Qoulb

/

Mh

A REPLY

TO SOME PARTS OF

MR. WARD'S DEFENCE,

JUSTIFYING CERTAIN PARTIES IN RECORDING THEIR
VOTES AGAINST HIM.

BY THE REV. E. M. GOULBURN, M.A.
FELLOW AND TUTOR OF MERTON COLLEGE J
PERPETUAL CURATE OF HOLYWELL.

OXFORD,
PRINTED BY W. BAXTER.
WILLIAM GRAHAM, HIGH STREET;
J. HATCHARD AND SON, LONDON.
1845.

A REPLY, &c.

The sum and substance of Mr. Ward's " Address
to Members of Convocation in Protest against the
proposed Statute" is this, " Is not my subscription
to our Formularies as honest as yours?" This
question is put severally to three classes of persons,
under one or other of which Mr. Ward supposes,
perhaps not erroneously, that every Member of
Convocation must be comprised. The Author of
the following Tract, though anxious to call no man
upon earth Master, and accordingly not willing to
identify himself with any Theological party, feels
that the Church of England owes a deep debt of
gratitude to that section of divines whom Mr. Ward
denominates ' Evangelicals.' He has therefore
given his particular attention to the portion of Mr.
Ward's book lying between pages 19 and 29, and
having looked in vain for the appearance of some
abler and more learned advocate to undertake the
cause, he comes forth at length (though for many
reasons with much reluctance) to vindicate that
school from the charge which he brings against
Mr. Ward himself of " non-natural," i. e. dishonest,
subscription. He begs leave then, courteously and in the spirit
of charity, but firmly and resolutely, to answer Mr.
a2

Ward's question ; " Is not my subscription to our
Formularies as honest as yours?" with a decided
negative in behalf of those whom he understands
Mr. Ward to address under the name of ' Evan
gelicals.' His grounds are as follows.
Mr. Ward assumes that their difficulties in sub
scribing to the Articles will be few in comparison of
those which they experience in declaring that there
is nothing in the Prayer-book contrary to the Word
of God. Let me address myself then in the first
instance to giving Mr. Ward an explanation how
this declaration on their parts may be perfectly
consistent with honesty and good faith.
And, in the first place, let me make a few pre
liminary remarks of the most common-place character
indeed, but bearing very much on the present
question. All Forms of Prayer, if they are to contain any
thing but the vaguest generalities, must be con
structed on some assumption respecting the spiritual
state of the person or persons using them. If there
fore we hold it, as on many accounts we do, a great
privilege and blessing to have edifying Forms of
Prayer provided for our Public Worship, we must
perforce acquiesce in some difficulties, which, under
certain circumstances, will beset the use of them.
For example, the Burial Service contemplates the
deceased party as having been, during his lifetime a
true and earnest Christian. The Service for the
Lord's Supper proceeds upon precisely the same

assumption ; it contemplates communicants as ap
proaching the Holy Table in a right state of mind,
and so speaks of them as having " duly received
those holy mysteries," and being really " fed with the
spiritual food of the Body and Blood of Christ," an
attribute which in the 29th Article is absolutely
denied of " the wicked and such as be void of a
lively faith." Reflection upon the nature of the case
(combined with the hints which these two Services
give us for the right understanding of our whole
Ritual) proves satisfactorily that all our Services
proceed upon a like hypothesis; namely, that the
persons using them, the persons in whose behalf
they are used, are (Mr. Ward must forgive the
words, if they be offensive to him) sincere, enlight
ened Christians, and thus that all conditions in peti
tioners, recipients, fyc. have been fulfilled. Professing
Christians are indeed divided into two classes; those
who are justified, and those who are not8; and we
earnestly contend that all our Services assume that
those who use them belong to the former class. For
it may be asked, what other assumption could a Ritual
make ? Could it assume people to be outcasts from
¦ We are aware that divines of Mr. Ward's theological sentimenis
hold that there may be degrees of justification ; that a man may be
more or less justified. We do not profess altogether to comprehend
the position. Justification, according to ordinary views of it, con
sists in forgiveness of sins and imputation of righteousness. How
can a man be half-pardoned, or half-accounted righteous ? Unless
indeed the blessed God forgives and restores according to our
niggardly unloving measure, " forgiving," as it is said, " but not
forgetting." Such however was not the Father's forgiveness and
acceptance of the prodigal.

6
God's favour, unforgiven, unaccepted ? Nay, it must
surely contemplate real Christians. Could it then
propose two distinct Services, or two distinct modi
fications of the same Service, on distinct assump
tions ? Nay, for " the Lord" only " knoweth them
that are His :" — to proceed upon any plan which
would oblige man to define them, would surely be
the extreme of presumption, and attended with end
less difficulties.
This being premised, let us turn to Mr. Ward's
" Address." He says very confidently in p. 19, " You
will not of course deny that the fundamental prin
ciples of your theology are the two following : first,
that justified persons may in all ordinary cases know^
themselves to be justified," &c. . . . Further on, in
p. 21, he fathers upon those whom he addresses the
following classification of nominal Christians.
" According to your view, nominal Christians are
divided into two classes ; those who know themselves
to be in a state of justification, and those who, as yet
at least, are not in that state. This is the very funda-
b No one really holds that we can ' know' our justification with
infallible certainty, as we know a truth of mathematical science.
The most assured knowledge of a matter of this kind can be only
very strong belief. Whether a man is justified is a question of
evidence : and his assurance of it will vary in strength according to
the amount of the evidence. Clearly then there may be mistakes
about it. In weighing the evidence self may be a partial judge,
and view it as stronger than it is, or weaker than it is. There is
room for self-delusion. I feel sure that some confusion will be
introduced into the minds of Mr. Ward's readers by the use of the
word " know ;" and I believe that this remark will strike at the
root of it.

mental principle of your theology, and you feel it to
be such. Now do consider, I beseech you, if this
were really the doctrine of the Prayer-book, how
plainly, how unmistakably, it must be written on
every page !"
Now we calmly ask, How could such a doctrine
be written " plainly and unmistakably" on the face
of the Prayer-book ? By having two Formularies, one
for the use of " those who may or do know themselves'
to be in a state of justification," another for " those
who, as yet at least, are not in that state ?" This in
deed would be an " unmistakable" mode of writing
it on the face of the Prayer-book ; but to common
sense surely, and for the reasons above given, a
highly objectionable one. How then? Mr. Ward
appears to think that the doctrine would appear on
the surface of the Prayer-book — if it were really a
Prayer-book doctrine — by the fact of every prayer
in every Service being a direct and exclusive petition,
either for the possession or the continuance of justi
fying faith. What else are we to make of the fol
lowing? " There is," according to the ' Evangelical' theory,
" but one matter of real importance for which the
justified have to ask, and that is the continuance of
justifying faith; for all else is supposed to flow from
that by necessary consequence : there is but one matter
of real importance for which the wnjustified have to
ask, and that is the possession of justifying faith; for,
till that be obtained, obedience and self-denial are
worthless, or even worse." p. 21.

Mr. Ward must pardon us for not regarding this
as very sound sense. We have already told him the
grounds on which we believe the Services of our
Church to contemplate only the justified as using
them. Will he say, "Then if so, why are there
prayers for pardon, as in the daily Confession ? Does
the already accepted person, does the pardoned, need
pardon ? Or why are there petitions for grace, peace,
light, &c? Does he whose conscience has been set
at rest, who has experienced ' peace with God through
our Lord Jesus Christ,' who is enlightened with the
saving knowledge of the Gospel, who does stand in
God's grace — does he need grace and peace and
light?" Yes, Mr. Ward. The justified person, sub
sequently to his acceptance, has the deepest need
of, as he has the most urgent craving after, all these
things. It is he who, on our theory, (for I here
most readily identify myself with the party whom I
am defending,) knows something of God's holiness
and justice, which could not be brought to acquiesce
in the pardon of sin without an infinite ransom. It
is he accordingly, on our theory, who being
sensitively alive to that holiness and justice, will
also be sensitively alive to his own miserable short
comings—to his want of continual pardon, his want
of more abundant grace, of more fervent love.
Verily he will account it no inconsistency — sensible
as he is of the motions of that indwelling corruption
which makes all his goings unclean, and defiles him
in his holiest things — he will account it no incon-

sistency to fall down whenever he enters the
Church, and with a pure heart and humble voice to
follow God's minister in the confession of his sins,
and to receive anew from that minister's mouth the
message of the Divine Absolution. So much for
pardon. And as regards graces distinct from faith —
is it not trivial in Mr. Ward to assert, that because
we hold faith to be the radical grace out of which
others grow, we ought in consistency only to pray
for faith ? Rather, having faith and so being
justified, should we not pray for its happy develope-
ment, its blessed fruits, its results, that we may add
to our faith virtue, and all those other Christian
graces which the Apostle so distinctly insists uponc?
Should we not rather forget those things which are
behind and reach forth unto those which are before,
and with all the energy of fervent supplication press
toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of
God in Christ Jesus ? Especially, seeing that every
step in advance can only be realised under God's
blessing, and that, though faith be the seminal
grace and has in it a natural capacity of expansion
and germination, yet, like the seed, for whose
ripening the husbandman would not deem it incon
sistent or " non-natural" to pray, it cannot possibly
develope itself into its legitimate results without the
cooperation of that same Lord of the harvest who
first implanted it ? c 2 Peter i. 5 — 7.

10
So much then for the first branch of Mr. Ward's
argument as relating to the Prayer-book. ^ The
spirit of it," says he, " is against you." We firmly
believe that this is not the case. " Where then,"
says Mr. Ward, " is your favourite doctrine of
Justification by Faith?" We answer: "it is an
ASSUMPTION COUCHED UNDER THE WHOLE PRAYER-
BOOK, THAT THEY WHO USE IT ARE JUSTIFIED BY
faith. That the justified should not dwell upon
their justification in their prayers, but reach forth to
those things which are before, is surely in no wise
unintelligible or " non-natural."
Let us now accompany Mr. Ward, as he begs us
to do, through the Catechism and Visitation of the
Sick. He seems to think that the first answer on the
subject of Baptism — wherein the child states that in
Baptism " he was made a member of Christ, the
child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of
heaven" — will present us with insuperable dif
ficulties. I can only say, that to my own mind it
presents, upon a fair and full consideration of it,
no difficulty whatever. The view of Infant Baptism
which I believe most generally obtains among the
" Evangelicals" — the " lowest" view of it which I
have ever heard maintained — may be explained by
a very easyd illustration. Infant Baptism is the

d The author wishes to be understood as expressing no opinion
as to whether Baptism is or is not more than this illustration

11
solemn act of making over* to a minor the title to a
large estate. This estate, however, he cannot enjoy
until, when he has come of age, he chooses to affix
his signature to the title-deed. Faith (necessarily
involving and presupposing Repentance, as all
genuine Faith does, and necessarily followed by
obedience, as all genuine Faith is) is the act of
signature — the estate being the heavenly inheritance.
Must we demur in honesty to call a minor, so
entitled, an heir, although (not being of age) he is
not yet (nor can be) in possession? Surely not.
Must we demur then in honesty to call a baptized
child, before he comes to years of discretion, " a
member of Christ, the child of God, and an inheritor
of the kingdom of heaven ?" Surely not, by parity
of reasoning. Such then being our view of what is actually
transacted in Baptism, let us next remark, in ac
cordance with what has been already said, that the
Service assumes a right state of mind (viz. Faith
and Repentance) in the recipient of the Sacrament,

represents it to be. He has for argument's sake advocated the
consistency of subscription with what he conceives to be the
lowest views held by " Evangelicals" on the subject of Baptism.
• The author has seen in the Works of Dr. Hammond, but not
having the volume by him, cannot at present refer to, an illustration
similar to this. That eminent divine compares Infant Baptism to
the old usage of betrothing two children to one another, a
transaction which presupposes that the parties when they come of
age will in their own persons ratify what has been done in their
behalf, which yet they may not always have the will to do.

12
and proceeds on that hypothesis. It may be again
asked, as a proof of its making this assumption,
what other assumption could it by possibility make ?
Could it proceed upon an hypothesis that the infant
when it arrived at maturity would be impenitent and
unbelieving? How utterly unwarrantable, in point
of charity, would such an assumption be, seeing
that we have no grounds whatever, from the present
state of the child, for making any assumption as to
its future state ? Could it then proceed upon no
hypothesis at all, as to the infant's future state of
mind ? We think that — the sponsors having vowed
in the child's name Repentance, Faith, and Obedi
ence — the Service would not recognise their vow
without making the charitable hypothesis, without
taking for granted that the heir at law will, when he
comes of age, affix his signature to the title-deed.
Is, lastly, the only remaining alternative feasible or
desirable ; that of having two Services, one on each
assumption ? By what rule, in this case, should we
apply one or other of the Services? According as
parents, sponsors, &c. are faithful and godly persons,
or the reverse ? Who is to determine that question
for certain ?
This is a full account of the way in which I, and I
believe many others with me, accept as thoroughly
Scriptural the Baptismal Service, and the passages
respecting Baptism in the Catechism; and willingly
subscribe to them as containing, when fairly con
sidered, nothing contrary to the word of God. A

13
baptized child I repeat, is, according to our view,
in a state of salvation. Is not an entitled minor in
the state or condition of an heir ? And would there
be any thing unmeaning in an heir's wishing that
his father might not, for his undutifulness, reverse
the testament whereby he had made over to him his
estate ? Why then should not a baptized child pray
for the continuance of that state wherein, by God's
great mercy, Baptism has placed him ?
We consider this an ex abundanti answer to Mr.
Ward; for, as the Catechism must adopt the same
view of Infant Baptism as the Baptismal Service,
and speak of the baptized under an hypothesis, we
might have attributed (many perhaps would prefer
doing so) the expressions " child of God," &c. to
that hypothesis. Of course the expressions " sanc
tified," " elect," are usually attributed to it by the
so-called ' Evangelicals.' That the hypothesis must
exist, we have before conclusively proved.
But Mr. Ward proceeds.
" In the next answer occurs the promise made in
the child's name by his sponsors ; or, in other words,
the description given by the Prayer-book of our
Christian course. What is that course, so described?
It consists of three parts; repentance, faith, obedience.
What allusion is there to renouncing confidence in
our own merits ? or looking for salvation to Christ
only? The answer is plain : that which you consider
the very foundation of all Christian obedience, the
very characteristic mark of genuine holiness, finds

14
not so much as a passing mention in that outline of
the Christian life, which our Church has ordered to
be impressed on her children's mind. Will you say,
in reply, that faith is distinctly specified ? Nay. but
observe what is the account given of faith : — ' that I
should believe all the articles of the Christian faith :'
not trust then, but belief is the Prayer-book version
of ' faith.' " p. 23.
We are quite willing to accept " repentance, faith,
obedience," (the first as necessarily leading to and
resulting in, the last as necessarily flowing from, a
lively faith,) as the true and Scriptural account of a
Christian course. We do not believe a Christian
course could in so few words be more happily de
scribed. Mr. Ward's remark on " the account given
of faith in the Prayer-book" we cannot but regard
as miserably shallow. An influential belief in all the
articles of the Apostles' Creed, such a belief in all
the glorious truths respecting the Three Persons of
the ever-blessed Trinity and their respective offices
in the Economy of Redemption, as should exercise a
purifying influence on the heart and life, ' Evan
gelicals' would gladly accept as a very admirable
definition of Faith. Such a faith in such articles will,
it is clear, involve and comprise trust in the Great
Redeemer, with the events of whose life on earth the
great body of the Apostles' Creed is occupied.
Does Mr. Ward say, " You have no right to
assume that belief in Articles of faith, means any
thing more than simple historic belief ?" Nay; Is it

15
conceivable that sponsors should solemnly vow, as
one great branch of a child's engagements, such a
belief only as the devils most certainly have and
tremble? The same remark applies to what Mr.
Ward has said on the Collect of St. Thomas the
Apostle. We cannot suppose faith or belief, when
spoken of as a Christian grace, to mean any thing
besides or less than an influential belief of certain
Articles, necessarily involving in its very nature trust
in the Divine Person or Persons of whom those
Articles testify.
We now come with Mr. Ward to the Creed.
" It is impossible," he says, " to omit the observation,
how absolutely inconceivable it is, if the Prayer-
book considered the Atonement to be that one
absorbing truth of the Gospel which you consider
it, that there should not be so much as an explicit
mention of it in the Creed. Try to imagine your
selves teaching your children the ' articles of your
belief,' and omitting all special reference to the
Atonement. This is still more striking in the
Athanasian Creed. ' Whosoever will be saved,
before all things it is necessary' — what? — that he
renounce all trust in his own merits ? that he close
with the Gospel offer ? that he believe himself freely
pardoned by the Atonement ? Such would be your
answer, you must acknowledge : but widely different
is the Prayer-book's answer — ' that he hold the
Catholic Faith:' and in all the detailed exposition of
Christian mysteries which follows, the Atonement

1G
receives only a passing allusion. Ask yourselves
fairly the question, — can any religious service be less
edifying to you than the Athanasian Creed ?"
The party whom Mr. Ward addresses hold, it is
true, that the work of Mediation accomplished by
the different steps in our Lord's life, which are
reckoned up in the Creed, is the central truth of
Christianity. All those Articles which respect our
blessed Lord, have an immediate bearing upon that
work of Mediation, if they are not distinct steps in
it. For instance, the work, in order to avail us,
must have been the work of a Divine Person.
Accordingly we profess our belief that Jesus is the
only Son of God, and so our rightful Lord. It
must have been also, if Christ were to be accepted
as our representative, the work of a perfect Man.
And if the victim were to be holy, harmless, un
dented, of a pure Man. Accordingly we profess
our belief in His conception of the Holy Ghost, and
His birth of the Virgin Mary. We acknowledge His
crucifixion and death, whereby He hath purchased
our pardon; His resurrection, whereby God the
Father declares His acceptance of the work; His
ascension and session, which enable Him to plead
for us the merits of His blood and righteousness ;
finally, His return, at which the work of His mediation
having been accomplished, He will give up the
kingdom to God even the Father.
In a word, the Articles of belief which respect our
Blessed Lord might be summed up thus : " I believe

17
in the Mediation of JESUS CHRIST, and in every
fact and event necessary to render that Mediation
effectual." " I believe," i. e. of course, not histori
cally, (with the devil's faith,) but really and influen-
tially, " in all these facts and events." A person so
believing is justified — yes, certainly — and his justifi
cation itself is a distinct article of faith : for he has
to profess his belief " in the remission of sins," this
belief again being not a mere historic one in the
remission of Paul's sins, or Peter's sins, (as I think
Staupitz once remarked to Luther,) but such a lively
faith that " God was in Christ reconciling the world
unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto
them," as exercises a purifying influence upon the
heart, and by consequence upon the life of the
believer. The same answer will serve for what Mr. Ward says
on the subject of the Athanasian Creed. There are
two kinds of faith spoken of in Scripture ; a living
and operative, " which worketh by love;" and a barren
historic faith, which the devils have, and which " being
without works is dead." It is to our minds (we
repeat it) absolutely incredible, that when " the hold-
ins: of the Catholic Faith" is declared " before all
things necessary" to salvation, any other holding of
it should be intended than an influential faith in the
truths therein specified; a faith of course (as has
been before remarked) involving trust in the
Redeemer, and indeed in all the Persons of the
Blessed Trinity under their respective covenant

18
offices. Can it be supposed that the compiler of the
Creed asserts only such an assent to Christian doc
trine to be essential to salvation, as we yield to
Alexander's victories, or any other fact of history ?
As to a " supernaturally infused belief in Christian
doctrine," (of which Mr. Ward speaks,) we question
altogether the supernatural infusion of any belief
which is not influential upon the heart and life.
Mr. Ward must produce evidence to prove that such
a faith is supernatural : the burden of proof is with
him. If however he should tell us that he and the
Roman divines do mean by this supernaturally infused
belief in Christian doctrine an influential faith,
cleansing the heart and rectifying the life ; then this
is our faith, whereby we profess ourselves to be justi
fied ; it is all one to us whether Mr. Ward calls it
supernaturally infused belief in Christian doctrine,
or supernaturally infused trust in Christ; the first
INCLUDES THE SECOND \
h The following passage extracted from " Baxter's Narrative of
his Life and Times" may serve to prove that there is no reason why
the most thorough Protestants should not ex animo accept the
Creed as the Articles of their belief. (Who indeed would have
imagined the existence of such a reason, unless Mr. Ward had
informed us of it P)
" Now'- (in his old age) " it is the fundamental doctrines of the
Catechism which I highliest value, and daily think of, and find
most useful to myself and others. The Creed, the Lord's Prayer,
the Ten Commandments, do find me now the most acceptable and
plentiful matter for all my meditations : they are to me as my
daily bread and drink, and as I can speak and write of them over
and over again, so I had rather read or hear of them, than of any
of the School niceties, which once so much pleased me."

19
1 hope Mr. Ward will not think me uncourteous for
remarking, that his opponents might retort upon him
here, by taking some of the "fundamental princi
ples" of his theology, some of " the absorbing truths"
of his Gospel, and commenting upon their absence
from the Creeds. " Whosoever will be saved, before
all things it is necessary" — what? — that he maintain
the supremacy of conscience ? or the sacredness of
hereditary religion? that he hold justification by
inherent holiness? or partake of the Sacrament of
the Altar? Such perchance would be Mr. Ward's
answer: and to this we confess we could not subscribe
but in the most " non-natural" sense conceivable.
" We next come to the Commandments and their
explanation ; to our ' duty towards God' and ' to
wards our neighbour.' What do you consider our
principal duty towards God ? of course this one, viz.,
to put our whole trust in our crucified Saviour : how
do you account for the fact, that, in this part of the
Cateclxism, there is no direct mention whatever of
our Lord's death, or indeed of our Lord at all ?
" Observe, too, the spirit in which these duties are
inculcated. You are in the habit of saying, that
obedience to God's commandments is hardly, or not
at all, a part of Christian sanctity, except so far as it
flows from gratitude for the Atonement. And the
language of our twelfth Article (which, in its natural
sense, most strongly savours of your theology,) is in
the same direction ; appearing to speak as though
good works derived their whole value from being the
b 2

20
proof of a lively faith. On this, however, more
presently: here I am observing that the Catechism
makes no allusion to this (as 1 should say, fanciful,
unscriptural, and immoral) notion; but inculcates
duties (whether inward only, or going forth also into
external action) in a straightforward manner and for
their own sake ; just in the manner which you call
heathen and unevangelical."
This is the weakest paragraph of Mr. Ward's
" Address." The argument is based solely on a
perplexed misrepresentation of the sentiments of the
party whom he is addressing. Faith indeed they
hold to be a commandment of God, inasmuch as
it is said in the imperative mood, " Believe on the
Lord Jesus Christ." And it is true also that obedi
ence to this command brings with it obedience to all
others, as it is said, " This is the work of God,
that ye believe on Him whom He hath sent." But
if I or any other Clergyman of the same sentiments
were asked what our principal duty to God was, we
should answer unhesitatingly, " Thou shalt love
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all
thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy
strength. This is the first and great command
ment." And if further explanation were demanded, we
should be well content to refer to the Catechism as
expanding and embodying this very answer. How
the love of God (which is the fulfilling of His law)
originates in the heart, is a distinct question, which
we should not feel ourselves bound to answer out of

21
its place, or if not asked for. If asked, however, we
should of course say that Faith in Christ engenders
this love.
"Mr. Newman, in his work on Justification, describes
the contrast between your views and those which he
considers Catholic, as consisting, to a considerable
extent, in this, viz., that you regard the keeping of
God's commandments to be impossible, even to the
Christian, while Catholics regard it as possible by
the help of God's grace ; and this representation you
will admit, I suppose, to be just. Now the catechist
proceeds to say, ' My good child, thou art not able
to do these things of thyself, nor walk in the com
mandments of God and to serve Him, without His
special grace.' It is very plain on which side of the
controversy these words decide."
Mr. Ward certainly is strangely mistaken if he
conceives that we subscribe to these words of the
Catechism in any other than their direct and straight
forward sense. We entirely acknowledge that with
God's special grace His children are able to walk in
His commandments, (even in His most difficult
commandments,) and to serve Him. But we sus
pect there is a further sense which Mr. Ward and
Mr. Newman (from their prepossessions) recognise in
these plain words, but which we are (and profess
ourselves to be) utterly unable to find in them.
They see in them, perchance, a sense that Christians
may attain to perfection in this life ; that a stage of
holiness may be realized here below in which, the

22
old leaven having been thoroughly purged out, no
plague-spot of corrupt nature remains to infect our
holiest actions, and to make it needful that our very
repentance should be repented of, and our tears of
contrition washed over again in the blood of Christ.
This error, which was Mr. Wesley's before it was
Ivir. Newman's, we indeed account a most serious
one; but, honestly, our plain minds can find not the
slightest trace of it in the Catechism.
2. With regard to the Service of the " Visitation
of the Sick," Mr. Ward has not treated the sub
ject quite fairly. He makes no mention of the
passages, in which ' Evangelicals' would most heartily
concur, and parades, isolating them from the rest,
certain others to which he thinks they ought ac
cording to their principles to object. Let us con
sider the case. A Minister approaches the house
of a sick person, assumed to be a child of God and
justified by faith, in order to give him consola
tion, and to guide and assist his devotions. The
patient is indeed a child of God, but a chastened
child; tempted by physical disquietude to entertain
doubts, fears, misgivings; and needing, probably, in
order to his peace of mind, some practical directions
besides the inculcation of those doctrines with which
he is already well acquainted. Accordingly he is
instructed, like Hezekiah, to set his house in order,
ere he dies ; to examine himself finally as to his
spiritual state; to ask forgiveness of those whom he
has offended; to unburden his conscience to the

23
Minister, &c, with a view principally of relieving
him from the disquietude incidental to his circum
stances. Some of these practical rules (they are to be
used with discretion as they are seen to be needed)
are attended frequently with very happy effects : I
have myself seen a case in point in which a special
confession made to me by a person, (evidently a real
and earnest Christian,) of a sin committed long ago,
was signally blest to her very great peace and comfort.
But is it indeed true that these practical rules are
the whole contents of the Visitation Service, that
there is no allusion to that Atonement which alone
can effectually bind up the wounds of the broken
heart? Quite the reverse. The sick person is in
structed to " put his trust in God's mercy for His
dear Son Jesus Christ's sake;" (a passage of the
Exhortation which Mr. Ward has overlooked;) he is
solemnly asked whether he believes all the Articles
of the Christian Faith, which can, as we have abun
dantly shewn heretofore, mean nothing less than an
influential belief in the things concerning Christ ;
he is declared absolved evidently on the expressed
condition of repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus
Christ; before the final committal of him into God's
hands, the Minister speaks in prayer of the cross and
precious blood which has redeemed us; finally as the
crowning blessing, beyond which nothing further can
be wished for the patient by love, or conferred by
grace, the Priest prays that " hetnay know and feel that
there is none other name under heaven given to man

24
in whom and through whom he may receive health and
salvation, but only the name of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Does Mr. Ward imagine that those whom he is
addressing find any thing " carnal," " heathen," or
" un-evangelical" in this1?
And now my task is nearly done. Mr. Ward has
adduced no single passage of the Articles against
any (so-called) 'Evangelical' not holding the doctrine
of final perseverance, a doctrine which many to whom
the name is given would I suspect reprobate as
strongly as Mr. Ward, and to which, let Mr. Ward
say what he pleases, their principles do not in con
sistency lead. " It is a fundamental principle o f
your Theology," says Mr. Ward, " that justified
persons may in all ordinary cases know themselves
to be justified." Well ; to be sure they may. " The
tree is known by its fruits," and therefore by a due
examination of their hearts and lives, they may arrive
at a comfortable conviction of their justification,
varying however in certainty according to the amount
of the evidences. This conviction of course brings
' If persons of Mr. Ward's sentiments should not think the
consistency of this Seivice with so-called Evangelical views
satisfactorily made out, (I myself think that it is,) let them re
member what the distinct words in the 36th Canon are, to which
we are required to subscribe: viz. that there is " nothing in the Book
of Common Prayer contrary to the word of God." I am not con
scious of the slightest wish to evade the full and stringent force of
these words : but they certainly must not be construed as if they
were equivalent to a declaration that " no single passage in the
Prayer-book could by possibility be altered for the better," which
would be nothing short of avowing it to he an inspired production

25
peace into the soul, how can it do otherwise? it is a
conviction of present acceptance with God ; it awakens
in the breast the feeling of a son who lives under his
father's smile and favour. Such a feeling cannot
but lead us to look forward in hope — say, if you please,
in confidence and assurance— to the future ; but it is
held in check by other feelings, which though they
do not dash its joy, yet chasten and mellow the glow
ing- tints of it. Such feelings are apprehension of
self, distrust of the heart, proved alike by experience
and inspiration to be deceitful above all things and
desperately wicked; feelings which certainly tran
quillize our joy, but do not strike at the root of our
peace by introducing, as Mr. Ward will have it,
oppressive dismay into the mind. Oppressive dis
may ! how can such a feeling live in the atmosphere
of God's favour, under the sunshine of God's smile ?
how shall it not hide its head, like some dismal night-
bird before the morning, when the light of that
countenance shines in upon the soul which puts
gladness in the heart more than in the time when
corn and wine and oil increases ?
And because a man is no longer the victim of this
dismay, must he therefore necessarily believe that
there is an absolute impossibility of his ever falling
away from the grace in which he at present stands ?
Absurd! Absurd! Mr. Ward does not profess to
understand the state of mind of which he writes, or
we should be indeed surprised at his misrepresent
ation of it.

26
I have now completed (however insufficiently) a
task which justice to Mr. Ward required that some
one should undertake. I have " looked plainly in
the face" such parts of our Formularies as Mr. Ward
thinks will present ( Evangelicals' with the greatest
difficulties. I have " put fairly down on paper" the
sense in which I myself and (I suppose) others with
me subscribe those parts ; and now " the world at
large may safely be left to form a judgment" as to
the respective naturalness of Mr. Ward's interpre
tations and ours. Yes, the world may safely be
left to form a judgment whether there be not the
widest possible line of demarcation between the
simple and obvious explanations here given of certain
passages in the Prayer-book, and a commentary
(for example) on the words, " The Church of Rome
hath erred, not only in their living and manner of
Ceremonies, but also in Matters of Faith" (" non so
lum quoad agenda et Cseremoniarum ritus, verum in
his etiam qua? credenda sunt,") interpreting them to
mean, " The Church of Rome contains (as what
Church does not?) some members who act wickedly,
some who are superstitiously addicted to outward
observances : and not only these, but some also who
err on one point or other of religious belief."
However, we shall not expend time in proving Mr.
Ward guilty of " non-natural" interpretations; for
" habemus confitentem reum ." he is convicted out
of his own mouth of " evasion" (p. 46. 1. 16.) and
" artifices of construction," (p. 29.) Nor, we must

27
say, is this barefaced confession so creditable to him,
as on a superficial view it might appear to be, so
long as he remains in the bosom of our Church. If
he were to forsake her communion, the case would
be widely different. We should then admire, if we
could not understand, that honesty, which now as
sumes the ugly shape of insensibility to shame. If
a criminal who had violated the laws of his country,
were to profess openly that he had done so, and at
the same time to acquiesce in the consequent penal
ties, the nobleness of his candour would be generally
admired, and sympathy enlisted on his side; but
were he to evade the warrant of arrest, make his
escape to some country beyond his Sovereign's
jurisdiction, and there proclaim aloud his evil deeds
in the ears of all men, publish his impunity, and
challenge the authorities of his country to touch
him, this would look extremely like barefaced
shamelessness. We had rather, much rather, that
he should hide his diminished head, after effecting
his escape, in some dark corner of a far country ; it
would argue, we think, a higher moral state in him
to shun, than to court, the public eye under such
circumstances. This remark is introduced — not, I assure Mr. Ward,
from any personal feeling of ill-will towards him, but
as bearino- upon the question, whether, the conclusion
having been arrived at, that an Academical Censure
ought to be inflicted, his is a case for mercy and for
bearance. His candour and openness seem ont he

28
surface to shew that it is : and on these grounds I
long hoped to persuade myself that I might forbear,
consistently with principle, from voting for the de
gradation of an old acquaintance. Further reflection,
however, has convinced me, that his dishonesty (sup
posing it to exist, and it is the solemn duty of every
Member of Convocation to ascertain whether or no it
does exist) is only aggravated by the fact of his
blazoning it on his escutcheon.
In conclusion, the Author of these pages begs
leave to state, that however sensible of its workings
within himself, he deplores and deprecates nothing
so much as that spirit of bitterness which in these
unhappy controversies finds too easy a vent among
men who in quieter times are, by God's grace,
strangers to it. He must candidly own (to his shame)
that in perusing parts of Mr. Ward's ' Ideal' and
' Address,' he has experienced the rising of that evil
spirit within himself, has felt something approaching
to exasperation at Mr. Ward's openly expressed
dislike and contempt of doctrines lying at the root
of all holiness and all peace, and indignation (some
times hardly to be restrained) at his entire want
of respect for the English Communion, her vene
rable system, her sound and masterly divines, and
her present revered authorities.
He assures Mr. Ward, however, that, having
struggled against this feeling and succeeded in over
coming it, he is prepared, as one out of many hun
dred judges, to try the issue of Thursday with mode-

29

ration and candour; in a spirit, he trusts, equally
removed on the one hand from that persecuting
anti-christian disposition which would run down or
press hard on an accused party ; and, on the other,
from that false and foolish liberality, which sacrifices
principle on the shrine of indifference.

I cannot help remarking, that what Mr. Ward says
on p. iv. of the Preface to his Address, viz. that the
historical branch of the argument in his favour (under
taken by Mr. Oakeley) has never received an answer,
is not quite the case. Mr. Ward may not be aware
of the existence of a Tract published in 1841 by the
Rev. C. P. Golightly, and entitled " Brief Remarks
upon No. 90. Second Edition," in which the author,
after despatching other topics, canvasses Mr. Oake-
ley's arguments. Mr. Ward should also be referred
to an anonymous paper which appeared some time
ago, exposing a False Citation in the British
Critic, and containing the following note on the
characters of Bishop Montague and Bishop Good
man, upon whose subscription to the Articles, while
they held Popish doctrines, Mr. Oakeley relies as
waiTanting himself and his friends in pursuing a
similar course. As to the first of these Bishops,
he was a man of so little principle, as to confess

30
" to Panzani, that ' as to the aversion to Rome which
he and others discovered in their Sermons and
printed Books, they were things of form chiefly to
humour the populace, and not to be much regarded.'
And it cannot be doubted that one of the other
Bishops referred to was Goodman of Gloucester, of
whom it is remarked in Panzani's Memoirs, that
' of those of the Episcopal order none appeared
more zealous for union with Rome, and that he
every day said the priest's office, and observed
several other duties as practised in the Church of
Rome.' Yet, of this very Bishop, Heylyn remarks
in his Life of Laud, (p. 263.) that ' having staid in
his Diocese long enough to be as weary of them as
they were of him, he affected a remove to the see of
Hereford, and had so far prevailed with some great
officer of State, that his money was taken, his conge
d'eslire issued out, his election passed. But the
Archbishop coming opportunely to the knowledge of
it, and being ashamed of so much baseness in the
man, who could pretend no other merit than his
money, so laboured the business with the King, and
the King so rattled up the Bishop, that he was glad
to make his peace not only with the resignation of
his election, but the loss of his bribe.' He died a
Roman Catholic.
" Mr. Oakeley in his defence of Tract XC remarks,
that ' the higher we set Bishop Goodman's Catholi
cism the more striking is the fact, that one who was
conscientious enough (!) to suffer penalties rather

31
than subscribe the Laudian Canons' (he did sub
scribe them at last, which Mr. Oakeley does not
seem to know) ' should not have stumbled at the
Articles.' "

the end.

BAXTER, PRIKTBll, OXtfORD.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08837 0722