Gre^l

/

hhgSZ

THE

REAL DANGER ^^"

CHUECfl OF ENGKLA1&

REVsW^ GRESLEY, M.A.
e^EBENDAR¥ OF LICHITIELP.

LONDON:
JAMES BURIES, 17 PORTMAN STREET,

PORTMAN SaUARB.

Hh^5¦^

1846.
m

THE

SEAL DANGEE OF THE CHUEOH.

REAL DANGER

CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

REV. W. GRESLEY, M.A.
PREBENDARY OF LICHFIELD.

LONDON:
JAMES BURNS, 17 PORTMAN STREET,

PORTMAN SaUARE.

1846.

- LONDON :
PRINTED PV KOB.SON, LEVEY, AND FRANK LVN,
Grent Ne-w Street, Fetter Lane

THE

REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.

The Church of England has just passed through a
process of fermentation, a fever has raged in her
veins, a storm has troubled her atmosphere ; and
now that these symptoms have subsided, a great
change is found to have taken place within her. The
Church is not what she was. Parties within her have
shifted their ground. New combinations have taken
place. Opinions and doctrines which had almost
become extinct are again recognised and widely esta
blished. Of those members who, in the process of fermen
tation, have been thrown off and separated from our
communion, no one influenced by the ordinary feelings
of Christian charity can think or speak otherwise
than with feelings of the deepest sorrow ; especially
when we consider the offences thrown in their path,
and how possible it is that we who remain may by
our sins, and still more by our negligences, be, in
no slight degree, answerable for their schism. For
such as we are to exult in their departure — to rejoice
that so many of our brethren, some of them so far
superior to ourselves in the highest Christian graces,
should have fallen, — would exhibit in ourselves a
spirit very little akin to that of the Master whom we

4 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
serve. They have gone, and we yet remain : let us
not be high-minded, but fear.
But now that the fever has subsided, the new
aspect under which the Church presents itself de
mands our careful attention. The principal feature
is, the growing up and establishment within her
bosom of a new and energetic school, or rather the
revival of a school, of theologians, which, though largely
influential in various periods of our Church's former
history, had more recently, till within the present
generation, almost become unknown. The last ten or
twelve years have seen the rapid progress and esta
blished influence of what are commonly called Church
Principles. Hundreds, nay thousands, of our clergy,
and these amongst the most zealous and learned, and,
what is much to be considered, the youngest ; a large
proportion of our best-educated laymen ; our aristo
cracy and gentry ; our professional men, and men of
business, and these undeniably amongst the most
serious and religious, — have more or less embraced
these principles. The rising generation at our Univer
sities is deeply embued with them. Nor are they con
fined to educated persons, though unquestionably most
prevalent amongst them. On the contrary, wherever
such principles have been fairly set forth, there
will be found many families and individuals amongst
the middle and the lower classes, in some instances
whole parishes, enthusiastically attached to them, and
embracing them with a warmth and energy not to be
surpassed by those who have been enabled by their
attainments more deeply to examine them. In truth,

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. O
Church principles have an equal efficacy to engage
both the intellect and the feelings ; and by their
perfect adaptation to all degrees of intelligence and
station, shew their close affinity with that sacred doc
trine which is given for the salvation of all degrees
of men. Any attempt to mix up this school, which has
become so widely spread in the English Church, with
the Romanisers who have left us, would prove great
ignorance of the real state of the question, or a de
liberate intention of causing prejudice. True that, to
a certain extent, and before the principles of each were
fully understood, they have acted and sympathised
together. Reverence for the Church was their bond
of union. But now the difference is marked, and the
separation defined for ever. They who, in their zeal
for the Church, fixed their views on the Roman Pon
tiff, have withdrawn from us ; those who remain look
to the Church of England as their spiritual mother.
Perhaps some Romanists in heart may yet be left
behind ; but to represent these as identified in prin
ciple with the Anglican body is an unfair and dis
ingenuous manoeuvre, unworthy of an honest contro
versialist. The characteristic feature of the Anglican
party is, a devoted attachment to their own Church
— not as being faultless, far from it ; but as being
the branch of the Church in which the providence
of God has placed them, — their spiritual Mother —
their Nurse, who has fed them from their youth with
spiritual food. To persist in saying that men influ
enced by such principles are Romanists in heart, is

6 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH,
nothing less than a shameful calumny. Their fault,
if fault it be, is being Ultra- Anglican. They ac
knowledge and firmly believe the Church of England
to be the divinely-appointed instrument for adminis
tering the means of grace to the people of this land.
They see no other instrument for Christianising or
humanising the swarming millions of their country
men. They have no hope but in her. If she fails
them, all is over. Even now they are filled with alarm.
They grieve for the inefficiency of her efforts. They
wonder at the immorality, worldliness, and atheism,
that abound. How is it, they ask, that a branch of
God's true Church should have allowed such a state
of things to exist ? They believe the sole reason to be,
that the Church has not been suffered to put forth
her strength. Her influence has been impeded. She
has been shorn of her due proportions. Her doctrines
have been perverted or suppressed by false sons : her
services curtailed and corrupted. Restore her to her
true position, and she will yet accomplish her work.
Thus the Anglican Churchman stands in a position
analogous to that of the Reformers in the sixteenth
century. The Church had then become corrupt and
inefficient, and needed reformation j and so it does
now. Only, whereas at that time positive corruption
had crept into her doctrines and ritual, which needed
to be expunged,— now, on the contrary, what is re
quired is, to carry out her existing ordinances and
teach her true doctrine to the people.
This is the position occupied by thousands both
of the clergy and laity. Pledged servants of the

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. /
English Church, — seeing in her, and in her alone,
not only health and salvation for themselves, but the
power to regenerate the nation and save it from
impending ruin ; mourning over her suppressed doc
trine, her neglected ordinances, her fasts and festivals
despised, her churches closed, her ritual degraded,
they watch for the time when they can work more
effectively in the cause of the mother who hath borne
them. To do her the best service they are able, is the
fixed purpose of their hearts.
This, then, is a prominent feature in the present
position of the Church. The existence of a body of
men, considerable in numbers, and still more so in
zeal and moral energy, who are firmly attached to
the Church of their country, and desire to spread her
influence through the land. As a school or party,
they occupy a distinct position in the public eye,
and still more as an element in the moral power
of the country. Their influence is more quiet than
obtrusive ; it is rather an undercurrent than an agi
tation of the surface. A free press is at their com
mand, and has afforded them a position in every kind
of literature. Not only books of theology of the
highest order, but periodicals, works of education,
works of fiction, poetry, memoirs, travels, all depart
ments in short, are more or less embued with
Church principles. Church principles appear con
tinually where you would least look for them. Where
you would expect a sneer at the Church, or such
a notice as betokened an utter ignorance of her
claims or nature, now not unfrequently you find a

8 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
respectful, if not a cordial, recognition. The lati-
tudinarian or eclectic admits Church principles
amongst the influential agents of moral progress, as
the Roman emperor would have placed a statue of
Jesus Christ amongst the gods of the Capitol. The
liberal and worldly honour Church principles by their
aversion ; the revolutionist and atheist by their threats
of persecution. In short, the existence of this body,
or school, or party, by whatever name we call it, its
revival and rapid progress during the last twelve
or fifteen years, its establishment as an integral por
tion of the moral condition of the age, is (to use
a current phrase) a great fact, which cannot be
denied. Church principles have gained a position
in the mind of the nation, from which they are not
likely to be soon dislodged ; nay, if we may judge from
the circumstance of their taking hold principally
on the seriously minded of the younger portion of
the community, it is reasonable to expect that they
will, in the next generation, make a great advance
and acquire a firmer hold.
But there is another great fact to which we must
now advert, and that is, the reaction which has sprung
up against these principles. Church principles being,
as we believe, essential parts of Christianity, could
not remain inactive, any more than the leaven placed
in the three measures of meal. They are essentially
proselytising and aggressive. To spread a regenerat
ing influence through society is their leading object ;
to induce men to give up their worldly, self-indul
gent habits, and exercise self-denial, wide-extended

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 9
charity, exalted purity, — this is their aim and ten
dency. Hence of necessity they have, like the first
preaching of the Cross, excited a strong spirit of
opposition; and it is this reaction against them, which,
as it is a prominent fact at the present moment, so
it is the great danger to which the Church of Eng
land is exposed.
From the first, the cause of Church restoration
and the revival of Church principles has been preju
diced by the excesses and imprudence of some ardent
spirits, who have confounded the true Catholic and the
Romish doctrine. The line between Church doctrine
and Romish doctrine, as well as practice, is, in reality,
broadly and plainly marked ; but eager partisans
have not always perceived it, and quick - sighted op
ponents have skilfully availed themselves of the errors
of a few to prejudice the ignorant, not only against
what is really Romish, but what is most truly Catho
lic and most thoroughly English.
This is one advantage that the Puritan or Anti-
Church party have gained. Another consists in
their successful resistance to the restoration of the
ritual of the English Church to its genuine form.
Nothing is more easy, when events have happened
and results are apparent, than to utter wise opinions
on the course which ought to have been pursued ; and
you will hear many persons most sagely blaming the
recent attempt at uniformity in public worship. And
yet at one time there was a very general concurrence
of opinion in its favour. It was felt by men of station
and piety, that far too much laxity had crept in with

10 THE REAL DANGEB OF THE CHURCH.
regard to the rules and ordinances of the Church ; that
if rules there were, we ought to abide by them ; and
that it was an evil example for the clergy to go on
in the constant infringement of their deliberate en
gagements. Many even of those who, in the main,
blamed the new doctrines, as they were termed,
acknowledged that the Tract-writers had done good
service in calling attention to the undoubted rules
of the Church. Men of the most opposite principles,
at one time, seemed to agree in this view ; scarcely
a Bishop's or Archdeacon's charge was published in
which some acknowledgment was not found of the
impropriety of the general disregard of rubrical re
gulations. Who could have anticipated the general
revulsion of public opinion ? Who could have ex
pected that many even of the clergy, when the written
laws and regulations of the Church, and their own
engagements to abide by them, were pointed out,
should refuse to acknowledge the duty ? Who would
have expected that, in the case of those who were
willing and anxious to conform, congregations and
vestries should have combined to prevent them ?
Who would have expected that a Bishop of the Eng
lish Church should have been found to condemn the
strict adherence to her rules, and blame the clergy
for abiding by their engagements? and that the
Chancellor of a Diocese should have publicly recom
mended the churchwardens within his jurisdiction to
resist the clergy who desired to adhere to the laws
by which they were bound ; and that this function
ary's charge should have been spread by post through

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 1 1
the most distant dioceses, and every where instigated
congregations and churchwardens to organised re
sistance ? Lastly, who would have supposed that the
respectable money-getting people of England would
have been so moved from their propriety on questions,
to them at least, of so little moment, as whether the
clergyman should turn to the east or west, or preach
in a black gown or a surplice ?
I do not think such a phenomenon could have been
reasonably expected. Had but the railroad mania
been at its height a few months earlier, or the corn-
law question come sooner into importance, or any
other absorbing subject of temporal interest occupied
the public mind, this strange excitement would proba
bly never have happened ; and the Church would have
been left to pursue her own internal reforms, without
let or hindrance. However, as it has turned out,
surely no blame can possibly attach to those whose
only error was a too sanguine expectation that the
English people would have been found willing to
abide by the laws of the Church of which they are
members. I can never regret the attempt made to restore the
offertory. Those who stood in the front of the battle,
and endeavoured to revive this most Christian and
scriptural usage, surely deserve gratitude rather than
blame. Who can say what might not have been the pre
sent position and prospects of the Church, if only this one
amongst her ordinances had been cheerfully complied
with ? Many eminent Churchmen calculated, and not
without reason, that funds might have been raised to

12 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
build all the churches that were needed in the land, to
increase our ministry, educate our people — in short, to
place our whole Church on a footing adequate to the
wants of our multitudinous population. The best men
in the Church encouraged the hope, the more sanguine
warmly espoused the scheme, even the prudent and mo
derate desired that at least it might be tried. I do not
think that earnest Christians could or ought to have
anticipated the strange spirit of opposition, arising from
the Puritan party, by which this most wholesome and
desirable measure was frustrated. It may, indeed, well
be doubted whether that spirit was not over-rated ;
whether, if the Bishop of Exeter had been supported
by his brother prelates, and the subject fairly repre
sented to the people ; the undoubted rules of their
own Church laid before them, and the impossi
bility of maintaining uniformity of practice without
recurrence to some fixed standard; if the Bishops had
calmly and dispassionately laid these things before the
members of the Church, — it may reasonably be doubted
whether the good sense and right feeling of the coun
try would not have supported them, in a matter of
such obvious propriety as adherence to the written law
of the Church, rather than the fluctuating practice of
popular usage. It was not a mere dogged spirit of
opposition by which the people were moved ; but,
together with this, was an honest, though mistaken,
notion of the duty of resistance to what they believed
to be an innovation upon the customs of their fathers.
They were taught, and many of them believed, that in
resisting the Church's ordinances they were standing

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURGH. 13
Up for the integrity of the Church. Had the rulers of
the Church calmly explained to them the error into
which they had been so artfully led, I see no reason
to doubt that those who from conscientious motives
resisted the restoration of the Church-service might
have been taught to perceive that in so doing they
were but making themselves tools in the hands of
a party whose spirit was very different from that of
the Church of England.
However, the rulers of the Church deemed it pru
dent to evade, or rather to postpone, the crisis. The
publication of the Archbishop's Letter, recommending
that things should remain as they were in the different
churches, has greatly changed the aspect of affairs.
Of course, legally and strictly speaking, the Arch
bishop's Letter can have no cogency whatever. No
clergyman is constrained to obey it. Convocation
alone can alter the formularies of the English Church.
Still, considering that the Archbishop, no doubt, was
aided by the counsel of his brethren, and that no
protest has been made by any of them against it, we
may, perhaps, suppose it to speak the sense of the
English Church, — such, at least, as a synod of the
Bishops, had they been convoked, would have deter
mined : and it seems not unreasonable to infer, that
after such a declaration, an individual clergyman,
however anxious to act up to the laws of the Church,
may feel himself, in foro conscieniioe, absolved from
blame, if he suspend a strict compliance with the
rubric, until he can bring his congregation to receive
.as a privilege what they now reject as a burden. The

14 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
responsibility is thrown, in a great degree, from the
individual clergyman on the Bishops.
Still this view of the case, and the attributing such
virtual authority to the Archbishop's Letter, involves
very serious difficulties. A license to depart from^ the
prescribed ritual establishes the very principle of Non
conformity. We have no longer any fixed rule to go
by : usage, or caprice, or the popular will, are our only
guides. If doubt arise in any parish as to the pro
priety of any portion of the service, the vestry has now
become virtually the referee, instead of the Bishop.
The Bishop's authority, so far as the laity are con
cerned, is defunct. If he cannot rule the interpreta
tion of a rubric or the dress of his clergy, without con
sent of the laity, what authority has he ? I cannot
but think that the injury done to the Church, by
thus tampering with her fixed laws, is very serious in
deed. Some perhaps may view it with less apprehen
sion. They will argue that, practically speaking, the
Church is better than she was. Attention has been
called to usages and doctrines which had been little
thought of; and the service is fully performed in
many more places than it was formerly. All this is
very true ; still the temporary suspension, if it be no
more, of our fixed laws, and the admission of the
principle of Nonconformity into the Church, is a
positive evil, the consequences of which it is difficult
to foresee. And this serious damage has resulted from the
manoeuvres of the Puritans. Skilfully availing them
selves of the evil passions, as well as the honest pre-

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 15
judices, of the people, they have frustrated the attempt
of the Church party to restore her ritual. With
the pretext of maintaining the Church, they have,
for a time at least, taught her children to break her
laws and despise her authority. Under cover of
an assault on Popery, they have inflicted a serious
wound on the Church of England.
But it may be taken as an axiom, that whenever
external ordinances are attacked, the real subject of
dispute is some vital doctrine. No one who has any
knowledge of human affairs believes that the real
contest is about the colour of a vestment or the pos
ture of the minister. The party which has thus suc
ceeded in its attempt upon the ritual, will make use
of its success to attack the vital principles of the
English Church. Nonconformity in ritual is inse
parably joined with heterodoxy in doctrine. Already
has unsound or even heretical doctrine spread with
rapid though stealthy steps ; and if it be not checked,
the present generation will not pass away without see
ing the Church of England, not in externals only, but
in vital doctrine, a very different Church from that
which she is represented in her formularies.
It is this point to which I earnestly desire to
draw public attention; especially that of our rulers,
and of that large body of the clergy who may be called
the conservative party, or vis inertice; and who ap
pear to me little aware of the essential changes which
are gradually creeping over the doctrinal teaching of
our Church. I would beg this party very seriously to
consider the present state of things. It may possibly

16 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
be right, for the sake of peace, to give up some point
of mere outward observance ; though, in truth, peace
is seldom purchased by such concession. But when
the question relates, as I am prepared to shew, to the
vital and fundamental doctrines of the Christian reli
gion, then it is not only pusillanimous but sinful to
allow ourselves to be borne down by clamour, or out
manoeuvred by skilful opposition.
Those who observe the progress of public opinion
will be well aware how insidiously and strangely opi
nions, which at first are scouted as paradoxes, do by
reiteration come to be entertained as allowable, or at
least possible. Till lately, for instance, it would have
been thought a thing incredible, that an English
clergyman should gravely assert that he might hold
Romish doctrine, such as the supremacy of the pope,
purgatory, or transubstantiation, and yet consistently
continue to officiate as a minister of the Enghsh
Church. Yet we know that such an opinion has
been broached and gravely defended. Reasoning a
priori, one would have thought it just as incredible
that any set of English clergymen should seriously
deny the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and yet
continue to officiate in the baptism of infants, instruct
children in the catechism, and prepare them for the
rite of confirmation. The utter incompatibility of
the denial of baptismal regeneration with the pro
fession and practice of an English clergyman, is, I say,
as self-evident a fact as the maintenance of the supre
macy of the pope, or any other Romish doctrine. This
is a point not rightly understood : uninstructed persons

THE UEAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 17
look upon the question of baptisinal regeneration to
be merely one involving an allowable difference of in
terpretation which opposing schools of theology adopt.
But the Baptismal service in our Prayer-book does, in
truth, set forth the doctrine of spiritual regeneration
in baptism in words as positive as can possibly be
used. Words have no meaning in them, if the formu
laries of our Church do not contain the doctrine in
question, and repudiate the contrary.
For the sake of those amongst my readers, if any
there be, who may not be familiar with the subject,
I will set down a few short passages from the Bap
tismal service.
" Dearly beloved," it begins, " forasmuch as all
men are conceived and born in sin, and that our
Saviour Christ saith. None can enter into the king
dom of God except he be regenerate, and born anew
of water and of the Holy Ghost ; I beseech you to call
upon God the Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ,
that, of His bounteous mercy. He will grant to this
child that thing which by nature he cannot have ; that
he may be baptised with water and the Holy Ghost,
and received into Christ's holy Church, and be made
a lively member of the same."
The priest and people then pray on the child's
behalf, " Almighty and everlasting God, who 
didst sanctify water to the mystical washing away of
sin ; we beseech Thee, for Thine infinite mercies, that
Thou wilt mercifully look upon this child, wash him,
and sanctify him with the Holy Ghost."
Again : " We call upon Thee for this infant, that
c

lo THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
he, coming to Thy holy baptism, may receive remis
sion of his sins by spiritual regeneration."
Again : the priest says, " Sanctify this water to
the mystical washing away of sin ; and grant that
this child, now to be baptised therein, may receive the
fulness of Thy grace."
The child is then baptised, and the priest ad
dresses the congregation, " Seeing now, dearly be
loved brethren, that this child is regenerate, and
grafted into the body of Christ's Church, let us give
hearty thanks to Almighty God for these benefits."
[In the office for Private Baptism the words are
even more precise : " Seeing that this child is by
baptism regenerate.''^
Then all kneeling say, " We yield Thee hearty
thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased
Thee to regenerate this child with Thy Holy Spirit"
Often and often as these passages have been
quoted in recent controversy, I transcribe them once
more ; and would appeal to any man of common un
derstanding, from the most unlettered peasant to
the ablest in the land ; or to any jury of twelve
honest men, be they Dissenters or be they Romanists ;
or the first twelve one might meet in the streets of
London, and submit to their judgment, whether it is
possible for a doctrine to be couched in plainer or
more positive words — whether there can be the sha
dow of a doubt that the Church of England holds
the doctrine of baptismal regeneration — whether the
denial of baptismal regeneration be not as clearly con
trary to the doctrine of the Church of England, as

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 19
the maintenance of transubstantiation, or the pope's
supremacy — and whether it is not one of the most
astounding facts in religious controversy, that minis^
ters of the Church of England should, Sunday after
Sunday, use this service, should baptise infants brought
to them, and then call on the congregation to join
with them in thanking God for that it hath pleased
Him to regenerate each child, and yet hold the opinion
either that the child has not been regenerated at all,
or that his regeneration is " hypothetical ! !"
It is beside my argument to enter upon the scrip
tural proof of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
What I maintain is, that it is the undoubted doctrine of
the English Church. There can be no question, how
ever, that it is proved by many more direct and con
vincing texts than any that can be brought forward
against the Romish doctrines concerning purgatory,
pardons, or transubstantiation. These are dangerous
and erroneous opinions, which our Church declares to
be fond things, " vainly invented, and grounded on no
warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the
word of God.'" The denial of the right doctrine of bap
tism is the denial of a doctrine which St. Paul classes
amongst the first "principles of the doctrine of Christ"^
and foundations of our faith — one which the univer
sal Church places amongst the articles of the creed,''
and the acceptance or rejection of which practically
changes the whole character of the Christian religion.
' See Article xxii. ^ Hebrews vi. 1 .
^ " I believe in ... . one baptism for the remission of
sins." — Nicenc Creed,

20 THE REAL D.1NGER OF THE CHURCH.
The whole character, I say, of the Christian re
ligion depends on this primary doctrine. The main
tenance or denial of this doctrine gives practically a
completely different turn to the treatment of a Chris
tian soul. Is the child whom we have to train for
heaven regenerate or unregenerate ? is he a child of
grace, or a child of wrath ? is he in a state of salva
tion, or in a state of condemnation ? If regenerate —
a child of grace, an heir of salvation — then clearly
the chief endeavour of parents, sponsors, and minis
ters, must be directed to keep him what he is ; so that
what he is on the day of his baptism, such he may be,
as to his spiritual state, the next day, and the next. We
must train him onward always in a state of grace ; so
that as the wakening energies dawn, the rising tenden
cies of evil hall be kept under subjection, and every
motion of the Spirit promoted and encouraged. Thus
our whole efforts and prayers must be devoted to keep
the child, by the grace of God, in the "state of salva
tion" in which he was placed at baptism ; so that he may
perform those good works which God hath prepared
for him to walk in, continuing free from the dominion
of sin, and advancing ever in ripeness for the kingdom
of heaven. On the other hand, if the child is unre
generate, — a child of wrath — in a state of condemna
tion, — our endeavours must be directed to rescue him
from this perilous state.
What course does our own Church pursue ? what
does she tell the child of himself? Look only at
the very first words she puts into his mouth — the first
words of the Church Catechism — "What is your name?

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 21
N. or M  Who gave you this name ? My godfathers
and godmothers in my baptism, wherein I was made a
member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of
the kingdom of heaven."
For ministers of the Church to teach these things
to children — to tell them they are members of Christ
and children of God, when they believe them never to
have been really made so — is to be paralleled only by
the mockery of their thanking God that each child-is re
generate, when they altogether disbelieve and deny it.
Again : the rite of confirmation is absolutely
changed in character, if we deny the doctrine of bap
tismal regeneration. In the Church's view, it is the
strengthening and forwarding the child in the path in
which he is already walking — the continuation or en
largement of grace, whereby he may be enabled to
persevere in godliness. " Almighty and everlasting
God" (thus the Bishop prays), "who hast vouchsafed
to regenerate these Thy servants, by water and the
Holy Ghost, and hast given them forgiveness of all
their sins, strengthen ihem, we beseech Thee, O Lord,
with the Holy Ghost, the Comforter ; increase in them
Thy manifold gifts of grace," &c.
The denier of baptismal regeneration, on the other
hand, looks on confirmation in the light of conversion
— a favourable time for the commencement of a reli
gious life ; which, with the true Churchman, was com
menced at the time when, in the sacrament of bap
tism, the heavenly Spirit first lighted like a dove on
the regenerated babe.
Thus, in early life, the whole character of the

22 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
treatment of our children is altogether changed, ac
cordingly as we receive or deny the Church's doctrine
of baptismal regeneration. Nay, even in addressing
the sinner in middle life, or the dying penitent, the
theory of, I might almost say the two religions, is quite
different : the denier of baptismal regeneration treats
him as an unconverted heathen, while the minister
of the Church appeals to him as one who once had
the grace of God, though he has put it from him, once
was a member of Christ, though now a son of perdition,
once a child of God, though now a prodigal. It may
well be doubted whether the greater part of the na
tion's sin, the desperate wickedness of the mass of our
population, and the general worldliness of all classes, may
not be traced to this denial of baptismal regeneration.
No care is taken to train them as members of Christ
and children of God ; the grace given them at baptism
is never cherished or called forth ; their sinful nature
is suffered to rise up and become predominant ; thus
the great vantage-ground of their Christian calling is
abandoned, never, alas, to be regained. They grow up
practically without God in the world ; and if some few
here and there are brought to repentance and saved,
the mass, it is feared, never return from their wallowing
with the swine — they live and die ungodly. Thousands
who once were made members of Christ and children
, of God are thus eternally lost, mainly in consequence
of this great heresy, whereby our country, and even
our Church, is overrun.
The denial of baptismal regeneration is the lead
ing doctrine not only of Dissenters from the Church,

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 23
but of the Evangelical or Puritan party within it ;
and in this they have entirely departed from the doc
trine of the reformers. The reformers, though not
always consistent in their teaching, — as, indeed, it was
impossible that men in a state of transition from one
opinion to another should be — yet one and all held
the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. Besides the
obvious fact of their having drawn up or retained our
present Baptismal service, which is entirely based on
the doctrine, their writings contain such constant
allusion to the same great truth, that it is quite clear
they had no intention of denying the essential princi
ple of the Universal Church.' From this doctrine
of the reformers the modern Evangelicals have en
tirely departed. I have before me a large collection
of tracts and pamphlets, many of them published and
avowedly by persons holding preferment in the Church
of England, in all of which the doctrine of baptismal
regeneration is either denied, or corrupted, or ex
plained away. Some of them call it a Popish doc
trine. The Rev. Carus Wilson, rector of Whittington,
says, "Sentiments have for some time been maintained
and preached, which plainly lay the foundation of any
popish superstition that men can wish to establish.
Baptismal regeneration is one."^ The Rev. Henry
Walter, rector of Haselbury Bevan, writes a pamphlet
' Thanks to the Parker Society, we have ample evidence that the
Reformers of the English Church held very different doctrines on
the Spiritual Grace of Baptism, and the Holy Eucharist, from what
the modern Evangelicals would have us believe.
2 Thoughts on the Times. By the Rev. W. Carus Wilson. P. 5.

24 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH;
in reply to a tract entitled " Baptismal Regeneration a
Doctrine of the Church of England," in which he says
at page 1,' "I continued, during a lamentably too great
portion of my life, to hold and teach the doctrine which
is briefly styled baptismal regeneration." But now
his mind is changed, and he wishes that " whatever
expressions in those portions of our service [?'. e. the
Catechism and Baptismal-service] have the appearance
of upholding a doctrine which our Articles disavow,
and our Homilies condemn, were changed for language
clearly in unison with them, and with the word of
God."^ The wish to alter our Prayer-book is very
general amongst this party. The Rev. James Sutcliffe,
incumbent of Knockholt, in a tract called " A Real
Tract for the Times," says at page 5, " It will be the
object of the following pages to shew, 1st, that the
doctrine of baptismal regeneration is absurd and un-
scriptural." At page 7> he quotes from the Rev.
Melville Home : " Fully convinced that baptism never
was designed to convey regeneration, and has no such
promise, I confidently conclude that no mortal ever
was so regenerated." At page 11 he says, " His" [St.
Paul's] language is utterly irreconcileable with the
notion of baptismal regeneration." At page 15, " no
valid or conclusive argument can ever be drawn from
Scripture in favour of baptismal regeneration." Thus
some deny the doctrine in toto. Others admit the
' A Letter in Defence of those Ministers of the Church of Eng
land who know that not all the baptised, but " as many as are led
by the Spirit of God, arc the sons of God."
2 Ibid. p. 40.

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 25
doctrine of baptismal regeneration in its full spiritual
sense, but limit its efficacy to such children as are
" elect ;" i. e. those baptised infants whom God's pre
destination marks out for salvation. And yet these
persons thank God in the case of every infant, that
He has been pleased in His great mercy to regenerate
him. Others admit that every child is regenerate,
but assert that regeneration is not a spiritual gift, but
merely an external change of position. They deny
that any spiritual grace is given ; and yet they pray to
God that the child " may be born again [«. e. regener
ated] of water and the Holy Ghost;" that He will wash
him and sanctify him with the Holy Ghost; and that
the infant, coming to holy baptism, may receive remis
sion of his sins by spiritual regeneration, may receive
the fulness of God's grace, — and afterwards teach the
child, in the catechism, that he is made in baptism a
member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of
the kingdom of heaven. Some of these writers main
tain that the child is only "hypothetically" regenerate;
others that the "announcement of regeneration in the
Baptismal service is an official or charitable conclu
sion ! ! " Alas for the shifts to which controversialists
are put when they have resolved to set at nought a
doctrine which they dislike, and depart from the
simple word of truth. The most straightforward
person I have met with is the Rev. Octavius Piers,
vicar of Preston, Dorset. In a "Dialogue on Baptis
mal Regeneration," the following conversation occurs:
" Curate. That there are differences of opinion on
the subject is most true, John; but that our Church

26 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
inculcates the doctrine of regeneration in baptism ap
pears to me so clear, that I cannot conceive how any
person, who has attentively considered her services,
can have a moment's doubt on the subject 
John. But, sir, I think I have heard yourself say,
that it is a dangerous and unscriptural doctrine, and
calculated to lead men blindfold to ruin.
Curate. Possibly, John, you might have heard me
say so; for 1 do consider it a most dangerous and
unscriptural doctrine !"
I have given the above extracts as specimens only
of the teaching of the Evangelical or Puritan party,
as set forth in the tracts which are poured from the
press, as well as in their official organs, such as the
Record, and others of the same class. The same lan
guage is heard continually in the pulpit — the dispa
ragement of the grace of the sacraments, and specially
that of baptism, is a favourite topic. Some, who are
more consistent than their brethren, have refused to
use those portions of the Baptismal service in which
regeneration is asserted or implied ; and have taken
upon themselves to baptise infants with a mutilated
form not recognised in our Church.
Now I desire most solemnly to appeal, not only to
the members of the Church of England in general,
but more especially to our rulers, who have to act as
well as to judge, whether such mutilation of our ser
vices and corruption of the Church's doctrine is to
be tolerated ; whether it is possible that the Church
can go on much longer with such a mass of heresy
within it ? I know the common feeling is, that High-

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 27
Churchmen and Evangelicals are two schools or par
ties in the Church, between whom the peace is to be
kept as long as possible. That such things as parties
or schools must exist is obvious : no man or body of
men, probably, is capable of grasping and teaching
the whole truth in its exact proportions. Some will
dwell more on one view of religion, and some on an
other. Some will most frequently preach justification
by faith, and other doctrines which are called evan
gelical ; and some will dwell on good works, sacra
mental grace, and what are commonly called Church-
doctrines. All this is inevitable, and allowable. But
such is not the point at issue : the question now is
with regard to the denial of a vital doctrine — a doc
trine of the Bible — a doctrine of the Church — of the
Church of all ages, as well as of our own particular
branch — a doctrine of our own reformers — a doc
trine which forms the commencement and basis of the
Christian life. It is not the mere suppression of the
doctrine, or reserve in propounding it ; but the flat
denial, and persevering inculcation of the contrary.
The denial and extinction of the doctrine has come
to be the most prominent feature of Evangelical
teaching. The sound Churchman is obliged per
force to enter the lists in its defence. If the main
tenance of baptismal regeneration be orthodox, the
denier must be heretical, or at least the setter-forth of
erroneous and strange doctrines. The question is come
to a direct issue : the Church cannot contain both
doctrines; the advocates of one or other must give way.
It may be thought by some unadvisable to put

28 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
forward in so broad a light the differences which
exist in the Church of England — it may be called a
stirring up of strife and agitation. What our Church
most wants, as some maintain, is peace, the suppres
sion of irritating topics, outward harmony at least,
if not inward unanimity. And some whom the writer
most respects may think, that if this pamphlet has
any effect, it will only be to cause additional bitter
ness and animosity.
All this I have well considered ; and most heartily
do I wish that God would give us peace ; most ear
nestly would I join in deprecating that party-bitter
ness which dwells on matters of trifling importance,
and magnifies them into occasions of perpetual strife ;
most willingly would I sacrifice all mere personal pre
dilections for the promotion of harmony. It is only
from the deep conviction that it is a matter of the
most urgent importance — that nothing less than a
fatal heresy has sprung up amongst us, and is making
such stealthy yet rapid advances, that the character
of the Church is becoming seriously compromised, and
that if the advances of the Puritan party be not
speedily checked, it will ere long have established
such an influence as to defy control — it is only from a
deep impression that a very great and rapidly growing
danger has come upon the Church in this land, that
I venture thus to appeal to those who may have the
power to check it. At present, as it appears to me,
the evil is just manageable ; but let it proceed much
farther unchecked, and it will have become too firmly
established to be rooted out.

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 29
Such an assertion requires to be supported by proof;
and I proceed to offer such evidences of the encroach
ments and dangerous influence of modern Puritanism,
as I trust may convince those who have the power to re
sist and control it, that the time for exertion has arrived.
The first instance of the activity and influence
of the Puritans which I shall bring forward is one
which has already been adverted to, namely, their
successful resistance to the restoration of the genuine
Service of the Church. There can be no doubt that
uniformity is, in the abstract, preferable to noncon
formity ; that it would be much better for the clergy
to perform the service in the manner in which they
have solemnly promised to do, than to go on con
tinually breaking the engagements of their ordination,
even though in a manner forced to do so. As little can
it be denied that the Puritan faction has been the
primary cause of the continuation of this great scandal
in the Ohurch. When the Bishop of London pub
lished his Charge, in which he required the clergy
in his diocese to conform to the rubrics, the first
symptom of opposition was a sort of counter-charge
published in the Record newspaper. Next appeared a
remonstrance from the Islington clergy, on whom still
rests the Evangelical spirit of their former rector, the
present Bishop of Calcutta. Soon after, Mr. Chan
cellor Raikes, another Evangelical leader, put forth
his address, already alluded to, which was dispersed
over the country, instigating vestries and church
wardens to resist those clergy who acted up to the

30 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
requirements of the Church. But it is unnecessary
to multiply proofs that the Evangelical party were the-
prime movers in this resistance to the laws of the
Church ; because they themselves, I suppose, will
rather claim it as an honour and a triumph, than
cast it from them as a reproach. Not that they would
have gained their point vrithout calling in to their
help a most dangerous ally. It was the spirit of
the world that enabled them to subdue the Church.
They have to thank the Times and Quarterly Review
for their successful opposition to their Bishops. It
must be, one would think, with some misgivings that
they find themselves supported by such allies. But
unquestionably this union with the powers of the
world gives them a formidable influence, and that is
the point I wish to prove. They have acquired a sort
of favour and popularity with the worldly and irreli
gious, which they did not before possess, as opponents
of an encroaching priesthood, and defenders of the na
tion from ecclesiastical tyranny. Church views are now
associated in the minds of the people with all sorts
of inconvenient innovations, as begging-boxes, and five
minutes' longer service ; and Evangelicalism with free
dom from these monstrous abuses. There can be no
doubt that this alliance with the world, in proportion
as it has impaired the religious character of Evan
gelicalism, has increased its political or rather social
power. And in this respect it is becoming more and
more identified with the Puritanism of two centuries
back. But there are other methods, not sufficiently ad-

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 31
verted to, in which the Evangelical party have greatly
added to their weight and importance.
When Mr. Simeon first set on foot his project of
buying up Church livings, and placing the patronage
in the hands of trustees, with power of self-election,
so as to perpetuate the preaching of his own peculiar
views, the project was looked upon as insignificant.
No one dreamed that the character of the Church
of England could be so seriously affected by such an
affair of pounds, shillings, and pence. The result,
however, has fully proved the worldly wisdom of the
projector. Many very important places have already
fallen under the patronage and management of Mr.
Simeon's trustees ; and by the judicious appointment
of able, zealous, and unscrupulous partisans, a sensible
effect has been made on the general character of
the Church. When the living of Bath fell into
their hands, every curate in the dependant chapels,
whose doctrines were not those of the Evangelical
party, was at once removed, and Bath has since been
a hotbed of Puritanism. Clifton is likely soon to
suffer the same fate. The greater part of Bristol is
similarly circumstanced. The case of Cheltenham is
notorious. Derby, Beverley, and many other places
might be named, which, unless Divine Providence
open some means of escape, are likely to remain for
generations under the same influence, and to be the
centres, in their respective districts, of a system of doc
trine which we have shewn to be essentially distinct
from that of the English Church. No reliance, I am
persuaded, can be placed on the expectations of those

32 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
who believe that the opinions of the trustees them
selves are likely to change, or that their nominees
may not always preach the same doctrine. Instances
may now and then occur, as they have already.
Several of Mr. Simeon's nominees have joined more or
less in the recent revival of Church principles. But
this is not again to be expected : the trustees will take
better care in future whom they appoint ; and the
scheme is concocted with such worldly skill, that,
humanly speaking, these important places must con
tinue the harbour of Puritan doctrine, unless our
rulers take some decided measures to check the eril.'
But the mischief is not confined to those places
which are under the patronage of Mr. Simeon's trus
tees, or other similar bodies ; for several others, though
not so extensive, I believe, exist. It is creeping on
with accelerated encroachment over every part of
the land. Recent acts of parliament have given
' This pernicious system is spreading even to India. Bishop
Wilson (of Calcutta) has put forth a plan by which it is arranged
that, durinf his lifetime, he shall have the appointment of all the
canons of the cathedral, but that after hi? death they shall them
selves fill up the vacancies that occur in their body — thus depriving
his successors of the patronage which he retains himself, and securing
the perpetuation of his own opinions, which are strongly Evangelical.
And this in an institution partly founded by the funds of the Society
for the Propagation of the Gospel. It is much to be hoped that this
arrangement may not be carried into effect. For though the Bishop
himself is a liberal contributor, the Society may surely object with
justice to such an appropriation of its funds. There are, indeed,
cathedrals in England in which the canons fill up the vacant stalls,
but then they are obliged to make their selection from the body of
the prebendaries, who have been nominated by the Bishop.

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 33
facilities for building churches, the patronage of
which shall be so vested, that, by a system of self-
election, as in the case of Mr. Simeon's trustees, the
same principles shall be perpetuated. Of this act the
Evangelicals have not been slow to avail themselves, —
if, indeed, it was not procured through their influence.
A populous district is in want of a church, — a sub
scription is raised from benevolent persons to supply
the want, — five trustees of Evangelical views are ap
pointed as patrons, with power of filling up vacancies
in their own body ; and so the Gospel (according to
Calvin) is established there for ever. Sometimes it is
managed by taking a district out of an old parish; but
where this is not practicable, then, as I have known in
several cases, a church is built in an adjoining parish,
within a few yards of that from which the congrega
tion is to be drawn ; and an orthodox clergyman has
the mortification of finding a rival preacher drawing
off his people, and teaching them doctrines on many
points diametrically contradictory to his own.
Thus, in one way or another. Evangelicalism or
Puritanism has established itself in a very large num
ber of churches in every part of England ; especi
ally in great and important towns, as Liverpool,
Manchester, and Birmingham, besides those places
already mentioned as being actually in the hands of
trustees for the permanent maintenance of unsound
doctrine. Nor is the evil confined to the parishes
over which Evangelical ministers are appointed. The
adjoining parishes are sure to be tainted, more or less,
with the same doctrine. Evangelical party-schemes,
D

34 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
such as the Pastoral- Aid and Bible Associations, soon
begin to ramify and spread their roots, in opposition
to the wishes of the more sound among the parochial
clergy ; and so religious controversy, discontents, and
heart-burnings are every where engendered.
And when we consider the great influence exer
cised by the large towns over the public mind, the
facility which exists in them for " making demonstra
tions," the popularity of Puritan doctrine with the
ignorant and disaffected, the zeal and ability of many
of its leading advocates, the unscrupulous perseverance
with which they promulgate their views, — there is
surely ground for very serious alarm, lest, if it con
tinue to spread as it has done in the present genera
tion, it may ere long establish such a power as may
be too strong to resist, and, in fact, come to be again
predominant, and have its own way in the Church of
England. Another mode in which the Evangelicals are ra
pidly extending their influence is, by the foundation
of schools, especially training-schools for teachers, in
places where they have a permanent influence. Chel
tenham is, as we have seen, permanently in the hands
of Mr. Simeon's trustees. Here, so long as the trust
exists, we shall see probably, as we do at present,
an able and influential partisan of Evangelicalism.
Here, therefore, was a fit place for the establishment
of an Evangelical college. The same has been at
tempted, though with what success I know not, at
Leamington. At Brighton, and at Casterton in Lan
cashire, there are schools for governesses under the

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.

85

same influence. In some places parochial schools
are placed under trustees, so as to perpetuate Evan
gelical teaching in a parish, even should an orthodox
clergyman be appointed. No means, in short, are
left unemployed whereby these peculiar opinions and
modes of acting may be gradually established and
perpetuated. But why blame persons for their zeal in promoting
what they believe to be the cause of truth ? Nay, I
admire their zeal and perseverance, and commend
the wisdom which they shew in their generation.
What I complain of is, that their zeal is exerted in
the promulgation of a radically erroneous system, — a
system which, if the doctrine of the Church of Eng
land is true, must be very little short of heresy : and
that the rulers of our Church, who, with one or two
exceptions, regard the Puritan doctrine with the same
disapproval, do not take measures to check its fatal
advance, but look upon it as a sort of established evil,
against which it is not their business to contend.
Surely, if the Church again falls, those who wilfully
shut their eyes to the danger, while it may yet be
controlled, will have much to answer for.
Perhaps the most formidable of all the instru
ments which the modern Puritans know so well, by
constant practice, how to use, is the society-system ; by
which extensive funds are obtained from benevolent
persons, and placed at the disposal of leaders of the
Puritan party, who make use of them for their own
party-purposes. Take, for instance, the Pastoral- Aid
Society. A very general want is felt for the employ--

36 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
ment of a greater number of curates, especially in the
more populous places. Benevolent persons are called
on to subscribe for the purpose of supplying them ;
a considerable sum is quickly raised. Meanwhile a
select committee is appointed, who, under the plea of
securing the appointment of proper persons, inquire
privately into the character of each applicant; and
unless a guarantee is given that he is one who
preaches Puritan doctrine, no grant is made. Thus
it is managed that the appointments shall be all of
a party character ; but even this precaution does not
suffice. The committee have constituted themselves
perpetual patrons, with more than Episcopal powers.
In other cases, when a patron has nominated an incum
bent, and presented him to the Bishop, and the Bishop
has inducted him to a parish, the patron's right and
influence ceases ; he can no longer interfere with the
clergyman whom he has appointed. But this is too
much liberty for the Evangelical committee to allow.
A sharp eye is kept over their curates, and if they are
caught tripping, i. e. teaching any thing but Puritan
doctrine, their salary is liable to be stopped. So that
we have in our Church an irresponsible committee of
self-appointed persons, not only nominating curates,
but virtually dictating the doctrine they are to preach.
How extensively the influence of this one society
operates may be shewn by the following extracts
from their own report : " The society renders as
sistance to 253 incumbents, having under their pas
toral charge nearly two millions of souls, being one-
eighth part of the entire population of England and

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 37
Wales." Thus the sort of doctrine preached to two
millions of souls is dictated by this self-constituted
Puritan committee.
Perhaps it may be asked. Is there not another
Society, set up by the High-Church party, called the
Additional Curates' Society, which does just the same,
only on the High- Church side ? No, it is not so ;
and I beg particular attention to this point from those
who are in the habit of thinking that these religious
societies are but representatives or organs, some of one
party, some of another. The Pastoral-Aid Society,
indeed, is so in the strictest sense. It is a society
for the appointment of Evangelical curates — and
this avowedly, for it does not pretend to conceal the
matter. But the Additional Curates' Fund is in no
sense the organ of a party, but of the English Church.
It is simply a fund for the payment, not for the
appointment, of additional curates. All that is re
quired from the applicant for aid is, a statement of
the number of his parishioners, and proof that aid
is really required, and the money is voted without any
reference to doctrine. It is left entirely to the incum
bent and the Bishop of the diocese (who, of course,
are the proper persons) to choose a curate whose
qualifications they judge to be competent. There
cannot be a plainer proof than that drawn from
the different practice of these two societies, that the
Evangelicals are a schismatical body, distinct in feel
ing and practice from the Church.
The system of schismatical interference, instanced
in the Pastoral- Aid Society, is practised also in the

38 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
Church Missionary Society, On the plea of collecting
subscriptions, to spread the doctrine of the Church
of England amongst the heathen, they not only
require the missionaries whom they send out to sa
tisfy a private committee as to the Evangelicalism of
their doctrine, but also retain the power of removing
them afterwards, and that in defiance of the wishes
of the colonial Bishop in whose diocese they may be
placed. And now a Church -building Society is esta
blished on the same principles, in opposition to the
remonstrances and in spite of the refusal of, I believe,
every one of the Bishops of the Church to co-operate
with them. But it is needless to enumerate more
instances. The simple truth is, a power has grown
up which utterly disregards, and in some instances
coerces, the authority of our Bishops. It is in vain to
seek to conciliate it by concession. It must be firmly
met, and that soon, unless it is to be allowed to domi
neer over the whole Church: and every year that
is suffered to elapse before it is put down, so much
the more likely will it be to establish itself perma
nently and carry all before it.
But the danger of Puritanism is shewn, not only
in its own advance and enlargement, but in its de
structive tendency, — its power of overturning or un
dermining what opposes it. This power of mischief
is evidenced in the successful attacks which it is
continually making on our most time-honoured and
valuable institutions. The venerable Society for the
Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts was

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 39
established, as needs scarcely be said, more than a
century ago, and has been the means of supplying
our numerous colonies with missionaries and parochial
clergy, which the government of the country have
neglected to afford. If any society is free from party
bias, it is this. It is supported by all the Bishops
on the English bench, and most of them take a warm
interest in its welfare. The first aggression of the
Evangelicals was the establishment of a rival society,
called the Church Missionary Society, under the pre
text of sending missionaries to the heathen (though
it is well known that this is a branch of the under
taking of the Society for the Propagation of the Gos
pel), but with the real intention of sending out per
sons imbued with Puritan principles, over whom
the London committee may exercise control. Not
content with this, however, they have in various ways
raised so great a prejudice against the Propagation
Society, that its exertions to increase its funds have
been much counteracted, its capital is all expended,
and there is reason to fear that the salaries of the colo
nial clergy must be withdrawn or much diminished.
This is naturally a great grief and embarrassment to
our Bishops, as it is to all good men ; and in order
to remedy the evil, they have unanimously published
letters expressing their high approval of the society.
Still the attacks of the Evangelical party go on : se
veral letters and leading articles have lately appeared
in the Record, recommending the withdrawal of sub
scriptions. In the Record of December 24, 1845, it
is said : " We think it a grave question indeed, for

40 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
men who know the true gospel of the kingdom, to
give up their substance to support that which is
wholly antagonist to that gospel, and of the removal
of which there is no prospect, nor even the desire of
it manifested by the society." " What we object to
is, that men who believe in their hearts that such
proceedings as those in the dioceses of Calcutta and
Toronto, though approved of by the society, ' fatally
endanger men's souls,' should contribute to the sup
port of the society." In the paper of January 8, they
return to the charge. " Our only object," say they,
"has been to prevent our readers from giving their
money, as they thought, to the propagation of the
gospel, while, to a considerable extent, it was not
that which they consider the gospel that was propa
gated." Of course, no one can object to the reason
ableness of this position in the abstract, that every
person should contribute his funds to spread what
he believes to be the true gospel. What I desire to
prove is, that the Evangelical party are at issue
with the rest of the Church, as to. what the true
gospel really is.
Here is one of the most ancient and venerable
societies of the English Church, identified, in fact,
with it, approved, supported, and cherished by every
one of om- Bishops, as the means of spreading the
gospel in foreign parts ; yet so attacked and vilified
by a party in the English Church, calling themselves
Evangelicals, that its means of usefulness are se
riously impeded, its increasing efforts checked, and
the good work in which it has been so long employed

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 41
in danger of being suspended. Can there be a greater
instance of unmitigated mischievousness ?
The same mischievous influence is extensively in
truding into another of our old Church societies, the
Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. The
constitution of this society is unfortunately peculiarly
suitable to the tactics of the Evangelical party ; as
the monthly meetings, which are open to all subscri
bers of a guinea, furnish an arena for speechifying and
discussion ; so that, even when in a decided minority,
persons of this school have found it conducive to their
ends to make a constant agitation. Lately, however,
owing to the temporising policy of the members of the
committee, who consist chiefly of London clergy, and
the reaction against Romanisers, the Evangelical in
fluence has begun to preponderate, and bids fair to
obtain the ascendant in the society, and convert what
from its beginning has been one of the most orthodox
institutions of the Church into an engine of Puritan
ism. One rule of the society is, that all books and
tracts proposed for the society's catalogue shall be
submitted to five Episcopal referees ; amongst them
is the Bishop of Chester, who, I suppose, far from
being offended, will consider it rather an honour to
be designated as one of the heads of the Evangelical
party. Consistently with this position, his lordship
pretty freely exercises his power of placing his veto
on such tracts and books, or such portions of them, as,
according to his judgment, do not harmonise with
evangelical truth, or rather, the Calvinistic tenets
which he espouses. Those Episcopal referees who

42 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
are of a different school have the power of exclud
ing books of a Low- Church tendency. The obvious
effect of this system is, to exclude from the society's
catalogue all books of a positive doctrinal character,
and admit only such as are vague and neutral. But
as it is generally supposed that the Bishop of Chester
is more strict in his revision than the other referees,
the consequence is, that gradually a set of books and
tracts more or less tinged with Calvinism has been
added to the society's catalogue, and those of decided
High-Church principles are denied admission. What is
the remedy ? Obviously, not to re-elect the Bishop of
Chester on the committee. But this would be looked
on by the chief managers of the society as highly
uncourteous, and exhibiting party-spirit; so that his
lordship remains, and probably will remain, until a
crisis comes, a principal authority for reference in
a society which was founded by Dean Stanhope, Nel
son, and Melmoth, and has been the honoured instru
ment, for more than a century past, of the old ortho
dox portion of the English Church !
Another very remarkable fact has been lately
brought to light as regards the operations of this
society, no less than the corruption and mutilation of
the old standard books, which have been from the
beginning on the society's list. The country sub
scribers have been astounded by the publication of
an appeal, from which it appears that the books of
the society, which they had been circulating, in perfect
confidence, as genuine works, have been materially
tampered with and altered ; and that some of the most

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 43
revered prelates and divines of the English Church
have positively had language put into their mouths of
a very different tone and tendency from that which
they really spoke. They have, in fact, been made
to bear unconscious testimony to the popular theology
of the nineteenth century. Many of the alterations
were, I believe, made carelessly and thoughtlessly by
some official persons of the society, who were trusted
by the committee to revise new editions, and imagined
probably that our old divines used language without
any definite meaning, which might with propriety be
translated into more modern phraseology. Inadver
tence, and inability to enter into the spirit of the
vFritings of such men as Wilson and Ken, rather
than a wilful intention of tampering with them, may
in some cases have been the original cause of the
mutilation. But what is so astounding is, that when
these mutilations and corruptions were pointed out,
a party should be found who had the effrontery to
justify them. It is difficult to conceive a more
striking proof of the unscrupulous encroachment of
the Puritan party, and the extreme depravation of
principle in men who could employ or defend such
means of propagating their own peculiar views. One
cannot enter into the minds of men professing strict
Gospel principles, who can declaim against Jesuitism,
and priestcraft, and pious fraud in the Church of
Rome, and yet resort to the expedient of falsifying
the writings of our old English divines, to make them
speak Evangelical language. And much as I respect
many of the members of the standing committee, I

44 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
cannot but regret that they should so far side with the
Evangelicals as to stifle the inquiry; so that, from
that time to the present, ovring to their connivance,
no restoration has been made of the mutilated books,
with the exception of placing Bishop Ken's Manual
in its genuine form by the side of the mutilated copy
which had usurped its place ; so that the members
of the society may now choose between the two. The
clergy of the old High- Church school may depend
upon it that they are mistaking the true line of policy,
as well as principle, if, in their dread of Tractarian-
ism, they thus play into the hands of the Evangelicals.
A crisis must come soon, and if the Anglican party
should, in disgust and despair, withdraw in a body
from this and other societies, the present managers
of them will be left a helpless minority, in the hands
of that most unscrupulous and exclusive of all parties,
the modern Puritans. Meanwhile, nothing could be
more injudicious than for Anglicans to secede one
by one from these societies, however objectionable
some of their proceedings may be. The Society for
Promoting Christian Knowledge is still essentially
sound, its name is influential, its ramifications are
universal; it is identified with the English Church.
The tracts more recently published are not so bad;
there are improving symptoms. There could not be
a more severe blow to the Church than for the
Anglicans, in a fit of disgust, to suffer this society
to fall into the hands of the Puritan party — as it
must do if they withdraw.
The destructive influence of the Puritan party

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 45
is farther exemplified in their recent attack upon
another institution, which perhaps is doing more
good in the Church at present than any other which
can be named — I mean, the National Society for the
Education of the Poor. This is an institution which,
more than any other, is under the direct management
of the Bishops. Its constitution does not admit of
the same disorderly democratic assemblage as the
last-mentioned society. It pursues its useful course
quietly but effectually, in spreading through the
rising generation the principles of the Church. This
will account for the violent attacks lately made upon
it by the organ of the Puritans. The Record has
lately published "ten separate reports" respecting
that society, and has subsequently reprinted them
for circulation. " The National Society," says the
second of these reports, "has long been known as
High-Church in its principles, and steadily opposed
to every thing approaching to what is called Evan
gelical influence. Of late years, however, it seems
to have advanced a step farther. Parties more or
less favourable to Tractarian sentiments have ob
tained a footing in the Society ; and while it has
been to a certain extent relieved from the soporific
influence of 'the High and Dry,' it seems to be, in
the quarters to which we allude, menaced by invasion
from men whose ambition it is to send into our
villages and hamlets, as well as into our mining and
manufacturing districts, schoolmasters initiated in all
the ecclesiastical millinery and ceremonies of Pusey-
ism." — Pp. 10, 11. The principa^l objections urged

46 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
against the National Society are the Church-services
at Christ-church, Westminster, and St. Mark's,
Chelsea, which are attended by training pupils of
the National Society, and are conducted in much
the same way as at our cathedrals, and strictly accord
ing to the Book of Common Prayer. But in this,
as in most other cases, though some external ordi
nance is made the object of attack, the real grievance
is, that the doctrines of the Church are faithfully
taught. In proof of this assertion, I extract another
passage from page 67 of the same publication : " The
following letters," says the editor, "are deserving of
attention, as fully corroborating our statements, and
conveying valuable information : —
" To the Editor of the Record.
" Sir, " It has been quite a struggle with me,
whether it would be any use to the cause of truth
for me to bear my humble testimony to the important
facts you are disclosing to the public, per the Record,
respecting the unscriptural instruction given at St.
Mark's, Chelsea, and at Westminster Training In
stitution. " At length I felt constrained to write  The
principal cause of my trouble was the continual incul
cation on masters and children of the soul-deluding
doctrine of baptismal regeneration 
" I beg to remain, respectfully,
" Your obedient servant,
" Oct. 17, 1845.  "

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 47
Now, it may be thought of very little importance
what may be the views of this writer ; but, in truth,
the real sentiments of the Evangelicals are best
learned from subordinates of their school, and from
their anonymous tracts and publications. Evangeli
cals of any station in the Church would not commit
themselves to such a statement as that baptismal
regeneration is a " soul-deluding doctrine " — at least,
not without some reservation or loop-hole by which to
creep out, if taxed with holding doctrine directly con
trary to that of the Church of which they are minis
ters. But such a passage as that just quoted, printed
with approval by the leading organ of the Evangelical
party, and used as an instrument of attack upon an
important Church society, is not without its value,
as shewing not only the extreme bitterness, but also
the undisguised heresy, of the party by which our
most valued institutions are thus in danger of being
destroyed. For let us be assured, that the same party
which has already so much interfered with the ex
pansion of the Society for Propagating the Gospel,
has determined to exert all its influence against the
National Society, which the Church has hitherto so
effectually used for the education of the people.
" We do not intend," says the writer of the Record,
" to quit the subject ; but meanwhile we shall ask,
is it not the duty of Christians to consider whether
another institution might not be formed, from which
Puseyism as to rites and ceremonies, and Popery as
to doctrine, might not be banished ; in which teachers
might be trained in the true faith of the reformed Pro-

48

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.

testant Church of England, without being taught that
the sacraments are the true way of salvation, and that
duties and obedience are to take the place of that
righteousness which is received by the hand of faith,
and under cover of which alone the believer shall be
enabled to sit down at the marriage-supper of the
Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." —
(P. 36.)
Similar attacks have appeared in the Record upon
the Incorporated Society for Building Churches ; but
these I need not take the trouble to reprint.
The Evangelicals may at once retort, "Why
should not we oppose those societies in which we
believe unsound doctrines to be taught, and support
those which spread what we believe to be evangelical
truth?" I reply — I have nothing to say against the
conscientiousness of the Evangelicals, or the purity
of their motives, in thus attacking the old Church
Societies. I do not expect to make a single convert
from their ranks ; that is not the object of my
writing. My arguments are addressed to the Church
generally, and more especially to those who bear rule
and authority in it. I wish to call attention to the
fact, that there is within the pale of the Church a
body of men professing to belong to it, who neverthe
less hold doctrines diametrically opposed to the plain
language of our formularies ; and, in their zeal for the
maintenance of their mistaken views, are, by means
direct and indirect, labouring to their utmost tp
undermine and subvert those institutions to which
you, the Bishops of the Churchv all of you, or with one

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 49
X)Y two exceptions, take a warm interest, and have
been accustomed to make use of as the best instru
ments, under present circumstances, for the edifi
cation and extension of the Church. In the place
of these old-established societies, they are forming
others, in spite of your remonstrances, in which your
authority is set at nought, and your functions
usurped. Under cover of the national prejudice
against Popery, which recent circumstances, not
without reason, have re-awakened, this zealous but
mistaken party are increasing their influence to an
alarming extent, and by methods the most question
able. A popular cry is fostered against the positive
ordinances of our Church — her undoubted doctrines
are, in a most barefaced manner, denied- — her old
divines mutilated and corrupted — ^her ancient insti
tutions undermined, or changed in character ; — and
this system is gaining ground, especially in our
populous and important cities, in such a manner as
to have become a formidable power in the Church.
What I hope to do is, to draw the timely attention of
those who have power and authority to the existing
state of things, which appears, in many respects, very
much the same as that which existed in this country
previously to the breaking out of the Puritan rebellion.
There was the same dislike of established ordinances,
the same schismatical temper, the same running after
popular preachers, the same slovenliness of Church
service, disputes about vestments, disparagement of
sacraments, the same calumnies cast abroad ; and even
in the mode of proceeding a remarkable similarity, as.

50 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH;
especially, in the buying up of Church preferment, for
the purpose of establishing partisan preachers in po
pulous and important places. This last device was
mainly instrumental in corrupting the minds of the
people of our towns in the 17th century, and is
making rapid strides in the same direction now. At
the same time, there are certain dissimilarities between
the two periods, which considerably remove the dif
ficulty of dealing with the evil. First of all, there is
the safety-valve of Dissent, by which the schismatical
body within the Church will depart if they find their
proceedings checked ; and next, there is this great
advantage, that the two parties within the Church are
not, as they were then, mixed up and blended with
political parties in the State. Parliament does not
now support the Puritan preachers ; it has other work
to think of. The Sovereign does not identify herself
with the opposite party. The High-Church is not
backed by the Star- Chamber, or Court of High Com
mission, and made the instrument of taking cognisance
of offences partly religious, partly political. There
are plenty of Prynnes, Bastwicks, and Burtons ; but
they cannot appeal to public commiseration against
the severity of the law. So, on the other hand, there
may be Montagues and Mainwarings ; but parliament
does not constitute itself judge of their doctrine, and
punish a High-Church sermon with fine and impri
sonment. Happily for the Church, she is not now,
as formerly, mixed up with discussions in the state.
Her dissensions and their remedy are mainly within
her own bosom.

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 51
And what are the remedies which are applicable
to the present evils of the Church ? The principal
eril is, the existence within the ministry of a body of
active intriguing men, who are Dissenters at heart,
and have no fellow-feeling with their brethren in the
Church ; who dislike and impede our services, deny
our fundamental doctrines, assail and undermine our
ancient institutions. Such persons ought not to have
the power of mischief which they possess. " Oh, that
our spiritual rulers could be brought to feel that it is
their solemn and bounden duty to expel these tainted
sheep, and this instantly, from the pale of our com
munion !" Such is the fervent wish of the Record,
in speaking of the Tractarians. I would not adopt
either the bitterness or exclusiveness of this appeal,
but rather apply to the Dissenters within our Church
the more sober and measured language which the
Protestant Association has recently addressed to the
Archbishops and Bishops, with reference to the
Romanising party, " Most desirable it is, for the
best interests of the Church, that the whole influence
of your lordships' character and authority should be
exercised to impress upon the minds of the clergy, and
all who are preparing for the sacred office of the
ministry, what common sense and honesty require in
this matter. We feel called upon by the principles
on which the Protestant Association was founded,
humbly, yet openly, to submit to your lordships this
expression of our earnest desire, that the Bishops and
pastors of our Church should perseveringly exert
themselves to maintain and diffuse amongst every

52 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
portion of the clergy, a high and holy standard of
conscientiousness, integrity, and faithfulness, both in
taking upon themselves and fulfilling their ordination-
vows and engagements ; and to hold up to general
detestation all Jesuitical reservation and evasion in
regard to an office so saci-ed, and pledges so solemn
and important."
Yes : let this strict discipline be applied, as the
association demands, to " every portion of the clergy,"
and to all candidates for ordination, and there would
be no just reason either for alarm or complaint. But
there is a prevailing impression, and not without ap
parent cause, that our rulers are unduly partial in
this matter ; there is a deep feeling of dissatisfaction
in regard to the one-sided justice that is administered.
Men who once or twice in their lives sign the articles
in a non-natural sense are stigmatised as disinge
nuous, and pointed at as Jesuits ; while those who,
week after week, administer the sacrament of holy
baptism and teach the catechism in a non-natural
sense remain unblamed. If any preach the doctrine
of purgatory or transubstantiation, they are quickly
called to account ; and no Anglican will deny that
they ought to be so : what we complain of is, that
others are allowed to deny the doctrine of baptismal
regeneration, and other undoubted doctrines of the
English Church, with perfect impunity. This it is
which appears to us so inconsistent and unjust. If
a clergyman of the Church of England associates
with Romish priests, or pays a visit to a Popish col
lege, he is denounced as a Romaniser ; but others join

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH, 53
themselves to an "Evangelical alliance," consisting of
all denominations of Dissenting teachers, without let
or hindrance. Bishops and their chaplains are careful
to detect and exclude from the ministry candidates of
Romanising views, but take little or no heed of such
as hold Dissenting doctrines.
But even this is not a fuU statement of the par
tiality complained of. This discouragement of the
rulers of the Church is not confined to Romanisers
only, but is extended to those who most strictly hold
the doctrines of the English Church ; while, on the
other hand, those who deny her doctrines and debase
her services are comparatively countenanced, or cer
tainly not interfered with. A strict Anglican, who
has not the smallest wish to join the Church of
Rome, meets with opposition, or at least finds no
sjrmpathy ; while those who are plotting against
their own Church, and spreading heterodox doc
trine through the land, are suffered to pursue their
schemes unmolested. By this apparent partiality,
many excellent men are much disheartened. Some
even are disposed to regard their Church rather
as she is seen in practice than as she is in theory,
and to doubt whether a communion in which truth
is discouraged, and heresy tolerated and suffered
to proceed unrebuked, can be guided by the Spirit
of God. Some have been driven by their feelings
to schismatical acts ; and even the most stanch ad
herents of the English Church — men who feel it
their duty to remain with her, and contend under
her banner to the last — find their spirit damped.

54 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
and their energies weakened, when those to whom
they looked for countenance and support join in the
ignorant outcry, instead of allaying it by the authority
of their office.
A reason for this partiality, especially as regards
the ordination of men holding Dissenting views, is
bluntly enough assigned by the Record in one of its
recent attacks upon the Society for the Propagation
of the Gospel. " The Rev. Carus Wilson, of Casterton
Hall," it seems, gave the highest testimonials for
Christian character, and high qualifications for the
ministry, to a young student of divinity, at the college
of Toronto, who, however, with two others, was sub
sequently expelled. Mr. Wilson, in high indignation,
denounces the Bishop of Toronto as a Tractarian.
The Editor of the Record takes up the accusation.
" What are the facts of the case ? Did these men
retire from Cobourg College in consequence of the
fiat of the Bishop — yes or no ? And were they ex
pelled because they could not elevate their faith to
the standard of the Bishop on questions of baptismal
regeneration, the apostolic succession, and other dog
mas of Rome ? . . . . They were so repulsed 
Where in England shall we find such proofs in relation
to the strongest Tractarian, as that given by the act
of the Bishop of Toronto, in refusing ordination to
men of the highest Christian character and attain
ments, because they could not give him satisfaction
in relation to the high Romish doctrines specified ? . .
Even the act alleged in to-day's paper against the
Bishop of Exeter, which, if true, will make him, in our

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.

55

judgment, amenable to the laws of his country, does
not prove Tractarianism against him so strongly as the
act perpetrated by j;he Bishop of Toronto ; an act which
no Bishop dare attempt at home in the present day."^
The italics are those of the Editor of the Record.
The same paper which strongly urges that ordination
should be refused to Romanisers, and suggests modes
in which they may be detected, congratulates itself
that no Bishop dare attempt to exclude from ordina
tion those who deny baptismal regeneration.
But what authority is the Record? some will
ask ; Why quote the words of an anonymous writer
in a party paper ? Simply because it is the organ of
the Evangelical party, and that by which a great part
of the mischief which they do is effected. The Evan
gelicals, as a body, are responsible for what appears in
the columns of that paper. It is the paper in which
Mr. Bickersteth, Mr. Carus Wilson (one of Mr.
Simeon's trustees), and other Evangelical leaders,
publish their attacks or complaints. It is, in truth, the
embodiment of Evangelical party-spirit. I should be
far indeed from wishing to laccuse all Evangelicals
of the same extremely bitter and schismatical spirit.
StiU it fairly represents their general sentiments.
Some while back, the British Critic used to be quoted
as an evidence against the Anglicans. But when that
periodical was found to put forth sentiments of a
Romanising tendency, it was repudiated by them, and
its publication ceased. Not so, however, with the
Record. Twice a week that paper continues tO
1 Record for December 11, 1845.

56 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
publish its attacks upon the doctrine, discipline,
and institutions of the Church, and may be seen
lying on the table of most persons of Evangelical
views. They therefore, as a party, are responsible for
its contents ; and I only wish that the Bishops, and
other influential members of our Church, instead of
treating it with contempt, would just go through a
three-months' course of reading the Record, in order
to make themselves acquainted with the sayings and
doings of ^ party, of the proceedings and animus of
which, I fear, they are at present but little informed.
But to return to our subject : — The Evangelical
party, through their organ the Record, say plainly,
that the Bishops of the English Church " dare not "
refuse ordination to those candidates who deny bap-
tismal regeneration. I do not believe that the rulers
of our Church are restrained by so pusillanimous a
feeling as fear. But they may be unconsciously in
fluenced by feelings of a somewhat analogous character,
and so deterred from taking that high line of duty
which the present necessity of the Church requires.
Our Bishops are men of ihe world, taken from amongst
the most eminent ecclesiastics of the 19th century,
and imbued with its character. The present age is
as far as possible removed from the spirit of martyr
dom or chivalry. Men in authority are little dis
posed to take the part of the weaker, or oppose them
selves to the spirit of persecution, or run a tilt with
public opinion. Public opinion is a formidable power,
especially the public opinion of men of the world.
It assumes to be the arbiter of right and wrong;

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 57
and those who would despise the attacks of the Record
as insignificant, might mistrust their position if they
found themselves opposed to the Times or the Quar
terly or Edinburgh Review, or were looked on as en
thusiasts by the men of the world with whom they
associate. Public opinion — that is, the opinion of
practical worldly men — sets its face against strong
measures and reUgious agitation. Our Bishops are, to
a certain extent, biased by the world ; they are men
of discretion rather than valour, of moderation rather
than zeal, courtesy rather than consistency. They are
men of refinement too. They dislike a stir. They do
not wish to be forced to act or to decide. They persuade
themselves that it is their duty to keep things quiet as
long as is possible. More evil, they think, wiU come
of causing strife, than good from maintaining principle.
They forget that while it may be the duty of statesmen
to yield to public opinion in mere matters of political
expediency, it can never be consistent with the office
of the rulers of the Church to sacrifice one iota of
God's eternal truth. Again : public men, especially
of Uberal and latitudinarian views, are inclined to
think little of positive truth. Their bias is towards the
popular side, and they are anxious to conciliate rather
than to instruct ; to give way to the opinion of the
many, rather than lead them in the right path ; and
this even though they sacrifice men unjustly assailed.
Witness the recent Charges of the Bishops of Worcester
and Llandaff. The Bishop of Chichester has gener
ously taken the opposite side, and lent his protection
to those against whom the tide of calumny had set.

58 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
Again : many of our rulers seem to have faUen into
the popular notion, which surely is most uHtenabl^
that Churchmen and Evangelicals are two parties in
the Church ; fixtures which must remain for ever.
They have not realised the fact, that the present
Evangelicals, or at least many of them, have departed
from the views of our reformers, and symbolise almost
entirely with the Nonconformists and modern Dissen
ters, whose essential feature is hostiUty to the leading
principles of the English Church. It is, I am per
suaded, not from fear, but from a too great leaning to
the public opinion of the age, that our Bishops have
acted with such apparent partiality, exercising an
undue harshness towards the most consistent members
of the English Church, and extending their sanction,
or at least toleration, towards a party whose princi
ples they evidently dislike. Thus it is that, in one
sense, as the Record asserts, they " dare not " exclude
from ordination even those who distinctly deny the
vital doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
And aU this is mainly for the sake of peace. The
Bishops are annoyed and distressed that there should
be so much want of unity, so much controversy and
disputation, in their respective dioceses. But have they
never considered whether the very system which they
adopt for the sake of peace be not, of all others, the
most likely to cause and perpetuate strife ; whether it
be not, in truth, the root of all the mischief? What is
the cause of the strife that rages in so many parishes ?
Simply, the preaching of contradictory doctrines hy those
ordained and licensed hy our Bishops. Our Bishops

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 59
ordain men who, on vital points, hold different opinions.
These men naturaUy deem it their duty to propagate
their own views. The doctrines preached in adjoining
parishes, and in the various churches in the same
town, and the modes of acting recommended by the
clergy, are diametricaUy opposed to each other.
What is the necessary result ? The greatest bewil
derment arises in the minds of serious people. The
High-Church clergyman preaches baptismal regener
ation according to the letter and true meaning of our
formularies ; the EvangeUcal, bearing the same autho
rity, and equaUy countenanced by the Bishop, often
more so, declares that it is "a popish and soul-de
luding doctrine." Able, eloquent, and earnest men,
under the sanction of authority, thus publicly de
nounce this fundamental doctrine. So that, on the
authority of the Church itseK, congregations are
taught to deny the Church's doctrine. Believing them
selves to be sound members of the Church of England,
and really desiring to be so, they are led by the very
ministers of the Church into essential heresy. Mul
titudes of weU-meaning persons, especially females, in
the middle classes, and others of imperfect education,
are vehement partisans of the Evangelical clergy, and
imder their teaching become bitter opponents and
denoimcers of this vital and primary doctrine of the
English Church, supposing all the while that they are
exceUent Church-people.
It is impossible to know the sort of confusion that
prevails in parishes from this single source, but by
the citation of particular cases. Two well-meaning

60 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
ladies go into the parish school of A  , and find
the mistress teaching the children that they had been
regenerated by baptism. FiUed with alarm at a doc
trine which they have been taught to view as the
foundation of popery, they take immediate measures
to establish another school in opposition to that under
the management of their minister, and use all their
influence to draw away the children from the parochial
school, where, as they beUeve, such soul-deluding doc
trine is taught. Thus the parish is divided with
religious controversy, and the children of the poor
are snatched from their authorised teachers. Take
another instance : — A parishioner complains to the non
resident rector of B  , respecting the curate whom
he has appointed. The curate, hearing of the com
plaint, remonstrates with the parishioner, and inquires
what cause he has given for such a step. " What
I object to, sir, is, your turning to the east at the
creed, and bowing at the name of Jesus." " Surely
you cannot be offended by such insignificant matters."
" To speak the truth, the real objection is, that you
preach baptismal regeneration." "Baptismal regener
ation ! why, that is the doctrine of our own Prayer-
book. Look at the Baptismal service 1 Look at the
Catechism," " Oh, I know all that ; but such popish
doctrines ought to be expunged from our services : they
ought never to have been there at all, Mr.  , in
the next parish, preaches quite the contrary." The
dispute ends in the withdrawal of the curate. I have
known an influential lady, a member of the Church,
positively recommend the poor to go to a Dissenting

THE E.EAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 6l
meeting-house, rather than to a church where bap
tismal regeneration was preached I And all these
people firmly believe that they are most excellent
members of the Church I How is it that they are
thus deluded? Just because the Bishops have or
dained ministers, and licensed them to cures, who in
the name and with the authority of the Church are
carrying Dissenting principles into every part of the
land. Flow can peace ever be restored while this
system prevails ? How can the Bishops wonder at the
strife that abounds ? How can they feel themselves
exempt from the charge that the mischief lies really
at their own door? Let but our Bishops declare
plainly in their Charges, or in any other way they
think proper, what the true doctrine of the Church
reaUy is ; and let them " dare " to refuse ordination
and license to those candidates whom, upon examina
tion, they find to be manifestly unsound, and to hold
Dissenting doctrines, as they do now to those who
hold Romish doctrines ; then, and not tiU then, will
one of the principal causes of strife be removed from
the bosom of the Church, and well-meaning Church-
people wiU not be beguiled by their own ministers into
being advocates of Dissent.
But peace can never be thoroughly restored until
some decided measures be taken with regard to those
societies which are at present the principal organs of
the Puritan party, and usurp or control the authority
of the Bishops ; examining, appointing, and with
drawing ministers almost at their own discretion.
These societies ought to be put under the efficient

62 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
control of our ecclesiastical rulers ; and those energies
which are now directed to increase the influence of a
party, should be employed for the welfare of the Church
at large. We could not have a better example for the
management of these matters than the mode of pro
ceeding in the American Church. Their missionary
societies, whether at home or abroad, their funds for
the increase of their own ministry, and other contri
butions for religious purposes, are placed under the
management of the Church itself ; the governing body
of the Church is the administrator of the funds
collected for Church purposes. Consequently there
is no wrangling and rivalry — no partisanship and
canvassing for one society in opposition to another.
The contributions of the pious and charitable are
coUected simply for the furtherance of the cause
of Christ, and not for the detestable and unchristian
object of extending the influence of a party. God's
blessing, we may be assured, will never be given to
such deeds of charity as these. Why should not our
Church Missionary Society and Society for Propagation
of the Gospel be formed into one board, and our
Pastoral-Aid Society and Additional Curates' Fund
into another, and both be committed to the care and
management of our legitimate rulers ? Never, until
something of this sort be done shall we rid our
Church of that petty strife and rivalry which now
infests almost every parish in the land.
These are matters which must sooner or later be
taken in hand, and placed on a better foundation than
they are at present, — at least, if our Church is to be

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 63
pi-eserved entire. The only danger is lest remedial
measures be so long delayed, that the evil shall have
become too great to be controlled. If active steps
were at once taken to purify the Church from heresy,
and check these party strifes, it might lead to the
secession of some thirty or forty leading Evangelicals
to the ranks of Dissent ; as the same number, on the
other side, have recently gone over to Rome, But
if the evil be permitted to advance, as it is now ad
vancing, without an attempt to control it, I see not
what is to prevent Puritanism again getting the upper
hand, and overspreading and remodeUing the Church ;
so that the old Church of England men, who keep to
the Prayer-book as it is, shall be driven from the
pale of the establishment, and become a second body
of Nonjurors. It is with the firm conviction that such an event
is not only within the compass of possibility, but much
more probable than many will allow themselves to
believe, that I have ventured, in such plain language,
to endeavour to draw the attention of those who hold
authority in the Church to the real state of affairs,
and the actual progress of Puritanism, of the stealthy
encroachments of which I fear they are little aware.
But it is not only to the heads of the Church that
I would appeal, but to all good English Churchmen.
It is true that we have suffered loss from various
causes. The extreme and Romanising views which
have been put forth, and associated by the designing
or uninstructed with our own principles, the actual
secession of some with whom we once took counsel,

64 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
the failure of our honest attempt to restore the customs
of our own Church, and, lastly, the adroitness with
which the Puritans have availed themselves of these
circumstances, to prejudice the worldly and uninformed
against us, — all these are heavy blows and great
discouragements. Still our cause is good, and we
have no right to despond. Our object is to uphold
and restore the doctrine and discipline of our own
Church, and to spread its influence through the moral
wildernesses which abound. Whatever discourage
ments attend the task, still we are bound to persevere.
Let us take good heart, and gird ourselves to renewed
exertion. Think only of the state of the Church
of England fifteen years ago, as compared with its
present state. Church principles were then scarcely
known ; now they pervade the breasts of thousands —
thousands of the best and warmest-hearted men in the
land. Never let us despair of the restoration of our
Church, when God has already given such abundant
earnest of success. Let us, however, learn wisdom
by experience. Let us avail ourselves of the experi
ence of partial failure to correct our modes of pro
ceeding. If suspicion has been cast on our efforts by
association with men of extreme views, men who have
disappointed our hopes by wandering into paths beyond
the limits of our own communion, let us eschew such
companionship, and seek only the co-operation of
those who love the Church of their fathers, and are
willing to join with us in directing their energies to
her service. If we have given occasion to the op
position of the uninformed, by too abrupt interference

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH, 65
with prevailing prejudices, let us in future be very
cautious not to render ourselves obnoxious to the
imputation of being innovators. The Church is not
in a condition to be restored all at once ; her services
have been so long defaced and mutilated, that the
decent performance of them appears a novelty, and
offends the prejudices even of well-meaning men.
This we have learned by experience. Let us not, then,
attempt any abrupt or general change ; but let us trust
that, one by one, as He shall call them, our congrega
tions will return to the true worship of Almighty God,
according to the forms and service of their mother
Church. For, after all, it is the restoration of
the pure and holy worship of Almighty God that is
the true object of our endeavours Such is the aim
of all reformation. In the sixteenth century the
worship of God had been overladen with unmeaning
ceremonies and superstitions : idols were set up in
every church. The true aim of the pious reformer,
amidst the strife of parties, and the contention of
worldly men, was the restoration of the worship of
God to its genuineness and purity ; and such is the
true object now. Our worship has been debased and
degraded into a dull formality. The rage for preach
ing has thrown our beautiful service into the shade.
There are few churches, indeed, and those only where
Church principles have recently found their way, in
which the worship of Almighty God can be thought to
be performed in such a manner as at all to awaken or
elevate the sympathy of the congregation. The mono
tonous reading of the service — the exhortation, con-

66 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
fession, absolution, psalms, lessons, creeds, prayers and
thanksgivings, all addressed most preposterously to the
congregation, and generally in the same dull tone ;
the responses made by a single voice, the irreverence
that prevails, the want of unity and sympathy, the
utter absence of propriety, or even a desire that the
service should be worthy of Him to whom it is offered,
—fast and festival, Sunday and week-day service, all
kept (if kept at all) with the same monotonous
uniformity, — how is it possible that this state of
things, which still exists in the majority of parish
churches, should not have a most pernicious and
deadening effect on both young and old ? It is to no
purpose that the young are brought up in the nurture
and admonition of the Lord : they may be instructed
in God's word — nay, their young hearts may be filled
with love for their Maker and Redeemer ; but all
religious warmth is soon extinguished, if, when they
are taken to worship in God's house, they find such
a service as too generaUy prevails, and see nothing
but irreverence, indifference, and formality around
them. And it is to be feared that multitudes of elder
people continue to attend Sunday after Sunday with
out the slightest benefit to their souls. The truth is,
we want a thorough reformation of the spirit of our
Church services. Let our Church service be in
practice what it is in theory, and then we might justly
talk of its " masculine simplicity," which is now, alas !
an empty boast.
I would venture to suggest a mode in which I
think the true sons of the Church, those especially

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 67
who are able and willing to devote a portion of their
wealth to her wants, may greatly advance the cause of
true reUgion at the present time : that is, the building
and endowing churches in populous places, where the
service of the Church of England may be carried out
in its true and genuine form. That such a service is
highly acceptable to Church-people, if their minds are
not prejudiced against it, has already been shewn at
Leeds and other places.' It is most desirable that
the example which has succeeded so well at Leeds
should be generaUy followed in our great towns, in
order that the members of the Church of England
may know what their Church service . really is. In
many of our principal towns, containing tens of thou
sands of souls, there is no church open from the
beginning of the week to the end ; the holydays
of the Church are altogether unknown ; and on the
Sundays the service is performed in so slovenly a
manner, or, if slovenUness be not the right word, in so
' I cannot sufficiently express my abhorrence of the wicked at
tempts made by the Evangelical party to prejudice the inhabitants of
Bethnal Green against the churches which the indefatigable and zeal
ous Bishop of London has procured to be built amongst them. Week
after week has the Record been pouring forth its calumnies, and it is
to be feared not without effect. Placards and handbills, accusing
the clergy of Puseyism, are posted on the walls, and distributed
amongst the worshippers ; and all this because the service of our
English Church is strictly performed, and her doctrines honestly
preached. And then the organ of the Evangelicals exults in the
diminished congregations. It makes one's indignation boil to see this
noble effort, which might have been the means of bringing tens of
thousands of perishing souls within the pale of God's mercy, thus in
danger of being frustrated by the malignant efforts of party-spirit.

68 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
Unmeaning and tasteless a manner, that the people of
the place have no notion of the worship of God but
as a tedious mass of unmeaning repetitions. And this
is the true secret of the numerous secessions to
Romanism and Dissent. People find, or expect to
find, a sympathy in other communions which their
own Church, though so well able, neglects to afford
them. This, then, I think, would at the present
juncture be an excellent way for good Churchmen to
employ their wealth and energies ; namely, the building
and endowment of churches in populous places, where
the genuine service of the Church of England should
be performed. The condition of the endowment
should be the performance of daily prayers and weekly
communion, together with the exact EngUsh service
in its most beautiful style. Can no one be found to
undertake such a work ? If it be too great for one,
why should not two, three, or more unite together?
Persons undertaking such a work would receive sym
pathy and assistance towards its completion from
quarters where they had not expected. Let the
structure, especially the interior, be as handsome as
the funds will admit ; let the arrangement be carefully
attended to ; let there be no exclusive pews, no dif
ference made between rich and poor, no theatre-like
galleries ; let kneeUng-room be carefully afforded ; let
there be a sufficient number of ministers, a choir
carefully trained, to which it is found by experience
that many members of the congregation will willingly
offer themselves ; let the Church resound daily with
the sounds of prayer and praise ; let a careful distinc-

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 60
tion be made between fast and festival and ordinary
days, according to prescribed order ; let the preaching
be plain and earnest (this is a point to which some
very good Churchmen have not sufficiently attended :
in their jealousy of the paramount importance given to
preaching, they have fallen into the contrary extreme,
and robbed it of its due position — let this error
be corrected), let God's word be preached with ear
nestness and simplicity, and the other parts of the
service performed with reverence and devotion, — then
we should indeed see the English service in its " mas
culine simplicity ;" or rather I should say, its " chaste
magnificence ; " and we cannot doubt that many souls
which are now beguiled to other communions, or con
tinue to attend on our mutilated and debased service
with godless vacuity, would be charmed and enUvened
with the refreshing dew of God's grace — they would
learn to worship God with a true and hearty spirit,
and for ever bless the day when they first joined in the
genuine service of the English Church.
Let me here most solemnly protest against the
slander and falsehood of those, if any such there be,
who shall dare to aver that the restoration of the
genuine service of the English Church is an ap
proximation to Popery. The folly and falsehood of
the accusation would be its own refutation, if it were
not for the incredible prejudice that abounds. No
doubt it is right to make due allowance for honest
prejudice. But when thousands of souls are perishing
around us for lack of Christian sympathy, when many
are leaving our ranks for Dissent, and some beguiled

70 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
to Romanism ; when too many of our old hereditary
worshippers in the Church of their fathers are, it is
to be feared, dragging out their lives in a listless
indifference, making no progress in warmth or vital
godliness, and this mainly in consequence of the
absurd negligence and want of propriety which pre
vails in our Church service, — it is surely no time to
listen to the prejudices, or regard the calumnies, of
those who maintain the monstrous paradox, that the
restoration of the genuine service of our own Church
is a recurrence to Popery. Honest prejudice deserves
to be respected, but such mischievous absurdity must
be confronted and exposed. But it is not only the
public service of the Church that needs to be thus
revivified. The whole personal intercourse between
the clergy and the people requires to be placed on a
better footing ; and this as regards all classes, but
especially the young. How almost universally does
the parochial pastor lose all influence over the youth
of his flock as soon as they leave the Sunday school !
How commonly do they fall into sin or indifference,
and never, alas, return to the fold! Much, very
much is wanting to give the parochial pastor that
religious influence over his parishioners which shall
enable him to be their guide through the thorny paths
of life, and train them for heaven and happiness.
Various other suggestions might be made to in
crease the efficiency of our Church. Most of them
have been already so often urged as to cease to be
attended to. Nevertheless, our only hope of obtaining
what the Church so urgently requires is by importu-

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 71
nate reiteration. Every one admits the crying evil
of the want of a sufficient number of Bishops to govern
the Church properly, and "set in order" the many
things that are wanting ; and yet year after year goes
on, and nothing is done. The means of accomplish
ing this most necessary work are in reality very
simple. There is an act stiU in force, passed in the
reign of Henry VIII., by which power is given to the
Bishops to appoint suffragans in certain places, who
shall aid them in their labours. Let but a clause be
added to this act, extending the power to other places,
where, in consequence of the change of the times,
Bishops are now most wanted : and let Bishops choose
from among their clergy such as have already suf
ficient endowments, — as, for instance, the Deans and
Archdeacons, — and this most desirable object might be
accomplished without even entering upon the question
of funds for endowment, or of votes in the House
of Lords. Another point which I would just advert to — for it
cannot be brought forward too often — is the absolute
necessity of getting rid as soon as possible from our
schools of the Madras or monitorial system, by which
children are set to teach each other, to the utter
destruction of that reverence which is due from scho
lars to their masters, and the deterioration of the
character both of the teachers and the taught. Some
persons are struck by one deficiency, and some by
another ; but it certainly appears to me that the pre
sent system of most of our national schools is one of the
most unmitigated evils with which we have to contend.

72 THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH.
But I must leave this and many other important
subjects for the present, and hasten to a conclusion.
My sole object, in all that has been said, is a hearty
desire to aid, if God grant me the power, in increasing
the efficiency and restoring the beauty and dignity of
our beloved Church, and carrying out her genuine
system of doctrine and discipline. I appeal confi
dently both to our rulers and to those of my brethren
who shall read these pages, whether in any the slight
est respect I have deviated either from the letter or
spirit of the Church, of which we are common mem
bers. If I may seem to have spoken harshly of some
who profess to be members of the same communion, it
is because they appear to me to be the main ob
stacles to those practical improvements which are so
urgently required. Far indeed be it from me to
accuse all Evangelicals of being actuated by such a
design, or even contributing to such a result, I know,
from personal acquaintance, that there are amongst
that party many sincere and earnest-minded men,
who are pursuing the quiet tenour of their way, and
doing as much good as pious exertion under an essen
tially defective and erroneous system can accomplish ;
and even of those who actively impugn the system of
the Church of which they are members, the majority
do so, I firmly believe, in utter misconception and
ignorance that they are striving against God's truth.
Others there are, I fear, who are actuated by a
culpable spirit of vanity and pride, and urged on by
ungodly partisanship. Whatever be their motive, the
evil which they are accomplishing is very great in-

THE REAL DANGER OF THE CHURCH. 73
deed : they are enemies within the very walls of the
sanctuary ; and, under the garb of Churchmen, are
corrupting her doctrine, impairing her discipUne, im
peding her improvement, and spreading disunion
and strife in every corner of the land. It was the
same principle, and almost the same mode of proceed
ing, by which, two centuries ago, the Church was
brought to temporary ruin. And it is under the
strong apprehension of similar danger from the same
quarter — whether in the shape, as formerly, of violent
aggression, or, what would be more fatal still, of
gradual and silent transformation of the English
Church into a mere Protestant sect, — that I venture
to raise this note of warning, in the hope that it may
fall on the ear of those who have the power to save
the Church of England from this most miserable fate,
and restore her to her real form and efficiency.

THE END.

I'lllNTEU BX KOBSON, LEVEY, AND FHANKLVN,
Cre.it New Street, Fcttei Lane.

".'#'. il », Aft/ '. . .

\

%f}f^^y''/

V'f,"