci
pline. Erring both singly and jointly in matters of religion, their
testimony is neither always true, nor always the same ; and refu
sing to stand by naked assertions, dropped in the course of their
treatises, they profess their design to be, not dogmatism, but inves
tigation. In evidence of the justness of these remarks we shall
summon a few of the Fathers,' selecting the best, the most learn
ed, and those, whose opinions are deemed most worthy of conside
ration. " Scripture we use for the discovery of our dogmas  By
faith, therefore, receiving the Scriptures without demonstration,
and taking our proofs in abundance concerning the Scriptures from
the Scriptures themselves, we are educated by the voice of the Lord
to the knowledge of the truth. In this way, we do not yield to the
interpretation of men, who are prone, with equal confidence, to
enunciate very contradictory propositions. Since, moreover, it is
not sufficient simply to set forth an opinion, but it is also indispen
sable to prove our assertions, we must not any longer rest in the
testimony of man, but believe that alone, which is brought from the
voice of the Lord ; since this is more worthy of faith than all demon
stration, or rather, this alone is demonstration." — Clement Alex.
Strom, vii., 16.
" If Christ alone is to be heard, we ought not to attend to what any
one before us has thought necessary to be done, but what Christ
first, who is before all, did. For it becomes us, not to follow the
custom of man, but the verity of God ; and therefore, if any of
our predecessors, either through ignorance or simplicity, did not
observe and hold to what our Lord, both by example and precept,
taught him to do, we may, to be sure, imitate the indulgent temper
of our Lord, and pardon his simplicity ; but for ourselves there
would be no excuse, since we had been fully admonished and
instructed by the Lord." — Cyprian, Ep., iii.
" How much are they to be pitied, who place the strength of
their doctrine in multitude, and consider not that the Lord, our
Christ, bestowed courage against the whole world upon twelve
disciples, simple, poor, illiterate, and unskilled in the world. Why
do you object to us the multitude, as it were, threatening Heaven with
the erection of another Babel  Show me the beauty of truth,

13
and persuasion is ready and easy  If Paul, the hearer of
unspeakable words, the mystagogue of the arcana, who had Christ
speaking in himself, did not employ his own private authority with
out the testimony of Scripture, how can it be without danger now
to neglect the study of the Bible, and to speak the opinions of the
heart 1" — Athanasius. Conf. of some propositions, 1, 2.
" Now I think, it would be arrogant presumption in me to under
take the office of dogmatic teacher among my (spiritual) sons.
For I am not weak enough to suppose, that I possess the grace of
the Prophets, the virtue ofthe Evangelists, or the circumspection of
the Apostles. My sole aim is to apply myself with diligence and
earnestness to the Holy Scriptures." — Ambrose, De Off., Lib. i.
" The indulgent reader, when he discovers that I have erred, or
attempted any matter beyond my strength, will pardon me." — Epi
phanius. " I have given utterance to many sentiments, which have refer
ence rather to exhortation and effect, than trath." — Chrysostom,
De Comp. Cordis.
" Nor ought we to regard the disputations of any men, though
they be catholic and praiseworthy, as authoritative writings, in
such a way, that it may not be lawful for us, without disrespect to
them, to disapprove or reject anything in their writings, if, by
chance, we discover that they thought differently from what the
truth, as comprehended, with divine assistance, either by ourselves
or others, has set forth. Such am I in the writings of others ; such
wish I others to be as critics of mine." — Augustine, Ad. Fort.
" What then is the peculiar right of the believer ? Neither to
be rash, nor to add anything ; since whatever is not of faith is sin.
But faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God ;
wherefore, everything, which is not in the divinely inspired Scrip
tures, because it is not of faith, is sin." — Basil, In Mor. Sum. 80,
cap. 22.
" Whatever has not the authority of the divine Scriptures, may
be despised with the same facility, with which it is approved." —
Jerome, Epist.
The character of Cranmer is one, which we come to admire only
at his death ; and then, for his eloquent testimony, we bury our
contempt for the man in our rejoicings over the retracting martyr,
and spread the wide and thick mantle of charity over his frailties
.and his sins. Pressed to the point, whether he chose Christ or the

14
Pope, the Bible or Tradition, like a man he stretched forth the
inglorious hand, seared the apostate nerves, and burnt them to
cinders. The Fathers, too, think much of their opinions and cus
toms. But when we have piled the faggots and applied the torch
to their writings, and constrained them to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, they come forth like honest men,
stretch forth the right hands of their authority, and offer up a
glorious and an acceptable holocaust to Almighty God.
Last in this train comes a much abused man, Vincentius Lirinen-
sis. His words — and noble words they are — pass from mouth to
mouth, as the watchword of the faithful ; universality, antiquity,
and consent — quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus credi-
tum est. Abused he is by almost all, who have placed him in the
vanguard of traditive authority ; for when Vincentius has wound
together the triune strands, they think it sufficient to pick out a
thread, or even a little furze, and palm it off, as possessing all the
invincible strength of the triple chord not easily broken. Let him
be heard ; for he, too, craves the honor of being numbered with
this worshipful company, who reject everything extra-scriptural.
" When I, or any other person, may desire to detect the frauds
of newly rising heresies and to avoid their snares, and to remain
sound in the sound faith, we ought, by the assistance of the Lord,
to fortify our faith in a two-fold way ; first, by the authority of the
Divine Law ; and then afterwards, by the teaching of the Church
universal. — (§ 1.) • • ¦ This antient consent of the holy
Fathers, however, is not to be searched out in all the nice ques
tions of the Divine Law, but only, with any degree of safety, in
the rule of faith, (the articles of the Apostles' Creed.) But
neither always, nor all heresies are thus to be attacked, but novel
ties and recent ones only, upon the occasion of their first appear
ance, and before they have falsified the antient rules of faith.
Prolonged and inveterate heresies, however, are not to be attacked"
in this way. • • • • Therefore, those more antient schisms
and heresies, we ought not thus to answer, but wherever there is
need of their refutation, to argue either not at all, or else from
Scripture alone." — Commonitorium, § 39.
The Fathers, then, strip from the back of Puseyism the armor,,
in which it has encased itself ; or rather, like the Tyrians upon the
soldiers of Alexander, they pour the hot sand down upon the
treacherous assailants, and compel them to fling away the useless

15
breastplate and cuishes, and struggle empty-handed with the bat
tlements of Scripture. With the Dana'ides of the fable, the
Tractarians have descended into the gloomy regions of Tradition,
and placed upon their necks the bondage of everlasting " drawers
of water," to supply the multiforous vessel of patristic authority —
a vessel, thoroughly riddled by its supposed master-builders, and
ready to crumble beneath the worms of time. Such Hyperdulia,
surely, would do honor to the inventive spirit of the Vatican, and
is anticipating the fruitless toil of purgatory : —
*- Visendus ater fiumine languido
Cocytos errans, et Danai genus
Infame, damnatusque longi
Sisyphus Aeolides laboris.
The use, therefore, which Dr. Pusey has made of the language
of the Fathers in this Sermon, is disingenuous ; he has selected
the strong rhetorical language of fallible men, and, by the glozing
arts of introduction and context, thrown over it a coloring, which,
viewed, as it must be, through the .mist of modern systems, was
farthest from their intentions. Especially is this abuse observable
in the case of Cyril of Jerusalem, who, employing the symbolical
epithets of the Eastern nations, paints in the most glowing colors
the essence and effect of the Eucharist; and yet even Cyril de
clares, for fear of misinterpretation, that his words must be taken
in a spiritual sense.* But what need of more convincing evidence
of this misapplication of language, when Dr. Pusey (Serm. p.
11,) has made the figurative expressions of the discourse of our
Saviour, (John vi. 50-58,) to consort with gross conceptions of
the Eucharist, and made it convenient with cool indifference to
forget, or conceal, the words of the Infinite Son Himself, which
were to correct the erroneous impression of His disciples, declaring
(v. 62, 63,) that His body should be taken from among them, and
therefore could not be eaten ; that " the flesh," (which Dr. Pusey
pronounces the giver of life unto our mortal bodies, even our de
caying flesh, p. 11,) " profiteth nothing ;" and that the life, to which
He referred, was to be imparted by His words. If, when the Bible
* The language of Cyril has been the subject of much learned controversy-
John August Ernesti, (Anti-Murat.) and Deyling, (Obs. Misc., p. 116,) have
abundantly vindicated it from the perversion ofthe Eomish school.

16
is in every man's hands, sufficient courage can be summoned to
make so gross a perversion of its language, what hesitation may
we look for in an abuse of the dusty records of large libraries 1 If
there is no fear in introducing a specious gloss upon the only Holy
Thing left in our midst, what hesitation are we to expect in mak
ing such an use of the words of fallible men, as misrepresents
their true intention, and derogates alike from their orthodoxy and
good sense 1 *
Knowing, too, as Dr. Pusey did, that the same abuse of patris
tic language had been made by Romish and Jesuitical writers, in
the very matter and for the very object then before him, it was not
the part of an honest man, claiming and clinging to communion
in a Protestant Church, thus to hold forth to her lips a cup, im
pregnated with the poison and death of Rome. The most hyper
bolical epithets of the most capricious propensity become for Dr.
Pusey no protection ; it is wrapping himself in all the excres
cences of a diseased antiquity, and claiming, for their conjunction
and arrangement in himself, the production of a figure of un
matched elegance and grace ; they are no more protection, than
the obnoxious phrases of Origen would be to a modern Unitarian.
He knew, too, the necessity there was for an Anti-Romanist to
adhere to the form of sound words ; he despised the danger, yea,
rather he gloried, in that he could push the doctrine of the Real
Presence to such an extreme, that Rome could discern no differ
ence between it and Transubstantiation ; and in that he could to
such a degree magnify the effect of the Eucharist, that Bellarmine's
* The controversy, respecting the interpretation of this chapter of John, has
not escaped us; but the very points of this controversy make against Puseyism.
So irresistible is the explanation of our Saviour, that the Papists, Cajetan,
Suarez, Jansonius, and Adrianus, and the Lutherans, (whose error about con
substantiation constitutes them witnesses of the same grade as the former,) Lu
ther, Melancthon, Schmidius, and Calixtus, deny any reference at all to the
Eucharist in the discourse. For Zuingle and Calvin, the verses 62, and 63,
were an impregnable tower. In addition to this, is to be considered the incon
gruity of the occasion, ofthe hearers, and ofthe words. Moreover, the Apos
tles had not yet partaken ofthe Eucharist, and therefore could not have that life
referred to ; which is inconsistent with facts. See the whole matter admirably
summed up in Lampe. In the Council of Constance, A. D., 1414, which de
prived the laity of the cup, these verses were adduced for taking away the bread
also ; so that the Quakers were almost saved the trouble of finding their foun
der in the obscure person of George Fox.

17
eagle eye would be embarrassed to fix upon a particular, in which
it was not a Mass.
" With respect to divine and holy things, and the mysteries of
the faith, nothing, not even the minutest point, ought to be taught
without the Divine Scriptures ; nor ought anything to be perver
ted even by a simple verisimilitude, or by the ornaments of lan
guage. Not even in me myself, who am speaking these words
unto you, should you repose any trust, unless you have already
taken from Divine Scriptures the demonstration of the matter
announced. For the safety and conservation of our faith lie not
in copiousness and variety of diction, but in the plain unvarnished
statements of the Holy Scriptures." — Cyril of Jer. Cat. iv. 13,
De. S.S.

H. — The Teaching ofthe Doctrine of the Mass.
The main doctrine of the Mass is, that the Eucharist is a pro
pitiatory sacrifice ; its attendant doctrines respecting private obla
tions and masses for the dead, are corollaries of this and the doc
trine of purgatory. It is this main doctrine of the mass we charge
upon Tractarianism.
In order to this conviction, it will not be sufficient to show that
the Sermon speaks of the Sacrament of the Eucharist, as of a
sacrifice, (pp. 9, 10,) since the figurative uses of this latter term
leave a loop-hole of escape.* When Dr. Pusey, moreover, adds
that the Eucharist " imparteth remission of sins, transmitteth th
inherent life of Christ to our bodies," and " is the ransom of the
sinner," he is, if not dogmatically teaching the Mass, at least,
taking so rapid strides towards Rome, that retreat, even if he can
be supposed to desire it, would have to be effected by the employ-
* It is by abuses of this term sacrifice, that Romish writers defendjtheir doc
trine of the Mass: An example, from the Scholia of James of Edessa, A. D.,
710, will exhibit this liability to abuse, " He ordered us not to conduct our
celebration with the leaven of malice and bitterness, but in the unleavened
bread of purity and holiness; that is, we should not thus offer the sacrifices of
the Lord, of whatever kind, whether it be the sacrifice of praise for our redemp
tion, or the sacrifice ofthe will, the former, namely, of the Body and Blood of
Christ, and the latter, that which is offered in good will through prayers."
Vide Assemani, Bibl. Orien. I. 480. Here, prayer and the Eucharist are termed
sacrifices ; neither of them really, but figuratively. '

18
ment of an intellectual palmistry, which Protestantism has ren
dered unpopular, and, but for its resuscitation at Oxford, was sunk
into desuetude.
Nor, on the other hand, will it be good ground of defence for the
Tractators to show, that their Coryphaeus has called the Eucharist
" a divine sacrament," (p. 17,) and referred to our Lord alone, as
" our sanctification and redemption." (p. 7.) Do not even Ro
manists the same 1 Here is Papistical doctrine and practice :
" Now the Eucharist is not only a sacrament of refection, but,
moreover, it is a memorial of all miracles. Again, it is the pledge
of the love of Christ." — Bellarmine, De Euch. 3, 9.
" No one_of the sacrifices, nor all the sacrifices, of the old law,
could make that one general price, ransom, and redemption of all
mankind, and of all sins, saving this one highest Priest, Christ,
and the one sacrifice of His blood, once offered upon the cross." —
Rheimish JV. Test, on Heb., ix. 12.
Verily, now, we seem to have passed into the healthful, sober
commentary of Ulrich Zuingle, or John Calvin. And yet the
Jesuits of Rheims, having written these words, turn about upon the
obtuse Protestants, and denounce them, " as gross and ignorant in
the Scriptures, and maliciously set against God's and the Church's
truth, and perversely and foolishly turning the whole disputation
against the sacrifice of the Mass."
If, then, the direct assertion on the one hand, that the Eucharist
" imparteth remission of sins," does not necessarily change the
Sacrament into a Sacrifice, and if, on the other, the calling the
Eucharist by the name of sacrament does not necessarily restrict it
to a proper Sacrament, wherein can it be shown, that Dr. Pusey has
irrevocably advanced the doctrine of the Eucharist's being a true
propitiatory repetition of a true propitiatory sacrifice ? It is, that
in making the Eucharist an essential part of the great Sacrifice,
he has constituted the repetition of the Eucharist, a repetition of
that Sacrifice, and consequently a veritable Mass. These are the
various steps of the Romish polemics, and with the admission of
their premises the conclusion is inevitable, that the Eucharist is a
repetition " of the past act of His bloodshedding upon the cross."
-(p. 18.)
In the first place, whatever be the definition of sacrifice, — that
of Melancthon, or Calvin, or Bellarmine, — it is conceded, that the
one sacrifice for sins, offered by Christ once for all, (Heb. x. 10.)

19
is a true and proper sacrifice ; and that the Passion of Christ, by
which is understood the three articles of the Apostles' Creed,
" suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead," * either the
whole, or some portion, of those Sufferings, constituted that
sacrifice. In the second place, whatever the Eucharist was on the night of
its institution, whatever was its essence, its object, and its effect, as
regards both Him, who gave to eat and drink, and those, who re
ceived to eat and drink, the same is its essence, its object, and its
effect, on every repetition of the Eucharist, as regards both the
Giver and the recipients.
If, now, as Dr. Pusey affirms, Christ suffered in the institution of
the Eucharist, if He then by its administration " began to tread the
wine-press alone," and " stain his raiment," and " wash his gar
ments in blood," — if, in fine, " it was the very blood shed for the
remission of sins," then does Christ suffer upon every repetition of
the Eucharist. And in whatever sense Christ was a sacrifice in
his Passion, in that same sense is he always a sacrifice in essence,
object, and effect in the Eucharist ; because, in this hypothesis the
Eucharist was originally part and parcel of the Passion. With
this plain statement of the laws of the stadium, we shall stand
aside, and allow Dr. Pusey free course in his reckless race ; the
chaplet is woven, and Paul will furnish the inscription, " crucifying
to himself the Son of God afresh."
" Hereby He seems as well to teach us that the great act of his
Passion then (in the Eucharist,) began ; then, as a Priest, did he
through the eternal Spirit offer himself without spot to God ; then
did he consecrate himself, (53,) before he was by wicked hands
crucified and slain, (54) ; and all which followed, until he com
mended his blessed spirit to the hands of his Heavenly Father, was
one protracted willing suffering. Then did he begin his lonely
journey, where there was none to help or uphold, but he ' travelled
in the greatness of his strength ; " then did he begin to " tread
* " This Article hath also received some accession in the particular expres
sion of Christ's humiliation. For the first word of it, now generally speaking of
his Passion, in the most ancient creeds was no ways distinguished from his
crucifixion ; for as we say, suffered and crucified, they only crucified under Pon
tius Pilate ; nor was his crucifixion distinguished from his death ; but where we
read crucified, dead, and buried, they only crucified and buried."— Pearson on the
Creed, Art. IV.

20
the wine-press alone,' and to 'stain all his raiment;' then,
" to wash the garments of his humanity ' with the ' wine ' of
his blood. (55.) And therefore does the blood bedew us too; it
cleanses us, because it is the blood shed for the remission of our
sins." — (p. 17.)
This, beyond equivocation or evasion, is the fretting doctrine of
the Mass. The fact, to which the Preface refers, and desires us
distinctly to mark, that NO CHANGE ofthe elements had been pro
nounced, is a sorry and contemptible subterfuge. As if all that
was objectionable and impious in Transubstantiation, was confined
to the surdity of an enthymeme, and the incompatibility of an
isolated fact with a metaphysical theory. We cease to wonder at
the pain its author felt at the publication of such Jesuitism, and
we might have hope in the pangs, if we could believe they were
real. Even Romish writers, by creating a distinction where there is
no difference, by conceding, or rather teaching, the permanence of
the accidents of the bread and wine, even after what they call the
perfect change of the substance, seem, in some degree, to allow it
to be said in a loose way of them, that they teach NO CHANGE
of the elements.
We too, said the Arians to Athanasius, teach that Christ is God ;
(and mental reserve interpreted God, as men and angels are styled
Gods.) We affirm, continued they, that he is truly God ; (and
the subtlety of the devil interpreted it, that it was only because
Christ was made so by God.) We affirm, they shouted again,
that he is naturally of God ; (and they said, we are all of God.)
We believe, that the Son is the power, the wisdom, and the image
of the Father ; (and they reflected, we are all the image of the
Father.) The Council of Nice pressed them with the article of
consubstantiality, and theArians responded similarity, of substance ;
homoousion, and homoiousion. An iota divided the true and false ;
whereat the Arians wrangled. Mental reservation was then
deified into a virtue, and they were by it able to subscribe ; men
tal reservation and disputatious subtlety reached their acme with
the height of Romish glory. They, [who hold their faith a defi
nition without substance, may adopt the habits of the Schoolmen,
and grow, in the society of Scotus and Bonaventura, to the stature
of acumen impersonate in the Angelic Doctor. " They have
taught their tongues to speak lies," and " with burning lips " they
use deceit.

21

III. — An Abuse of Evidence for the Support qf that Doctrine.
To the extract from the Sermon, above given, Dr. Pusey has
¦appended certain notes, referring to certam authorities to justify
'him in this application of the terms of the Passion to the Eucharist.
Before entering upon an examination qf this evidence, it may be
premised, that whatever may be the interpretation adopted by the
Fathers, that of this Tractator is plain and obvious ; first, that the
passages of Genesis and Isaiah, employed by him, refer to Christ's
Passion and the Eucharist contemporaneously and indifferently ;
and secondly, that these two events were coincident, the latter
Deing a part at least of the former.
It tis our aim to demonstrate from the very passages of the
Fathers to which he refers, that his application of them is unwar
rantable ; and also to demonstrate from the same evidence, that
these texts of Scripture have reference singly, and exclusively, to
the Passion, of which event the Eucharist, in the estimation of
these same Fathers, formed no part. The authorities are contained
in notes 53, 54, and 55 ; of which those in 53, testifying that
Christ " sanctified himself," are not to our present purpose ; a fact,
which we did not imagine required any higher authority than His
own words, (John xvii. 19,) albeit Chrysostom and Cyril , may
have coincided in such testimony : and, as the words of our Sa
viour, " I sanctify myself," were uttered after thEucharist, the
allusion is wholly irrelevant to, or rather subversive of, Dr. Pusey's
design. The Fathers cited are Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Clement
of Alexandria, Cyprian, Origen, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine,
Theodoret, Gregory of Nyssa, and James of Edessa.
In an exposition of these blunders and fallacies of Oxford, it
might be deemed sufficient to disentangle the web of connection,
sought to be woven about simultaneity of reference. We have,
however, too good an opportunity to give a specimen of Oxonian
exegesis, as well as of allowing the Fathers a chance to vindicate
their brains from the charge of a sympathy with the muddy
mysticism of the Tractators, to pass the matter so slightly by.
Even at the risk of being tedious, we must let them speak for them
selves. The passages, or prophecies, which Dr. Pusey says were ful
filled, or began to be fulfilled, in the very administration of the
3

22
Eucharist, are found in Genesis xlix. 11, 12, and Isaiah lxiii
1, 2, 3. Justin Martyr, A. D., 140.
" The passage, (Gen. xlix. 11,) ' Binding his foal unto the vine,
and his ass's colt unto the choice Tine,' was a prophetic symbol of
what would happen to Christ, and of what was to be done by him.
• • • After this he was crucified, that the rest of the pro
phecy might be fulfilled ; for that phrase, ' washed his clothes in
the blood of grapes,' was prenunciatory of the Passion he was
about to suffer, purifying through4his blood those who believe in
him." — Apol. i., p. 73, ed. Paris.
The very same, explanation is repeated in Dial. p. 274, and
again, p. 286, and again, Apol. ii, p. 301. Justin, therefore, says
the prophecy, " blood of grapes," refers solely to Christ's blood
shed in the crucifixion, which shedding is our purification.
Tertullian, A. D., 200.
" And that you may recognise in wine the ancient figure of
blood, Isaiah will show, (lxiii. 1,) ' Who is this that cometh from
Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah 1 This, that is glorious
in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength 1 Where
fore art thou red in thineTapparel, and thy garments like him that
treadeth in the wine-fats? ' For the prophetic Spirit now, as it
were, fully contemplating the Lord coming from his Passion,
clothed as it were in flesh, after he had suffered in that flesh, de
signates the bloody rednessof flesh by the ' redness of apparel ;'
that flesh having been trodden and pressed out by the violence of
the Passion, as it were, ' in the wine-fat.' Because, men come
from the redness of wine, so to speak, drenched in blood, {a~uen-
tati.) Much more" clearly in Genesis in the benediction of Judah,
(from which tribe according to the census of the flesh Christ was
to come,) is Christ even then delineated in Judah ; ' He will wash
his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes,' de
signating by garments and clothes the flesh, and by wine the
blood." — idv. Marc, iv. 20.
Disputing against'Marcion, who denied the verity of Christ's
manhood, Tertullian is here proving that Christ had real flesh, be
cause we have the figure of it in the Eucharist ; for, if the flesh
were a phantom, we could have no figure, as a shadow casts no

23
shade. The ancients, too, as shown above, had a figure of Christ's
flesh and blood ; and the prophecies of Genesis and Isaiah have'an
exclusive reference to the Passion, and the appearance of the flesh
as stained with blood upon Christ's resurrection. Immediately pre
ceding the above extract Tertullian has these words: "Christ,
having taken the bread and distributed it to the disciples, made it
his body by saying, ' This is my body ; ' that is, this is the figure of
my body." We conclude, that our author had not the faintestridea.
of Passion in the Eucharist.
Clement of Alexandria, A. D., 210.
" The Logos is allegorically termed in various ways, alike fbod>
and flesh, and nutriment, and bread, and blood, and milk. God'
becomes all things, that believers may enjoy him. Let no one
therefore wonder at our saying, that the blood of our Lord is alle
gorically called milk ; for it is also allegorically called wine. ' He
washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of
grapes.' " — Pacdag, i. 105.
This, with its Gnostic taint, makes nothing for Dr. Pusey's-
doctrine. It asserts, moreover, that the wine of the Eucharist is-
no more blood, than the milk, with which in a figure Neophytes:
are said to be nourished, is blood. In a fragment, preserved by the
author of the Paschal Chronicles, Clement discloses his ignorance
of any Passion in the Eucharist : " Now on the thirteenth clay was
the preparation of unleavened bread ; wherefore, also, John re
cords, that on that day the feet of the disciples were washed by our
Lord. Now on the following day our Saviour suffered, himself
being the passover, immolated by the Jews." This washing ofthe
feet of the disciples (John xiii,) was immediately coincident with
the Eucharist, and as Clement was not aware of the necessities of
Puseyism, he defers the Passion to the following day.
Cyprian, A. D., 250.
In the days of Cyprian some Christians celebrated the Eucharist
by using water alone in the cup, and were thence denominated
Aquarians. To correct this malpractice Cyprian writes to Caecil-
ius, demonstrating that water alone cannot represent the blood of
Christ. Hence his arguments :
" In the benediction of Judah the same fact is represented, where
also, the figure of Christ is expressed, in that Judah was to be

24
adored and praised by his brethren ; in that, he was about to sub
jugate his yielding and flying enemies with those hands, with
which he carried the cross and conquered death; and in that, he
himself was the Lion of the tribe of Judah, and couched, that is
died, in his Passion, and rose again to be the hope of nations.
To which things Divine Scripture adjoins and says, ' He will wash
his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes."
When it is called ' blood of grapes,' what is signified, except that
there should be wine in the cup of the blood of the Lord. And
likewise in Isaiah the Holy Spirit, concerning the Passion of our
Lord, bears witness to the same thing, saying, ' Wherefore art
thou red in thy apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in
the wine-fat V Can apparel be made red with water, or in the
wine-fat is it water, which is trodden out with the feet, or expressed
by the mill V'—Ep. 63.
Cyprian's reasons for the use of the wine in the cup are, 1.
Such has hitherto been the usage. 2. The types of the Old Tes-
.tament prefigure the blood of Christ by wine. 3. The Evangel
ists and Paul speak of wine in the institution of the Eucharist.
4. The wine in the cup represents the blood of Christ, and the
water, mixed therewith, the communicants. Enough of these.
This latter trifle is not a solitary one in Cyprian ; his name and
vultraism are synonymous in Ecclesiastical History. Not trusting to
" our own unaided private judgment " in thus condemning one of
" these deepest expositors " of Scripture, we employ the words of
Augustine : " As there was much, which the taught Cyprian might
teach, so there was much, which the teachable Cyprian might have
learned." — De Bapt. " Whatever in Cyprian's letters I find con
gruous with the authority of Divine Scriptures, I receive with his
praise ; and whatever is incongruous, begging pardon of his shade,
I spew out of my mouth." — Cont. Crescon.
Origen, A. D., 254.
" ' He shall wash his garments in wine, and his clothes in the
blood of grapes.' This passage also shows, that the Jewish method
of interpretation is not to be followed. Our mystic exposition,
however, brings forth a more noble sense. For the ' garments ' of
Christ, which he ' washed in wine,' is properly understood of his
Church, which he washed in his own blood, not having spot or
wrinkle. ' For,' says the apostle, < we are not redeemed with silver

25
and gold, but by the precious blood of the only Son of God.' ' In
the wine of his blood,' that is, in the laver of regeneration the
Church is washed by Christ."
But here we are confronted by a strange interpretation from the
private judgment of Origen, which Dr. Pusey, exercising the same
divine right, refused to adopt into his Sermon. Leaving this " mys
tic exposition " of Gnosticism for the fraternity of Oxford, we-
select another from this worthy Father, on Matt. xvi. 19.
" Similarly to the words of Psalm xxiv. 7, ' Be ye lift up, ye-
everlasting gates, and the king of glory shall come in,' Isaiah pro
phesies concerning the ascension of our Saviour, after the office
assigned him had been executed ; ' Who is this that cometh from
Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah ? This that is glorious in
his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength V "
These passages of Isaiah and Genesis are interpreted again of
the resurrection in his commentary on John vi. 37, and Pamphilus
in his Apology for Origen, after setting forth these words, asks,
" What more clearly and distinctly could be uttered by any one
concerning the resurrection of the flesh 1" Disappointed, there
fore, in our search here for Passion in the Eucharist, we pass on to
Ambrose, A. D., 390.
" ' He washed his garments in wine,' by the Passion of his own-
peculiar body." — De Joseph Pat. 13.
" ' He will wash his garments in wine;' the good garment is the
flesh ofthe cross, with which he overshadowed the sins of all. . .
' He washed those garments in wine,' when he was baptized in
Jordan. . . . Then it is added, ' and his clothes in the blood
of grapes,' that is, in the passion of his own body, he washed the
nations in his own blood. . . . And well does he say 'grapes,'
because as a grape he hung upon the cross, himself the vine, him
self the grape." — De Bened. Pair. 24.
Ambrose, it will be perceived, has saved us the trouble of ques -
tioning his infallibility as an expositor. A part of the prophecy
he interprets of the baptism, and the other moiety of the crucifix
ion, ofthe Lord; and though he made a blunder, in delivering two
contradictory propositions respecting the first part of the prophecy,
and was evidently in trouble to find enough food for his capricious
appetite, he unfortunately failed to perceive the Passion of the
Eucharist, and therefore dismisses Oxford empty handed.

26
Jerome, A. D., 420.
In a desert of half-learned Fathers, obtruding upon us their
puerile and fanciful expositions, and introducing confusion into any
critical and consentaneous exegesis, it is a pleasure to meet with
the learning and talents of Jerome. His declamatory viralence
merits our severest censure ; but his extravagant asceticism should
find some apology in the spirit of his age. His penances and his
superstitious notions suffer nothing, when placed side by side with
the early days of the Doctor of Wittemberg. A complete master
of many languages, and a diligent student, he has left us in his
Commentaries works worthy of all praise. There exists, too, in
those Commentaries a stumbling block for all, who by divine right
would " lord it over God's heritage," and were this the only sen
tence of his extant, the fearless declaration, (and for this Augustine
complimented him), " idem presbyter, qui episcopus," reducing the
ministers of the New Testament to a common level, should carry
his name with glory to the end of time. Honor to the intrepid
presbyter of Stridon !
Jerome, in allusion to the oriental custom of giving wine and
milk to those recently baptized, thinks, that Moses prophesies seme
such custom. "And Moses also, in the passion of Christ discern
ing this wine and milk, by a mystic phrase, testifies, ' His eyes shall
be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.' " On Isaiah, Lib.
xv, Cap. 55.
In what sense these words are to be understood is certainly
obscure; and when we say obscure, we do not at all admit that it
makes anything for Puseyism. In fact, Dr. Pusey has not at all
employed these words of Genesis, and the interpretations of this
passage are as various as the several commentators. But, that Je
rome saw no passion in the Eucharist, w-e shall proceed to prove.
" Gethsemane is the place, where our Saviour prayed before his
passion." — De Heb. loc.
" Lest the future passion should prevail over the mind of our
Lord, he began to be sorrowful, (in Gethsemane), through pro-
passion. For to be sorrowful is one thing, and to begin to be sor
rowful quite another. Now he was not sorrowful through fear of
the passion."— On Matt. xxvi. 37.
" Many of our day refer this prophecy of Isaiah lxiii. 1, to the
end of the world. But now, after his passion, we are driven by
necessity to receive these prophecies for the resurrection of our

27
Saviour. . . . Therefore, the words are addressed to him, on
account of the second assumption of flesh, and the passion of the
cross. And under the name of Judah, he is foretold in Genesis
xlix, 8-11. This is he, whom the angelic powers seeing ascend,
drenched in blood, to the Father, command their fellow angels and
are obeyed by them. (Psalms xxiii. 7), 'Be ye lift up ye everlast
ing gates.' " — On Isaiah lxiii. 1. Jerome, then, saw no passion in
-the Eucharist, and interprets Genesis and Isaiah of the crucifixion
and the resurrection. Augustine, A. D., 430.
"Here, (Gen. xlix. 8-13), also, the death of Christ is predicted
by the word ' couched,' and not necessity, but power, in death, by
the word ' lion.' . . . ' The garments, which he washed in
wine,' that is, which he cleanses from sins, in his own blood ; — now
the sacrament of this blood, the baptized are admitted to — and
when he adds ' his clothes in the blood of grapes,' what are these,
but the Church ?"— De Civ. Dei. 16, 41.
Augustine, the disciple of Ambrose, has the same interpretation,
as his instructor ; and from it we gather that Christians were admit
ted in his day to the sacrament of the blood of Christ, and were
ignorant of the Eucharist's being a propitiatory sacrifice, and a
repetition of the passion of the cross. There is another quotation
from Augustine ; namely, that marked De Doct. Christ, iv. 21, and
upon this we have somewhat to remark. Augustine is there bring
ing examples of the different kinds of composition, and from Cy
prian's sixty -third epistle, of which a passage is given above under
the head of Cyprian, he takes a good example of the modest or
gentle style, and afterwards one from Ambrose of the same charac
ter ; then again from both writers he brings examples of the ornate,
and lastly some of the grandiloquent, style. Of their sentiments
he is expressing no opinion, and passes them by in silence. Here,
then, we have the Regius Professor of Hebrew, Canon of Christ's
Church, etc., either dealing out quotations at second hand, of the
value, pertinence and correctness of which he is assured only by a
traditive credulity and inclination, or else acting not an honorable
part in an imbecile effort to drag in Augustine, and claim authority,
where there is none to be found. Want of accuracy, or want of hon-
- esty,in a matter of great moment — take either horn of the dilemma,

28
and confidence in the man receives a shock from which it cannet
easily be recovered. Sed stupet hie vitio, et fibris increvit opimum
Pingue: caret culpa: nescit, quid perdat; et alto
Demersus, summa non rursus bullit in unda. — Persius.
Theodoret, A. D., 450.
" Christ is now a priest, which is sprung of Judah according to
the flesh, not offering anything himself, but is the head of them that
offer, seeing he calls the Church his body; and therefore exercises
the priesthood as man, and receives offerings, that are offered, as
God. And the Church truly offers the tokens of his body and
blood, sanctifying every leaven by the first fruits." — On Psalm cix.
That is, Christ offered himself to God, and Christians offer to
Christ the tokens of his body and blood ; and it required the micro*
scope of the Tractator to discover herein the doctrine of Passion
in the Eucharist. Let us examine Theodoret's interpretation of
the prophecies.
" Then also he predicted the Passion in these words, ' He shall
wash his garments in wine and his clothes in the blood of grapes,'
and afterwards demonstrating the joy, subsequent to the Passion,
' His eyes shall be red with wine and his teeth white with milk.'
And that he so called his Passion, the Lord himself is a witness,
saying, ' Father if it be possible, let this cup pass from me.' " —
On Gen. xlix. 11.
As this prayer was made subsequent to the Eucharist, Theodoret
saw no Passion in that ceremony, and can afford no rehef to Oxford
Gregory of Nyssa, A. D., 390.
Entering now upon different ground, and, as it will appear, having
to deal with the weakness of simplicity and credulity, it becomes
necessary to bear in mind these failings of intellect. Basil the Great,
aware of these infirmities of his brother, has left on record (Ep. 58),
his reprehension of the good natured good-for-nothingness (xpi^^ira)
of Gregory ; and Erasmus pronounces the most charitable judgment
of Gregory's character, in denominating it a pious simplicity. With
this premonition, we transcribe the naked words of Gregory of
Nyssa, as transferred to his notes by Dr. Pusey ; and it being the
only one he has transcribed in full, on this all important point, he
must have viewed it as his strongest defence.

29
" He, who disposes all things according to his supreme will,
awaits not the compulsion from his betrayal, nor the violent assault
of the Jews, and the lawless judgement of Pilate, so that their
malice should be the beginning and cause of the common salvation
of man; but by this dispensation he anticipates their assault accord
ing to the mode of his priestly act, ineffable and invisible to man,
and offered himself as an offering and sacrifice for us, priest at once
and Lamb of God, who taketh away the sins of the world." — In
Christi Res. Or. i.
Dr. Pusey says, Gregory says, the Eucharist was part of the
Sacrifice. Verily, that shot seems to be point blank, and ought to
tell against the Protestant doctrine ofthe commemorative sacrament;
and if we would rush upon the keen point of Gregory's lance, we
must rush with all our might and main into Puseyism. However,
it is rather our curiosity, that is alive to the issue, than our faith,
and at the worst we can fall back upon that Protestant volume, the
Bible, even at the expense of being accounted timid and simple.
After Dr. Pusey's extract these words follow in Gregory :
" When did he do that ? when he gave his body to his disciples
to be eaten and his blood to be drunken, then he plainly declared,
that he had finished the sacrifice of the lamb. For the body of a
victim is not fit to be eaten, if it be alive. Wherefore, when he
gave his body to be eaten»and his blood to be drunken, already then
his body had been immolated."
Now is a brief hour of exultation for Robert Bellarmine. The
Jesuit (De Missa) bears off this sentence in all the glow and ardor
of a complete triumph. Oxonians, now, and Reformers alike, are
bound hand and foot to be passed along to the tender mercies of
the Pope. Trent, with all its mummeries and blasphemies, its canons,.
damnatory clauses and all, is but one post on our journey ; the
creed of Pius IV, and the infallibility of the Vatican, our final rest
ing place. There is no escape, if we must believe, as Bellarmine
expounds Gregory, and Gregory expounds Matthew. Puseyism
too — and the proverb says misery loves company — must retract its
imbecile declamations against "Mother Church," and tell its beads
in an indefinite penance of Hyperdulia. For Dr. Pusey says, Greg
ory says, that the sacrifice was begun in the Eucharist ; and Bellar
mine says Gregory says that the sacrifice was finished in the Eucha
rist, wherefore Masses are perfect and propitiatory in and of them
selves, and therefore actual sacrifices.

30
Check your ardor and rage, Papist and Puseyite, while we show
our Protestantism. Against Oxford and Rome we protest, and
affirm, that Gregory of Nyssa says no such thing ; neither that the
great Sacrifice was begun, nor finished, in the Eucharist, but that
it was consummated before the Eucharist. Let us review the ex
tracts of Gregory, and see the truth of this assertion.'
" The offering was invisible." " Wherefore when he gave his
body to be eaten and his blood to be drunken, already then had his
body been immolated." "A victim is not fit to be eaten if it be
alive." " When he gave his body to be eaten and his blood to be
drunken, then he plainly declared, he had finished the sacrifice of
the Lamb ;" and therefore, says Gregory, they ate and drank the
symbols in memory of his death.
Disengaging ourselves, then, from the skirts of Oxford, and mak
ing a dead halt at Geneva, we shall let the Tractarians plod on
their weary way Romeward, and cease ourselves to stand in awe
of the infirmities of simple Gregory of Nyssa, and the gloss of Dr.
Pusey on the perversion of Cardinal Bellarmine; pronouncing the
decision, even by this worshipful witness, and " deepest expositor,"
the Eucharist was no part of the great Sacrifice.
To dismiss this matter here would be doing great injustice to the
good-natured Gregory ; for to his credit be it known, that this pre
cession of the Sacrifice to the institution 4-of the Sacrament, was a
mere imagination, as he confesses, and but one figment in a fanciful
theory, to remove an imaginary difficulty. His object was to ex
plain, how Christ was three days and three nights in the bowels of
the earth ; for this purpose he invents this fiction, and computes the
time thus : Christ died, in some mysterious way, before the Sacra
ment of the last Supper — then, from that death to actual crucifix
ion, first day — darkness at crucifixion, first night — light after ninth
hour till night, second day — night before Jewish Sabbath, second
night — Jewish Sabbath, third day — night before resurrection,
third night. There is exegesis for a Strauss ! Not an exercise of
caprice, but the pure, sublimated, and concentrated extract of
critical and " deepest exposition" ! But Gregory sets out upon this
matter with caution, and saves, though as by fire, alike his theology
and his common sense. " The following is our opinion, merely,
about the three days ;* whether right or wrong, we leave to the
* cirt 61 apOios, i"" nal /'>/, ii t$ Kptm t.:<v aKpoar.Zt, KO-TaXsiirojitv. oi, yap
AirvipaiTls b \6yos laTlv, a\\a yvfivatria Kal £»jr7?<nf.

31
judgment of the hearer — for our words are not a dogmatic asser
tion, but an effort at a guess ;" and in our judgment he made a
very bad one.
Here, then, stands Dr. Pusey, convicted of transforming a puerile
guess into dogmatic teaching ; of borrowing an incidental trifle
from the weakest opinion of a very weak man, and palming it off
upon us,, as the most scriptural exposition of a most worshipful
Father of the Church. " But let us know, that Heaven .hath a
pillory, whereon Fraus pia herself shall be punished, and rather
let us leave religion to her native plainness, than hang her ears
with counterfeit pearls."f James of Edessa, A. D. 710.
Last, and least, in this imposing array, is James of Edessa,
stretching off into the eighth century. His works have never been
published ; a matter of no great regret. The learned Maronite,
Assemani, in his Bibliotheca Orientalis, has given a catalogue of
the manuscripts of this James, and extracted wherever, as a Roman
ist, it suited his convenience and purposes. Dr. Pusey, in the note,
affirms that Genesis xlix, 11, is explained by James of Edessa,
in the edition of Ephraem, in the commentary on that verse,
with reference to the Passion. This note is a tissue of blunders.
First, it is James of Sarug, and not James of Edessa, whose
notes are occasionally appended to the edition of Ephraem ;
secondly, neither James of Edessa, nor any other person, is noted
at all in that passage of Genesis ; and thirdly, the exposition is
Ephraem's, and being a very unexceptionable one, may be inserted :
" ' He shall wash his garments in wine,' thatis, He shall wash his own
body in his own blood, ' and his clothes in the blood of grapes,' that is,
that body with which the majesty ofthe divine person was clothed."
In this there is not the slightest reference whatever to the Eu
charist, but a very clear exposition of the verse, as predicting the
Passion of Christ, and the shedding of his own blood upon his own
body on the cross. If Dr. Pusey had taken the trouble to open the
work of Assemani, he might have spared himself the awkward
ness of patronizing the exploded error of Cave, and might have
discovered that the James, known as the Oecumenical Doctor
among the Syrians, was Bishop of Sarug, and preceded his name
sake of Edessa by two hundred years. (Bibl. Or. i., 283.) An ex-
t Fuller's Holy "War.

32
position of Isaiah vi., 7, was most probably picked up from the
Antirrheticon of Peter Benedict, the Jesuit editor of Ephraem, who
argues with it against the interpretation of Kohl ; the passage is
irrelevant to our present design, though of course it is, to Peter
Benedict and Dr. Pusey, a demonstration of the Mass.
Since we are in Mesopotamia among these Mar Jacobs, it will
not be unseasonable to introduce another of the name, the patri
arch of the line, for the rescue of Oxford. James of Nisibis was
the instructor of Ephraem, and from the latter the succeeding
Syrian clergy derive all their knowledge of Scripture and of its
exegesis. This James, on a time, fell into a great doubt about the
three days, and, after painful and deep excogitation, adopted the
oriental solution, by which Christ is made to die before the Eu
charist. The events from that death to the crucifixion, are char
acterized as a mock dramatic representation ; hear him — " Now
they took Christ on the fourteenth night, and the trial lasted till
the sixth hour — then they crucified Him. And when He was
judged He said nothing, because the whole affair would not have
been in character, that He, who was thought dead, should respond
or utter a word." — Serm. xiv.
To this, then, it has come, that to swallow an old wives' fable,
we must pronounce the agony, and the crucifixion, a badly acted
pantomime. We fling the blasphemy from us with the most un
mixed contempt ; and if Dr. Pusey, and his coadjutors, covet the
post of standard bearers of such impure comments on the Holy
Word before the world, these choicest pieces of patristic tradition,.
they will meet their merited rebuke in the unmeasured scorn of an
outraged Church ; happy, if even then they are warned to leave
these putid fables to fester in the noisome wound of pious fraud.
The worthy Thomas Fuller wishes to speak again. (C. H. Lib. v.}
" Small grit and gravel may choke a man ; but that stone can never
stop his throat, which cannot get into his mouth" — Jerome [Jon.,
ii., i.), Augustine (De Trin., iv., 6, and De Res. i., 2), and Isidore-
of Pelusium {Lib. i., 114), reject the vain guess of Gregory of
Nyssa, James of Nisibis, and their modern admirers, and explain
this matter of the three days in a way at once reasonable and judi
cious ; as we are commanded to " try the spirits" and decide, we
shall follow Jerome and Augustine ; Oxford and Rome have already
chosen Gregory and James.
In summing up the evidence, then, which this Sermon produces,,

33
for including our Holy Eucharist in the Lord's Passion, and thus
making every repetition of that Eucharist a real and proper sacri
fice, we shall decide, first, for the doctrine — the Eucharist was no
part of the great Passion ; and secondly, for the Fathers — they
have been misrepresented by Puseyism.
I-V. — The analogy between Trent and Oxford, and some of their
common fallacies.

We shall set down in parallel columns a few of the passages
that see " eye to eye."

Puseyism.
Were the Eucharist only
a thankful commemoration
of His redeeming love, and
only a showing forth of His
death, or a strengthening
only and refreshing of the
soul, it were indeed a rea
sonable service; but it
would have no direct heal
ing for the sinner. To him
its special joy is, that it is
his Redeemer's very bro
ken body ; it is His blood,
which was shed for the re
mission of sins. In the
words ofthe ancient church
he drinks his ransom, he
eateth that, the very body
and blood of the Lord, the
only sacrifice for sin.
So then partaking of it,
that life is transmitted on
to us also ; and not to our
souls only, but our bodies
also, since we become flesh
of His flesh, and bone of
His bone, and He, who is
wholly life, is imparted to
us wholly.
It has been remarked, as
that which cannot be inci
dental, (as how should any
of the Eternal Word be in
cidental*) how amid lesser
variations in order or full
ness of those solemn words,
they still, wherever record
ed, speak of the act as a

Council of Trent. Bellarmine.
If any one shall affirm,! Now the Eucharist is
that the sacrifice of the|not only a Sacrament of re-

Mass is only a giving of
thanks, and a bare com
memoration ofthe sacrifice
finished on the cross, and
not propitiatory, ... let
him be accursed. — Ofthe
Mass., 3. We offer to
Thee this sacrifice for the
redemption of our souls.
for the hope of safety and
preservation. Being ap
peased by this oblation,
mayst Thou receive us,
and order our days in
peace. — Canon ofthe Mass.

Jlkeimish Neu> Testament.
It is also a Sacrament, in
that it is ordained to be re
ceived into our bodies, and
to feed the same to resur
rection and immortality. —
On Matt, xxvi., 26.

As the Old Testament was
dedicated by blood in these
words, "This is the blood of
the Testament" {Heb. 9.),
so here is the institution
ofthe New Testament in
Christ's blood, by these
words : " This is the blood
of the New Testament,"

fection, but also amemo-
rial of all miracles.
Secondly, it is a testimony
and pledge of the love of
Christ towards His Spouse,
the Church.
Thirdly, it is the cause
and seed of the resurrec
tion of our bodies, and
that by contact and con
junction of His glorious
body with our mortal
bodies. Lastly it is — whether
heretics will hear, or for
bear, — the sacrifice of the
Christian religion. — De
Euch. iii., 9. _ _.,

Now we have these three
arguments : First, Christ
said, " This is my body,"
which is given for you, and
which is broken for you.
" This cup is the New
Testament in my blood,
which is shed for you."
These words, is given, is

*" Holy Scripture speaks, indeed, incidentally of some ofthe effects of the
working of regeneration, ' — Pusey tm Baptism, 55.

34

Puseyism.
present act. " This is my
body, which is given for
you." " This is my blood
of the New Testament,
which is shed for many for
the remission of sins."
" This cup is the new Tes
tament in my blood, which
is shed for you." He saith
not " shall be given," but
is " being given," " being
broken," " being shed

And of one of these words
used, S. Chrysostome re
marks how it could not be
said of the cross, but is
true of the Holy Eucha
rist. " For a bone of Him,"
it saith, " shall not be bro
ken." Butthat,whichHe
suffered not on the cross,
this He suffers in the obla
tion for thy sake, and sub
mits to be broken that he
may fill all men.
Then as Priest, did He
through the Eternal Spirit,
offer himself without spot
to God. Then did He con
secrate himself before He
was, by wicked hands, cru
cified and slain.

Rheimish New Testament.
which is here mystically
shed, and not only after
ward upon the cross, for
the Greek is the present
tense in all the Evangelists
and St Paul ; and likewise
speaking of the body, 1st
Cor. xi., it is in the Greek
the present tense, and Luke
xxii., and in the Latin
here.f And the heretics
themselves so put it in their
translations. — Matt, xxvi..
28. The service and Sacri

Bellarmine.
broken, and is shed, do not
signify that that is given,.
and shed for the Apostles
to eat and drink, but is
given and shed to God in
Sacrifice. — De Missa i., 12.

fiee, which the people of ken in body, but only in

the New Testament might
resort unto, could not be
that violent action of the
cross, but this on the Al
tar, which by Christ's own
appointment is and shall
be the Eternal office of the
New Testament, and the
continual application of all
the benefits of his Passion
unto us. — Luke xxii., 28.
To sanctify himself is to
sacrifice himself by dedica
ting His holy body and
blood to His Father, both
upon the cross, and in the
Holy Sacrament. — John
xvii., 19.

Christ could not be bro-

the appearance of the
bread. Wherefore S. John
Chrysostome {Horn. 24, in
Cor. i.,) writes, that Christ
suffers fraction in the Sa
crament, which he was un
willing to suffer on the
cross. — De Euch.

That action by which
the body of Christ is plac
ed upon the table in honor
of God, that it may be con
sumed, and that it may
represent the Passion of
the same Christ, is called
oblation and immolation.
Now that act is consecra
tion. — De Missa. i., 12.

Of the matters in the above comparative table, which remain to
be considered, the following only are important : 1st, The present
tense " is shed," and its correlatives ; 2d, The blunder of Chrysostom
about the " broken body."
1. This array of the present tense, after its importance had
rested in obscurity for fourteen centuries, was determined on by
the Council of Trent, and we hold its acquaintance with the philo
logy of the Greek language — the language denounced by the the
ologians of the Romish school as the source of all heresies — on a
par with the objects, for which that Council was convened ; the
poverty of the one, and the turpitude of the other, enjoy a common

t " In the Latin," — that was a Jesuit verity,
gate reads " effundetur," shall be shed.

transparently pure, — The Vui-

35
notoriety and contempt. And this has ever been the irrefragable
argument from verbal criticism and analogy ; the phrases " is4shed,"
"is broken," and " is given," are, in the language of grammar, ex
amples of the proximate future, in which the reference is to an event
comparatively so nigh at hand, that it is spoken of as present. In
stances of this grammatical usage in the New Testament fall around
us thicker than the leaves in Vallambrosa. " Are ye able to drink
ofthe cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism
I am baptized with." — Matt, xx., 22. " Ye know, that after two
days is the feast of the Passover, and the son of man is betrayed to
be crucified." — Matt, xxvi., 2. Compare also, verses 23 and 24.
" And behold / send the promise of my Father unto you." — Luke
xxiv., 49. " Behold we go up to Jerusalem." — Matt, xx., 18.
" The axe is laid unto the root of the tree ; therefore every tree,
which bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down, and cast into the
fire." — Matt, iii., 10. " That where I am, ye may be also." — John
xiv., 3. " Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins
of the world." — John i., 29. See also John xiv., 19, and cap. xvii.,
passim. Observe, says Whitby in his Examen of Mill, two points ; 1.
The present tense is used, because then was made the representation
of the body, which was soon to be broken, and of the blood, which
was soon to be shed. 2. Sacred Scripture uses the same figure
respecting both Jewish sacraments. It says of the circumcision,
before Abraham was circumcised, " This is my covenant, which ye
shall keep," and concerning the Paschal lamb, " It is the sacrifice
of the Lord's passover."
The Latin Vulgate translates Matt. xxvi. 26, " which shall be
shed" — quod effundetur — taking the tense for a proximate future.
Tertullian and Cyprian, writing before the settlement of the Vul
gate text, translate " which shall be shed," and " which shall be
delivered for you." — Jerome translates the correlative phrases of
Luke " which is given for you," and " which shall be shed for you,"
indifferently in the present and the future. Origen, on Matt.
xxvi. 26, says the body " was about to be broken "—frangendus —
and the blood " was about to be shed " — effundendus — wherefore
it is mystically represented at the Eucharist.
Examples might be multiplied indefinitely, — but enough. Dr.
Pusey's adeptness in philology has grown quite as lame as in patris-
tics, and he is disposed to receive, upon the decree of the infallible

36
Council of Trent, both articles of faith, and canons of unmixed
grammatical criticism. The instances from analogy form for Pro
testants an impregnable line of circumvallation and contravallation
—f err eus atque ahenus murus. Out of a few Fathers and the Vul
gate we may construct a breastplate and shield of pasteboard,
to receive " the tapering sea-reeds " of the doughty warriors of
Oxford. 2. The blunder of Chrysostom in the interpretation of the pro
phecy, " A bone of him shall not be broken." " Why does he add,
' which we break V Because, one can see this done at the Eu
charist, but not at the cross. On the contrary, the very opposite
happened there ; for it says, ' A bone of him shall not be broken.' "
— Hom. 24, on 1 Cor. Then, of course, Christ's body was not
broken, and the blood — to follow out the argument — could not be,
and was not, poured out. Oh, " deepest expositor," rare logician,
and theologian ! We answer ; the body of the paschal lamb, in
which this prophecy was annually set forth, was broken and de
voured, and the bones unbroken offered as an holocaust. So the
Saviour's body was torn, mangled, pierced, and broken ; but not a
bone of him was broken. Chrysostom, in the rapidity of volumi
nous and ill-digested composition, forgot at the moment, that the
prophecy read, " A bone," and not " the body ;" and this remark
of his, occurring but once in his Homilies, where, were it not the
blunder of the moment, he had frequent occasion to set it forth, is, .
evidently and without hesitation, to be dismissed, not only as a
weak trifle, but as infringing on a fundamental article of the
faith, respecting the " broken body and the shed blood." Lastly,
this is a blunder, into which Chrysostom alone stumbled, the
Fathers unanimously interpreting the prophecy in a different man
ner, and affirming that the body was, in the strongest sense of that
term, broken in the crucifixion.
The summation, then, of these differential terms of Puseyism
amounts to a gross mistake of Chrysostom's, a bungling criticism,
and a misinterpretation of a very pitiful and imbecile guess of the
good-natured Gregory of Nyssa, — risum tenatis amid. From the
entire circle of Fathers, Councils, and Romish Commentators, their
worthy disciple has picked up three party-colored rags, joined them
as firmly as their rottenness would permit, and now waves them
aloft for the gathering of the faithful :
"Dicceopolis. — On my knees I beg of you, my dear Euripides,

37
give me a rag out of your dramatic wardrobe. For I must make
a long set-speech to 1iie chorus, and my head's off, if I fail.
Euripides. — What rags would you have ? Those there, in
which ill-starred old Oeneus piled up the agony 1
Die. — No, no ; not those of Oeneus, but of some more ' beg
garly element'
Eur. — Well, will you take those of the blind Phoenix 1
Die. — No, not of Phoenix. There was one of your characters
more pitiful than he.
Eur. — Whose rags can this man be after ? Do you mean the
rags of the mendicant, Philoctetes ?
Die. — Oh, no ; but of one, who in beggary was taller than
Philoctetes by a full head and shoulders.
Eur. — Now I have it. You want the sordid patches that Bel-
lerophontes wore, — that fellow with a limp in his gait. Here
they are.
Die. — No, not those of Bellerophontes. Why, you had a char
acter in one of your tragedies, that was a combination of all these
virtues. He could limp and beg ; he had a tongue like a rattle,
and eloquence like an earthquake.
Eur. — A.h, now I know your man. You mean Telephus, the
Mysian. Die. — Oh, yes ; Telephus. Do, I beg of you, loan me his rags.
Eur. — Run, boy, and give him Telephus' rags. You'll find
them underneath the rags of Thyestes, between them and those of
Ino." — Aristophanes* Ach.
In a word, this one-ideaism, this ostentatious exaltation of rites,
this fastidious qualm, that steals over the sensitive formality of
minds of a certain grade, upon the mention of exploded errors and
fallacies, marks the body of Tractarians. The doctrines must be
good, because of their antiquity, and rtie fact of their putrescence
* Aristophanes and Chrysostom are names suggestive of each other. It was
this same " deepest expositor," Father John of the " Golden Mouth," who was
wont to place the scroll of that poet under his pillow at bed-time, that his morn
ing hours might be spent in social converse with wit and genius. (Barnes,
Tractatus de .Trag., iv.) We have a sincere respect for Chrysostom, and ac
count him the most readable ofthe Greek Fathers ; and as it becomes desirable
at all hazards to save his orthodoxy, the suggestion is thrown out by us, that
he may have stumbled into the denial of the " broken body," on some occasion,
when his head and heart were fuller of the images of the " mad, but clever,"
prince of the sock, than of the naked truths of the Bible.
4

38
and dilapidation must be suppressed by the ardor and obstinacy of
their advocates. A busy, bustling, nimble activity, wasted and ex
hausted on the frippery of tattered forms, and those other " many
things," is to supplant, and compensate the loss of, whatever is
healthful and stirring in the religion of our Fathers. Instead of a
living Church with warm blood and true in its veins, we must, by the
adroit manipulations of a scholastic chemistry, extract the vital fire
from its arteries, check the tendency to decomposition with myrrh
and incense, and reverence the mummy of our own cunning as the
chef-d'oeuvre ofthe spiritual embalmery of Heaven. This " straining
at gnats," cannot be described with greater felicity and in fewer
words, than has been done in the late Charge of the Metropolitan
of India, Bp. Wilson : " In the New Testament there is a divine
proportion, as well as order, in the statements made. There are
matters slightly touched on, or omitted, and others treated of at
length, and made of the greatest importance. But in the authors
before us, this proportion is entirely reversed. What the New Tes
tament is full of, they pass over slightly ; what the New Testa
ment passes over slightly, they are full of."
One of the avowed objects of this Tractarian movement is to
unprotestantize the Church, to back out of the Reformation : and
their success may well astonish its most zealous partisans. Com
pared with Luther's gradual Reformation, they seem to have
reached the period of the quarrel with Tetzel. "A very good inven
tion, that of indulgences, friend Tetzel, but it is scandalous to ask
so much for them ; the Pope has a very pious motive, that induces
him thus to absolve all sinners by St. Peter's merits. Now if you
find a poor beggar in trouble of conscience, a silbergroschen or
two should reward your toil and satisfy your avarice. If you don't
mend your ways, Tetzel, I will write to the Pope and report you
for contumacy ; and he will nullify the value of your wares by
creating a glut in the market." The Vatican apparently smiled
upon the young and ardent Augustine monk ; but a cloud unfore
seen — thank God for that, else Luther might have paused —
was settling upon her brow, black with the storms of Erebus.
Does Rome look thus upon the quibbles of the Tractators 1 Does
the impotent exhortation from Oxford to him that is throned on
his seven hills, to lesson his strict rules of conformity, or explain
them away, as she has the thirty-nine Articles, and to modify his
damnatory clauses and all that, draw down vengeance and rebuke 1

39
Alas ! that the delusion of frail humanity should have so firmly seized
on the sober judgment of any man, as to betray him into such puny
efforts and vapid small-talk with " the Man of Sin." The next
step of these new-lights amid darkness visible will be the cloister,
the cowl, and the bread-bag, with the menial prentice offices of
porter, sexton, and servant. Martin Luther knew them all, and
" after the most straitest sect lived a Pharisee." But his way lay
through nature upward, that of Oxonians through nature down
ward ; the one had the Bible still before him, to bring him into the
fruition of the most perfect liberty ; the others have turned their
backs upon the Sun of healing, — the device upon their escutcheon
being encircled by the words of Tertullian, " Lucifugae Scriptu-
rartjm," — and are moving to the Stygian stream of infallibility,
to be transported irremeably to the Elysian fields of passive obe
dience, saintly adoration, and moral death.
" It is infatuation and fanaticism," say the Tractators, " to im
agine, the common folk can understand the Word of God ; for
you can see, it is a difficult matter even for us with all the Fathers
at our elbow." Jerome, (Ep. 139, Ed. Cyp. T. 3, p. 153,) would
tell them, if they would but listen to such admonition from " one
of themselves, even a prophet of their own," that " it is the uni
versal case ,with these Commentators on Sacred Scripture, that
there is greater difficulty in arriving at their meaning, than at the
meaning of the passage, they endeavor to explain." Now " this
witness is trae," and his testimony is confirmed by the words of
Gregory Nazianzen, Eucherius, and Athanasius. This true issue,
in fact, must sooner or later engross all others, whether the Bible
has its Highest value without note or comment, or whether Coun
cils, Fathers, and Schoolmen, are its necessary attendants and in
terpreters ; whether Augustine, whose pages (De Bapt.) even the
Benedictines have profusely sprinkled with the monitions of " caveat
lector," hanging out upon the margins like the yellow flags from
the windows of a pest-house, is necessary to our apprehension of
St. Paul, or whether St. Paul was favored with sufficient grace to
speak with distinctness and accuracy enough to be understood by
any ordinary mind. It is not now the question, whether it requires
time and toil to master, as far as human comprehension can, the
divine mysteries ; but whether the perfect revelation of these mys
teries was reserved for, and entrusted to, men, who themselves avow
their inability to comprehend but little of them, though perhaps

40
enough each for his own practical utility ; and who set a lower
valuation on their own and one another's opinions, than any Pro
testant has done, since the days of Milton : * and whether, in fine,
we are to return to the customs of the Apostohc age, and not to
the Apostolic Bible, and erect in this, the city of our God, thirty
thousand well-chiselled altars and statues for the worship of the
great Goddess of the modern Ephesians, ' Mother Church,' while
the Invisible and Unsearchable, ' whose offspring we really are,'
shall be thrust aside into some dark unfrequented corner, told by a
rough forbidding stone, inscribed ' To the Unknown God.' This
Tractarian controversy may, or may not be, the forerunner
of the great contest. It will at least develop elsewhere an Unity,
to the fact of whose existence the habits of mere formalism are
apt to blind its votaries, and whose very silence is evidence of its
conscious strength : an Unity, which Ecclesiastical forms and rules
neither creates, nor confines ; an Unity, that knows, absolutely and
exclusively, but one Head and Teacher in holy things ; acknowl
edges, absolutely and exclusively, but one Source of moral light
and liberty ; an Unity, stronger than steel in its bonds, quicker than
the electric fluid in its transmission, and enduring as the ' ever
lasting hills ; ' an Unity, of which the essence is a common Hope,
a common Faith, and a common Head.
* " Whatsoever time, or the heedless hand of blind chance, hath drawn from
of old to this present, in her huge drag-net, whether fish or sea-weed, shells or
shrubs, unpicked, unchosen, those are the Fathers." At the expense of para
dox, we pronounce John Milton a Puseyite; we mean, that, like Dr. Pusey,
having " lived in the Bible for a time ; " he held " converse with its deepest ex
positors, the Fathers," and was careful in this exposition of their value and
character, " to use rather their sentiments than his own ; " wherefore, we must
be cautious, lest in " blaming " John Milton, we may " be unconsciously blaming
the Fathers."

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 03720 5524