fefe??fe;

PRICE TWENTY-FIVE CENTS.

m LETTEE
|t! ^ TO THE RIGHT REV. FATHER IN GOD,
Pj| RICHARD,
liuBD BISHOP OF OXFOKD,

TENDENCY TO ROMANISM.
IMPUTED TO
DOCTRINES HELD OF OLD, AS NOW, IN THE
ENGLISH CHURCH.

m

BY THE
REV. E. B. PUSEY, D. D.,
late fellow of oriel college ; .
kkgius professor of hebrew, and canon of christ chuhch.

¦*fs#

FROM THE SECOND OXFORD EDITION.

5Sf
¦a- '?•--->

NEW- YORK :
J. S. REDFIELD, CLINTON HALL.
1843.
Tribune Print, 160 Nassau, and 7 Spruce-Street,  J. A. Fraetas. Printer.

LETTER
TO THE RIGHT REV. FATHER IN GOD,
RICHARD,
LOED BISHOP OP OXPOED,

ON THE
TENDENCY TO ROMANISM,
IMPUTED TO
DOCTRINES HELD OF OLD, AS NOW, IN THE
ENGLISH CHURCH.

BY THE
REV. E. B. PUSEY, D. D.,
LATE FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE ;
REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH.
FROM THE SECOND OXFORD EDITION.

NEW- YORK :
J. S. REDFIELD, CLINTON HALL.
1843.

Principal subjects of the letter.
Art. VI. and XX. — On the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation;
1 apid Of the Authority of the Church  16
" Art. XI. — Of the justification of Man  41
Art. XVI.— Of sin after Baptism  , 54
Art. XXV.— On the Sacraments  65
Baptism  -  73
Art. XXVIII.— Of the Lord's Supper  84
Art. XXIII. — Of ministering in the Congregation  98
Prayers for those departed in the faith and fear of God  125
Invocation of Saints  129
"Celibacy  140

A LETTER, etc.

My dear Lord,
In ordinary times it is best and simplest to be silent amidst
misrepresentations, and to commit our innocence to God, lea
ving it to Him to bring it out when to Him seems good : " As
for me, I was like a deaf man and heard not, and as one that
is dumb, who doth not open his mouth ; I became even as a
man that heareth not, and in whose mouth are no reproofs :
for in Thee, 0 Lord, have I put my trust ; Thou shalt an
swer for me, O Lord my God."* Extensive good to the
many must always be purchased by the suffering of the few ;
it is a portion of the Cross which our Lord has bequeathed
as a precious gift to His disciples, and they must take it
humbly and thankfully ; glad if they may indeed think that
they have a portion of it, yet scarce venturing to decide for
themselves whether it be in truth His Cross, or the chastise
ment of their own infirmities, yet taking it at all events
quietly and joyously, that so, sanctified by that meritorious
Cross, it may turn to their joy and consolation ; and to those,
to whom it is indeed His Cross, to their crown.
These, however, are not ordinary times ; the waters, which
stagnated during the last century, are being stirred vehe
mently ; we trust, for the health of those who shall be cast
into them ; but amid the first troubling, people seem to be
tossed this way and that, not knowing whither themselves
shall be borne, and more curious about the fate of others,
than anxious to secure their own. It is not among the least
strange circumstances of the times, that tracts, written for a
temporary purpose, by persons unknown, or those who were
known, but little known beyond their own University, should
within a few years have been made, against the will of their
* Ps. xxxviii. 13 — 15,
1

writers, into a sort of touchstone of opinion almost through
out the land ; it is stranger yet, that the greater part of those
who make these tracts a test of soundness or unsoundness' of
faith, should be ready to confess not even to have seen them/
but have gleaned what little they know of them from the re
port of one or two periodicals; stranger yet, that publications
devoted to politics, should at a time of great political expec
tation, break off their speculations, or books of gossip,* "cut
off their tale, to talk of" deep and sacred subjects of theolo
gy, and descant on the gifts of God in Baptism, or on the
succession of Bishops ; or a defence of the Establishment-^
be changed into an " accuser of its brethren." Amid this
chaos, it is certainly not strange, that the wildest misconcep
tions should be commonly circulated and greedily received ;
that tales about the writers in the "Tracts for the Times"
should take the place of other novelties, and that those who
live to " tell or to hear some new thing," should be more in
terested in their novelty than their truth ; or that truths which
were handed down to us by our forefathers, and which in the
last century, and in the beginning of the present, were held
by the majority of the Clergy, should be stigmatized as no
velties, because new to such as have taken their opinions
from a modern school.
This ferment has already had its use ; the names of indi
viduals have been branded, but the doctrines or practices
which they recommended have been at least partially received.
Many who opposed them, were obliged to advance a certain
way, in order to take a position from which they might with
advantage attack them: still more frequently, men werethus
constrained to consider subjects which they had hitherto left
out of sight, but which, once brought before them, demand
ed an audience, and thereon found admittance, through their
manifest coincidence with the teaching or the services of our
Church. Thus, many observe the Ember weeks, acknow
ledge in some degree the duty of fasting, keep some of the
* " Travels in Town."
t " Essays on the Church," originally, and still for the most part, an useful
exposure of the pseudo-voluntary system.

festivals of the Church, acknowledge the privileges of their
ministry, are thankful for the gifts of God in their Baptism,
have truer views of repentance, recognise the benefits of
more frequent Communions, not to speak now of a deeper
knowledge of its blessedness, who perhaps little suspect from
what quarter they derived their present views. Doubtless,
too, some of those who now have " heresy" upon their lips,
have been awakened from their apathy as to its dangers, ulti
mately, by those whom they now accuse of it ; and some
have derived unconsciously their value for the distinctive
character of their Apostolic Church from those, whom they
now too readily suppose to be alienated from, or but luke
warm towards, her. Then also these discussions, though
often somewhat rudely and painfully carried on, have spread
wide the seed ; and so it has reached and lodged in many a
heart, which God has prepared to receive it, and to which
He has thus brought it, and is taking root, and bringing forth
fruit of self-denial, self-discipline, increased devotion, and
enlarged charity. We can, in another respect, already, hard
ly realize the state in which we were some few years ago.
The plans of reforming our Liturgy, then so rife, (each refor
mer having a scheme of his own, and agreeing with his fel
lows only in curtailing* the whole,) have shrunk away, or
sunk to rest ; most have discovered that one hour and an
half in a week is but very little to offer to Almighty God :
the murmurs against the Athanasian Creed and the impreca
tory Psalms, are no longer heard: and those who retain their
wishes for some alteration, are content to abandon it for the
time as hopeless, and to comfort themselves, that if the Li
turgy were more perfect, " the sort of idolatry now often
offered to it"f would be increased, and it might be " placed
not only on a level with the Bible, which indeed men often
do already, but even above it." Thus the Church has gain
ed a respite ; and persons who love her, might the more
* This, as so much besides, is inherited from the Puritans. See Hooker's
Defence of the length of the Church Service, Eccl. Pol. V. xxxii. and notes,
ed. Keble.
t Essays on the Church, p. 270.

cheerfully go on with the task of studying her character, and
developing it in their own practice, and inculcating it on
their flocks.
And with this we should have been contented, had we •¦¦
ourselves, or our own character, alone been concerned. |
Each year is changing or modifying the opinions of numbers
among those, who once regarded as novelties the truths
which we have put forth in the name of our Church, many
now support them, who once opposed them ; and of those
who have been too long trained in a different system to re
ceive any new impressions, many yet see thus much] that
there is nothing in these views inconsistent with piety ; and
so they are content to wait with Gamaliel, to see whither this
thing would grow : " for if this counsel or this work be of
men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God, ye can
not overthrow it, lest haply ye be found to fight against
God." The case, however, is altered since your lordship, as our
diocesan, has, in the discharge of your sacred office,* pro
nounced upon the charges circulated against us ; acquitting
those among us who are parochial ministers, of any " breach
of discipline," and bestowing a refreshing and paternal praise,
which we gratefully acknowledge at your lordship's hands,
for our " desire to restore the discipline of the Church," our
" attempts to secure a stricter attention to the Rubrical di
rections in the Book of Common Prayer, and to re'store the
due observance of the fasts and festivals of the Church :"
and on other topics, although your lordship declines enter
ing into questions which " might hereafter tend to contro
versial discussions," (since your lordship's office is to pro
nounce and arbitrate, not to dispute with those over whom
you are placed in the Lord,) your lordship has kindly stated
that " the authors of the Tracts have not laid upon your
lordship the painful necessity of interfering, nor have you
any fear that we shall ever do so." And thus, while we
thankfully acknowledge the caution which your lordship
* Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Oxford, 1838, pp. 20,21.

gives, especially to those who have learnt of us, (since in
times of excitement there must always be reason to fear lest
the truth should be evil spoken of, through the exaggeraw
tions of those who receive it,) we feel ourselves acquitted,
not of huma n infirmty, but of having put forth any such
doctrine, or in such spirit, as would call for the admonitions
of those who have authority in the Lord's vineyard.
But this acquittal by your lordship, calculated in itself to
inspire confidence in the members of the Church, and to
procure us peace, has proved only contemporaneous, at
least, with yet more violent and more extended censure.
Even your lordship's name and office has not been spared,
simply for having acquitted us ;* many seem to be perplexed,
as if there must be some evil about the thing, of which there
is so much evil spoken ; as the chief captain commanded to
examine St. Paul " with scourging, that he might know
wherefore they cried so against him." Acts xxii. 24.
In reverence then to your lordship's office, I would en
deavor at least to show those who will see, that we were
not undeserving of your lordship's kindness ; both lest your
lordship's holy office (for personally your lordship would be
unconcerned) should in the eyes of any be compromised ;
and in hopes of restoring in some measure that spirit of con
cord, which your lordship would promote, for which we
pray, and which we very sensibly need, now that Romanist
and Ultra-Protestant are united in an unnatural league
against our Church. And in so doing, I would beg respect
fully to be understood, not to claim the sanction of your
lordship's authority in behalf of all the views which I pro
fess. In some indeed, and in those affecting the most im
portant questions, I feel assured that I coincide with your
lordship, as having learnt them from the same Mother, the
Church of England ; others, upon which she has not pro
nounced, I would claim only to fall within the scope of your
lordship's words : " There must always be allowable points
of difference in the opinions of good men ; and it is only
* Church of England Review, reprinted in the Times newspaper.

when such opinions are carried into extremes, or are moot
ed in a spirit which tends to schism, that the interference of
those in authority in the Church is called for."
The charges brought against us are heavy : disaffection to
our own Church, unfaithfulness to her teaching, a desire to
bring in new doctrines, and to conform our Church more
to the Church of Rome, to bring back either entire or " mo
dified Popery."
The evidence for these charges is somewhat vague : for
ultra-Protestantism has in its own nature no standard except
each man's private judgment, and so its notions of popery
vary according to each man's individual views ; and that be
comes to every one popish, which in solemnity of observance
is greater than his own, or a doctrine or rite of antiquity
which he holds not. This was, when the use of the surplice,
the cross in Baptism, the very use of the Lord's prayer in
the same part of the service which it occupied in the ancient
ritual, to bow at the name of our Lord, to stand during the
reading of the Gospel, to administer confirmation, to " turn
his face at any time from the people,* or before service end
ed, remove from the place where it was begun," and the
like, were accounted popish by those of the "extreme refor
mation," whose principle it was that "in nothing they may be
followed which are of the Church of Rome."f Whither
that principle leads, our Church has once had but too un
happy experience. But the. principle, although modified, is
not abandoned ; it is not now popish to bow at the name of
our Lord in the Creed, but it is popish to do so at any other
time ; the Cross in Baptism is not popish, but for any, pri
vately, to retrace that mark upon himself, though a prac
tice of the early Church, is popish ;l to baptize infants is not
popish, but to hold that all infants derive benefit from bap
tism is altogether popery ; to bow to the Altar where such
(as in some cathedrals) is the received custom, is not popish,
* Hooker, Eccl. Pol. V. xxx. beg.
t Hooker, E.P. V. xxviii. beg.
t Essays on the Church, p. 290. Fraser's Answer to Dr. Hook's Call to
Union, p. 8.

but to speak of it with respect is so ; the title " Altar," is
not popish in the coronation-service, because it is part of the
ritual of our Church ; but, (though a scriptural and primi
tive title,) used by any private clergyman, it is an indication
of popery :* to kneel towards the east, is not popish in a
cathedral, or in the Ordination-service by a bishop, but in
a priest (although no innovation) it is so ; again, it was not
so accounted in Hooker's time, in the Church, but that has
become popish in the 19th century, which was not in the
17th ; it is not popish, if any one, taking one alternative of
fered him by his Church,+ " all Priests and Deacons are to
say daily the morning and evening prayer, either privately, or
openly, not being let by sickness or some, other urgent
cause," shall say them by himself in his own house ; but
if any one, taking the alternative enjoined to the Parochial
Minister, unless " reasonably hindered, say the same in the
parish church or chapel, where he ministereth," and from
any cause none come " to pray with him," then to pray by
himself in the church is popish, and partakes of the nature
of " private masses."
Again, it implies a papistical leaning to dislike the term
" Protestant.":}: And yet this title, the rejection of which is
to argue a leaning to Romanism, does not belong historically
to our Church, but to the Lutherans, and was still used ex
clusively of them, in the memory of some of the younger
among us; it has no where been adopted by our Church in
any formulary or document of her's ; nay, it was in 1689 al
together repudiated by the representatives of the inferior
clergy at least, the lower house of Convocation,§ who
would not even allow of the phrase, " The Protestant reli
gion in general, and the Church of England in particular,"
lest they should thereby seem in any way to identify them
selves with the foreign Churches. Thus then, again, that is
* Essays, p. 287. Fraser, p. 21.
f Directions " Concerning the Service of the Church," in Preface to Com
mon Prayer-book.
t Essays on the Church, p. 284.
§ Birch's Life of Tillotson. See at length, Tracts, No. 71, p. 33.

to be papistical in the beginning of the 19th century, which was
not at the close of the 17th ; or the main body of our cler
gy had then a papistical leaning. The adoption of a Luth
eran title might surely better prove those who use it, to iden
tify themselves with the Lutherans, than its rejection to im
ply any lurking feeling for the Church of Rome. The ti
tle, as simply negative, is ill-fitted to characterize the faith of
any portion of the Christian Church ; it speaks only of what
we do not hold, not of what we do hold, and is accordingly,
in some countries, as Italy, adopted by those who intend
thereby to deny, not the errors only held by Rome, but the
faith which she has retained : " which imagine the canker to
have eaten so far into the very bones and marrow of the
Church of Rome, as if it had not so much as a sound be
lief, no, not concerning God Himself, but that the very belief
of the Trinity were a part of Anti-Christian corruption."*
For the most part, Protestant, is there the title assumed by
the infidel. And this abuse of the title lies in its very na
ture : it is always more real to describe ourselves by what
we are, than to state merely what we are not, lest in time
our faith should shrink into the mere denial of error, instead
of being a confession of the truth.
It is popery again, and disaffection to our Church, to doubt
whether the pope is the Antichrist, even while asserting that
there is much anti-Christianf in the system of Rome ; that
as in St. John's time there were " many Antichrists," and
the mystery of iniquity had begun already to work in St.
Paul's, and his descriptions were in great degree realized
by the Gnostic heresies, so there is also anti-Christianism in
the system of Rome, though Antichrist himself be not yet
revealed, nor may we yet know when or among whom he
will appear.
Again, to approve of any thing in the Roman breviary,
which was not extracted thence by the reformers of our Li-
* Hooker, E. P., IV. viii. 2. ed. Keble.
t See Appendix, Nos. 38. 40. 41. 48. 72. and close of "Earnest Remon
strance," prefixed to Tracts, vol. iii.

turgy, betrays a longing, they say, towards Rome, an argu
ment somewhat singular in their mouths, who speak against
the " idolatry of the prayer book," — as if our compilers had
been not only wisely governed, but infallibly directed, and so
could not have overlooked any thing, which, though not es
sential, had yet been an additional beauty or perfection had
it been retained. Why, when we have an Easter hymn,
should it be papistical to think Advent hymns, with which the
breviary. abounds, had been an accession to our service, re
alizing as they do the coming and immediate presence of our
Lord 1 or to term the breviary and missal, from which most
of our own Prayer book is taken, " precious relics of anti
quity V
My lord, I would not be misunderstood ; we do not wish,
we have never expressed a wish, to have any alteration in the
Liturgy of our Church ; as we mistrust others in their way,
so we mistrust ourselves in our own ; they think that our
Church erred in retaining too much — we think that she might
have retained more of what was ancient in the breviary and
the missal, without approximating in any way to the corrup
tions of modern Rome : but there is this difference/ in our
principles, that they, not accustomed to any high views of
Church discipline, for the most part as soon as they have an
end in view, which they think good, think also that it is good
to realize it any how ; form societies, enter into combina
tions, prepare schemes for accomplishing it, take the initiative
in it, hoping that those "set over us in the Lord," the Bishops
of our Church, will in time fall into it. They are, what they
have upbraided one of our friends for terming himself, "Ec
clesiastical agitators ;"* only our friend meant by the name
"to rouse the Church from within to a sense of her own pri
vileges and gifts," they act upon it, as referring to outward
changes, whether in her Liturgy or discipline, produced by the
" agitation" of a portion of her members. We have been
taught to know our own place in the Lord's vineyard ; that
we are " under authority ;" that our office is not to reform
* Froude's Remains, t. i. p. 258.
2

10
our Church, to add or to take away from her, but to obey
her ; to study her character, to see how we may more and
more bring out and realize her teaching and her principles.
We have, farther than this, said again and again, (and I refer
to this, because they who blame us should at least know our
principles,) that whatever is done for the Church must not
be done by a majority in her ; that, (to use the words of one
of us,) " Whatever is done for the Church as a whole, must
be done by the Church as a whole."* More than this, the
writer among us, who from his peculiar mode of expressing
himself, could least be judged of by partial extracts, and so
has been, perhaps, the most extensively misunderstood, sums
up in this reverential way his arguments for not farther short
ening the Church services. It is manifest that his own heart
(one may speak of him, because he is at rest) was with those
ages, when " they complied with Scripture to the letter,
praised God seven times a day, besides their morning and
evening prayer." Yet he thus sums up his account of the
gradual contraction of them.f " This, it will be said, is an ar
gument not so much for retaining the present form of the
Prayer-book" [for which he had been contending] " as for
resorting to what is older. To my own mind, it is an argu
ment for something different from either, for diffidence. I
very much doubt, whether in these days the spirit of true
devotion is at all understood, and whether an attempt to go for
ward or backward, may not lead our innovations to the same re-
* Pref. to St. Augustine's Confessions, p. ix. add. App. No. 54.
t Froude's Remains, t. ii. p. 382. Of the same kind is the passage in
which, while referring to the changes in our Communion Service, through the
foreign reformers, as " a judgment on the Church," he thankfully acquiesces
in our present service, as "crumbs from the Apostles' table.'' Better (if one
might so expand his metaphor) in itself, to have the whole than the fragment;
but better again to have the fragments than the whole, when mingled with fo
reign ingredients, so that there is " Death in the pot," if not to individuals, yet
to the Church generally ; nay, better again, perhaps, for us, because more suit
ed to us, (such as we now are,) to be contented with "the crumbs," having
again become babes who have " need of milk not of strong meat :'' and so
also it is implied, they are " crumbs" which we are not worthy to gather up.
The expression is abasement of self, not derogation of our service, which is
but too good for most of us.

II
suit. If the blind lead the blind, shall they not both fall into
the ditch ?" I at least, my lord, must own that I felt im
pressed and reproved by this deep and self-restraining feeling
of a young and ardent mind, mingling self-abasement with
aspirations after something higher, and acknowledging him
self unworthy to " unloose" even " the shoe latchet" of that
form of worship which in our own devotions we so imper
fectly realize.
The feeling of our friend in this passage, and our own, is
briefly this, we must have acted up more to the theory of our
Church as she is, before we attempt to alter any ritual be
longing to her. We must amend ourselves before we amend
any thing of her's. When the body of our Clergy shall have
acted up to her injunctions, by performing for years, day by
day, her daily service, then may they be judges whether any
improvements may be introduced into that service ; when
our service shall have become daily instead of weekly, then
may we judge whether any additions should be made to that
of the Lord's day; when people by the daily devotional use
of the Psalms, shall have come to learn some portion of their
depth, then they will see whether they are not in truth Chris
tian hymns, and how much more of Christian truth they
contain than the popular modern hymns, now often in use
among us ; when we have learnt and taught our congrega
tions the blessedness of infant Baptism, and to be gladdened
instead of wearied by seeing our little ones, one by one,
made members of Christ, or have realized the blessings
of our own engraffing into Christ, then may they perhaps
judge of the language of the Baptismal service ; when we
have become alive to the importance of a true confession of
the Holy Trinity, how much belongs to it, how manifold and
subtle the temptations to deviate from it, have jealously ob
served our own inherent tendencies, and to what heresies our
own frame of mind was inclined, or from which we have,
perhaps, on the very road, been snatched, then may men
judge fitly whether " our Church"* at this day " needeth"
* Hooker, Eccl. Pol. V. Xlii. 13. ed. Keble.

12
not, in the Athanasian Creed, "those ancient preservatives,
which ages before us were so glad to use ;" or rather, when
our whole selves shall have been disciplined by her solemn
rounds of prayers, thanksgivings, fastings, festivals, commu
nions, shall we be formed in her model and so shall under
stand her, and may supply any thing lacking to her. Till
then, our only safe course is to abide as we are, fitting our
selves to receive any enlargement of our treasures, by learn
ing gratefully to appreciate and to use those which we have.
What is good in itself might not be good to us, until we are
other than we are.
It is then, my lord, by judging of us according to their own
habits of mind, and inferring that we should feel, act, and think
as they would, were they in our stead, that they have come
to these strange notions about us. They, with the impa
tience of modern habits, could not see a fancied defect, with
out at once casting about how they might remove it ; they
cannot understand that men should think it their duty to sit
still, should not have a wish to remove it, if they could ;
should think that it had been better otherwise, that here
after what they think best in the abstract, may be best for our
Church ; may even speak of these things in the hopes of
preparing for their ultimate restoration, if it may be, in the
days of our sons' sons ; but meanwhile would not, if they
might, restore them. I mean not in so saying to claim any
superiority for ourselves over others ; we are, each as we
have been trained to be ; the difference is in the systems,
wherein we have been formed ; I would only account for the
mistakes which must arise, if those who act upon one set of
principles are judged upon by the other. Thus, we would
freely express, as have many of the bishops of our Church,*
our conviction that the revisers of our Liturgy did unadvised
ly in yielding some more explicit statements of doctrine to
the suggestions of foreign reformers, whose tone of mind was
different from that of our Church ; yet could we adopt the
words of one, with whose views probably we do not coincide,
* Such as Bp. Overall, Abp. Sandcroft and Sharp, Bp. Hickes and Hors-
ley. Tract No. 81. ed. 2.

13
" happy is it for the Church, that there has always been be
tween these opposite parties" [who would reform the Prayer-
book in opposite ways] "a much larger body of worshippers,
who have used their Book of Common Prayer with undis
turbed devotion, offering thanks to God continually for His
unspeakable gift."*
These sentiments we have often expressed ';f and I may
extract here a statement made in a periodical,^: expressing
for the most part our sentiments, and which was quoted with
pleasure at the time, as a declaration of our practical views,
by one,§ whose valued life was devoted to the maintenance
of our Church as she is, and the uniform opposer of whatever
threatened her with organic change.
" If Anglo-Catholics did but understand their position, it
would be no despicable one. For ourselves, we find enough
of satisfaction in it, not to be eager for any of those changes
in the relation of Church to State, which late political events
and constitutional reforms make abstractedly fitting. What
may be the duty of persons in high stations in the Church, is
another matter, or what might be the Church's duty if her
members one and all were of one mind and one judgment in
all things, or what may be the duty of individuals as a matter
of conscience in the event of certain contingencies ; but at
this moment, we conceive that Catholic truth will spread and
flourish more satisfactorily under the existing state of things,
than on any alteration which could be devised. We feel
no desire for the meeting of convocation ; we are not even
earnest in behalf of a repeal of the Statute of Praemunire,
though it would certainly be becoming and just. We want
changes of no kind, whether in the Prayer-book, or Articles,
or Homilies, or Government, except any thing can be shown
to us in our present state to be literally and directly sinful.
We are content to take things as we have received them, and
are quite sure that that system which was sufficient for the
* Pref. to two books of Edward VI. compared. Oxford, 1838. d. xxxv.
t See Appendix, Nos. 24. 54.
t British Critic, vol. 24. p. 69.
§ Rev. H. J. Rose, British Magazine, vol. xiv. p. 21 9, 20.

14
expansive minds of Andrews or Laud, has not been so cir
cumscribed by subsequent political events, but it will hold us
pigmies, however large we grow. We may like some parts
of it less than others ; we may conceive that some parts
might be more primitive, other parts more finished ; but we
are thankful to have, and content to use, what has come
down to us ; and even where any thing has had an unsatis
factory origin, we will make the best of it, and receive it into,
and assimilate it to, the glorious deposit which we inherit
from the Apostles."
But setting aside these vague suspicions, I would now pro
ceed to lay before your lordship, in connexion with the arti
cles of our Church, what we (following, as we are assured,
those who have ever been accounted the great lights of our
Church) believe to be her doctrine, on the points whereon
we are accused ; and that (wherever the case admits) in
contrast with Romanism on the one hand, and Ultra-Protest
antism on the other. Thus it will appear, I trust, that the "via
media," along which we, with our Church, would fain tread,
though distinct from the by-ways of Ultra-Protestantism, is
a broad and tangible line, not verging toward, or losing itself
in Romanism. Rather is it the " old path" of the Primitive
Church, after whose model our own was reformed, and
which amid the entanglements of the modern deviations of
Rome, our reformers wished, I believe, to trace out.
On the first five Articles of our Church, those which relate
to the Holy Trinity, happily no imputation has been cast
against us; and on these, even the Church of Rome is allow
ed to have transmitted faithfully the doctrine of the primitive
Church. Would, my lord, that there were no signs of un
soundness on any other side ! But whereas a traditionary faith
would be safe with regard to these essential articles, in that
it would depart neither to the right nor to the left from that
which the Universal Church had attested to be the Apostolic
and Scriptural creed, the greater, because unsuspected,
danger will beset those who profess to draw their faith, un
aided, from Holy Scripture. If it overtake them not, it is be
cause their faith is better than the principles which they pro-

fess ; they are sound and orthodox, not in consequence of their
principles, but in despite of their natural tendency. The na
tural bias of what terms itself a " Scriptural Theology," is to
a naked Creed ; it would cast aside all but Scriptural terms ;
confine itself to Scriptural phrases ; reject as " scholastic
distinctions" the fuller declarations, which have been com
mitted to the Church ; boasts of contenting itself with what
it terms practical truths, or what it decides to be such ; takes
farther statements, first as simply negative, then supersedes
them as having been useful formerly, but not needed now,*
dwells not upon them, drops them from its Creed, takes an
attitude of hostility against them, generalizes its faith ; and
then, since the mind must think one way or other, whenever
subjects are brought before it in detail, falls an easy prey to
the heresies from which the Church would have rescued
them. All true Theology must of necessity be Scriptural ;
but that which terms itself a " Scriptural Theology," has al
ways been a stepping-stone to Socinianism or Rationalism.
It begins in an ungrateful spirit, setting at nought the teach
ing of the Church, and " leaning upon its own understand
ing ;" and it ends in being left to its own understanding, and
being " given over to an undistinguishing mind." Such has
been the case with every Protestant body, except those con
nected with our own Church, though not of it ; such is the
course which America, as far as it is not Anglican or Roman
ist, is now taking : and no one can observe the way in which
unsound f American publications are creeping into this coun
try, by whom introduced, with what apologies in one instance
for Socinianism ; without being convinced that the Ultra-Pro-
* " The like may be said of the Gloria Palri and the Athanasian Creed.
It was first brought into the Church to the end that men thereby should make
an open profession in the Church of the Divinity of the Son of God against
the detestable opinion of Arius and his disciples, wherewith at that time mar
vellously swarmed almost the whole of Christendom. Now that it has pleased
the Lord to quench that fire, there is no such cause why these things should
be in the Church, at the least why that Gloria Palri should be so often
repeated."— Cartwrightap. Hooker, E. P. V. xlii. 1. ed. Keble, and Hooker's
answer, especially § 11, sqq.
t See Tracts for the Times, Vol. iii. No. 73. " On the introduction of ra
tionalistic principles into religion."

16
testant sects in this country, so far as they do not return to
the Church or relapse into Romanism, will take the same
course. Those in our Church, who have fraternized with
them, are upheld by a traditionary instruction, of which they
are unaware, in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds ; and
while they declaim against tradition, are probably upheld by
tradition against heresies which destroy the soul. And so,
we trust, they will continue ; but though there is all hope
that they will be protected against the grosser forms of he
resy, the subtler form of Sabellianism creeps over the mind
almost unperceived ; and the objections against the title
flcoTd/cos, with which we have been assailed, imply that some
have sadly forgotten what was the origin of the Nestorian
heresy.* This instance may illustrate the danger of an over-anxiety
to recede from Rome, or of sacrificing truths which that cor
rupt Church has abused ; it would lead to too long and in
volved a discussion to point out, article by article, wherein
we, with our Church, differ from that of Rome ; I will there
fore trespass no longer upon your lordship's time than the
occasion requires, and will confine myself to those articles
upon which we have been rumored to approach nearer to
Rome, than the limits of our Church allow. In so doing, I
must make many statements, which to your lordship are trite
and familiar ; but my object is to lay before your lordship
an explicit confession, not to say any thing new upon sub
jects so often handled.
Art. VI. and XX. — On the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures
for Salvation ; and, Of the authority of the Church.
These two articles must neccessarily be taken together, in
* " The Christian Knowledge Society has latterly erased from one of its
publications the phrase, ' The mother of God,' rightly judging it to be Popish.
The British Critic demands its re-instatement, observing, ' As to styling the
Blessed Virgin the mother of God, did the Essex ministers ever chance to hear
of the council of Ephesus V "—Essays on the Church, p. 288 ; also p. 304. Yet
the State, by advice of our Church, acknowledged that what the Council of
Ephesus "ordered, judged, or determined to be heresy," is such. 1 Eliz. 1. 36.

17
order to understand fully the meaning of our Church, on the
relation of the authority of the Church to that of Holy
Scripture. In the first she declares that "Holy Scripture
contains all things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is
not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be re
quired of any man to be believed as an article of the Faith ;
or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation." The article
is manifestly directed against the Church of Rome, which
has made new articles of faith, and so does " require to be be
lieved as necessary io salvation," things which are not contain
ed in Holy Scripture. But the article, though it states that
Holy Scripture "contains all things necessary to salvation,"
does not say that it teaclies them in such wise, that every one
may collect them thence for himself: nor does it even say,
that things ma}' not be believed or practised, which are not
contained in Holy Scripture, (so that of course, they be not
contrary to it ;) but only that they must not be " required to
be believed as necessary to salvation." It is remarkable that
this limitation, which is so singularly overlooked* by those
who employ this article against the right use of tradition,
occurs, wherever the sufficiency of Holy Scripture is men
tioned ; so that the compilers of this article must have just
meant to exclude the case to which people now so carelessly
apply it, of "things not necessary to salvation." Thus,
again, in the engagement required at Ordination and Conse
cration, this limitation is inserted in each clause : Are you
persuaded that the Holy Scriptures contain sufficiently all
I>octrine required of necessity for eternal schation through
faith in Christ Jesus 1 and are you determined out of the said
Scriptures to instruct the people committed to your charge,
and to teach nothing as required of necessity to eternal salvation,
but that which you shall be persuaded, may be concluded and
* Thus, one argues that the Apostolical succession is against our Articles,
because it cannot be proved by Scripture, and by that Article nothing is to be
held [omitting " as necessary to salvation"] which cannot be so proved.
There seems to be the same sort of confusion in " Dr. Hook's Call to Union
answered," p. 9. though the instances given are mostly Popish corruptions, and
so against "tradition" also. 3

18
proved by Holy Scripture1?"* The very word also, "requi
red," shows that the Church had in view some one in autho
rity who had the power to " require." In the preceding
articles our Church had embodied the doctrines of the Creeds,
which, and which only, are Articles of Faith, or "necessary
to be believed in order to salvation." Those which follow,
are Articles of Religion, which she did not receive from the
ancient Church, but which she framed herself, not as essen
tial to Communion, (for this she requires only the belief in
the Articles of the Apostles' Creed,) but " for the avoiding
of diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent
touching true religion." Accordingly, at the very outset of
this new range of Articles, she draws limits to her own pow
ers and to those of the Church Universal. She does not, like
the Church of Rome, increase the Creed, which no particu
lar Church has the right to do ; and she lays down within
what limits the Creed may be enlarged by the Church Uni
versal ; namely, only as to whatsoever is " read in Holy
Scripture, or may be proved thereby." She lays down that
Holy Scripture is the sole source of " all things necessary to
salvation ;" and that nothing must be " required to be belie
ved as necessary to salvation," but what is drawn from that
source ; but both at the beginning and the end she restrains
what she says, to " things necessary to salvation." So then
it is probable that our Church means that things may be requi
red to be believed, (provided it be not upon peril of salvation,)
which are not proved by Holy Scripture : but certain, that
according to her, things not in Holy Scripture maybe subjects
of belief ; and that there is a power, some where residing,
which may " require" to be " believed as necessary to salva
tion," whatever can be proved by Holy Scripture. For the
limitation were absurd, that things not proveable by Holy
Scripture, must not be required to be believed " as necessary
to salvation," unless those which can be so proved, might be
required. This very article then, in laying down the " suf
ficiency of Holy Scripture as the source of all saving truth,"
at the same time recognises the existence of an authority
* See farther Mr. Keble's Postscript to 3d ed. of the Sermon, entitled,
" Primitive tradition recognised in Holy Scripture," p. 12. sqq.

19
which may " require to be believed as essential to salvation,"
what it " can prove thereby." And this authority, in the
20th Article she declares, as in the 6th she implies it, to be
the Church ; for in the 20th Article, there recurs the same
language, that, " as it must'not decree any thing contrary to
Holy Writ, so besides the same, ought it not to enforce any
thing to be believed for necessity of salvation." Within this
same limit, however, drawn equally by the 6th and 20th Ar
ticles, the 20th Article expressly states, what the 6th implies:
" The Church has authority in controversies of Faith." The
Church is subject to Holy Scripture, but set over individuals ;
she may not ( 1 ) " expound one place of Holy Scripture that it
be repugnant to another," nor may she (2) "decree any
thing against Holy Writ," nor may she (3) " besides the same,
enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of salvation ;"
but then the very fixing of these limits of her power, shows
that she has power within these limits ; that she is the " ex
positor of Holy Writ," provided she do "not expound one
place that it be repugnant to another ;" she may " decree
things," provided they be not " against Holy Writ ;" she
may " enforce things to be believed" even "for necessity of
salvation" provided they be neither " against, nor besides,
Holy Scripture." But the power of " expounding," " de
creeing," " ordaining," implies that her children are to re
ceive her expositions, and obey her decrees, and accept her
authority in controversies of faith : and the appeal lies not
to their " private judgment ;" they are not the arbiters,
whether she pronounce rightly or no ; for what sort of de
cree or authority were that, of which every one were first to
judge, and then if his judgment coincided with the law, to
obey 1 who would not see the absurdity of this in matters of
human judgment 1 " If thou judge the law, thou art not a
doer of the law, but a judge." Jas. iv. 11. " If I be a
father, where is mine honor 1 and if I be a master, where
is my fear 1" Mai. i. 6.
But our Church in this article farther and accurately de
fines the nature of her authority ; the Church is a " keeper
and witness of Holy Writ ; she is its guardian ; it is from her

20
that we know of what books the Canon of Scripture con
sists ; she is the " witness" to the truths which it contains ,
not a "judge" over it, not having to determine new truth, or
erect new articles of faith ; but a witness to the doctrine
which she herself received in continued succession from the
primitive Church, as being contained in Holy Scripture.
In brief, then, my lord, the meaning of our Church (as
we conceive) in these Articles is, that the Scripture is the
sole authoritative source of the Faith, i. e. of " things to be
believed in order to salvation ;" the Church is the medium
through which that knowledge is conveyed to individuals ;
she, under her responsibility to God, and in subjection to His
Scripture, and with the guidance of His Spirit, testifies to
her children, what truths are necessary to be believed in or
der to salvation ; expounds Scripture to them ; determines,
when controversies arise ; and this, not in the character of
a judge, but as a " witness" to what she herself received.
And in this view of the meaning of our Church, we are
further confirmed by the Canon of the Convocation of 1571,
to which we have of late often had occasion to appeal ; the
same Convocation which enforced subscription to the Ar
ticles. " They [preachers] shall in the first place be careful never
to teach any thing from the pulpit to be religiously held and
helieved by the people, but what is agreeable to the doctrine
of the Old or New Testament, and collected out of that very
Doctrine by the Catholic Fathers and ancient Bishops."
So have we ever wished to teach, " what is agreeable to
the Doctrine of the Old or New Testament," and as the
test of its being thus agreeable, we would take, not our own
private and individual judgments, but that of the Universal
Church, as attested by the " Catholic Fathers and ancient
Bishops." This, my lord, were perhaps sufficient ; nor need we, we
conceive, go into the private opinions of those engaged in
our Reformation ; seeing that they, in many points, varied
from each other, and some of them on some points from
themselves ; and we have the injunction to take the Articles

21
in their plain grammatical sense. Nor indeed have we our
Articles from them ; but Articles, in which their opinions
have been in some respects modified ; we have not the 42
Articles of Edward VI., but the 39 of Q. Elizabeth ; and
these have their authority to us from the agreement of our
Church in 1562 and 1571. We are then in no respects even
guided to look to the private opinions of any instruments of
the Reformation, as interpreters of tbe Articles ; since we
are expressly referred not to them, but to the " literal and
grammatical sense"* of the Articles themselves. But we
could go farther ; and show that they who are of most note
among them, wished to submit their own judgments to that
of antiquity, and at all events, desired to hold no other doc
trine, than that which had been received by the Primitive
Church. They did not appeal to her, as has been recently
said, as an argumentum ad hominem, merely to refute an ad
versary with his own weapons. "f Their very language shows
that they vicre in earnest, and speak with reverence. Abp.
Cranmer, for instance, appeals, at a solemn moment, to
them, and confesses:): " in all my doctrine and preaching,
both of the Sacraments, and of other my doctrine, whatso
ever it be, not only I mean and judge, as the Catholic Church
and the most holy Fathers of old meant and judged, but
also, I would gladly use the same words that they used, and
not use any other words ; but to set my hand to all and sin
gular their speeches, phrases, ways and forms of speech,
which they do use in their treatises upon the Sacraments,
and to keep still their interpretation."
And hence our Divines fearlessly appeal to the whole pe
riod when the Church was one, and spake one language, and
could speak as one ; as Bishop Jewell in his celebrated
challenge :§ " I said, perhaps boldly, as it might then seem
* K. James's declaration prefixed to the Articles.
t e.g. " Dr. Hook's Call to Union answered," p. 11.
t Works, vol. iv. pp. 126, 7. See farther and other authorities in Mr.
Manning's Appendix to a Sermon on the Rule of Faith, p. 6. sqq.
§ Sermon preached at Paul's Cross, (Works, pp. 57, 58.) extracted more
at length in Tracts for the Times, No. 78. " Testimony of writers in the lat
ter English Church to the duty of maintaining quod semper, quod ubigue,
quod ab omnibus traditum est."

22
to some men, but as I myself and the learned of our adver
saries themselves do well know, sincerely and truly, that
none of them all, that this day stand against us, are able or
shall ever be able to prove against us any one of all those
points, either by the Scriptures, or by example of the prim
itive Church, or by the old Doctors, or by the ancient gene
ral Councils.
" The words that I then spake, as near as I can call them
to mind, were these : If any learned man of all our adver
saries, or if all the learned men that be alive, be able to
bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholic
Doctor, or Father, or out of any old general Council, or out
of the Holy Scriptures of God, or any one example of the
primitive Church, whereby it may be clearly and plainly
proved, that there was any private mass in the whole world
at that time, for the space of six hundred years after Christ ;
or that there was then any communion ministered unto the
people under one kind ; or that the people had their com
mon prayers then in a strange tongue, that they understood
not ; or that the Bishop of Rome was then called an univer
sal Bishop, or the head of the universal Church, &c. ; if any
man alive were able to prove any of these articles, by any
one clear or plain clause or sentence, either of the Scriptures
or of the old Doctors, or of any old general Council, or by
an example of the primitive Church : I promised then that
I would give over and subscribe unto him." 
" Besides all that I have said already, I will say farther,
and yet nothing so much as might be said. If any one of
all our adversaries be able clearly and plainly to prove, by
such authority of the Scriptures, the old Doctors, and Coun
cils, as I said before, that it was then lawful for the priest to
pronounce the words of consecration closely and in silence
to himself, &c, &c. — if any one of all our adversaries be
able to vouch any one of all these articles, by any such suf
ficient authority of Scriptures, Doctors, or Councils, as I
have required, as I said before, so say I now again, I am con
tent to yield unto him and to subscribe. But I am well as-

23
sured that they shall never be able truly to allege one sen
tence. And because I know it, therefore I speak it, lest ye
haply should be deceived."
Nor do we in this, nor did they, approximate to Romanism ;
but rather they herein took the strongest and the only unas
sailable position against it. Rome and ourselves have alike
appealed to the authority of "the Church ;" but in the mouth
of a Romanist the Church means, so much of the Church
as is in communion with herself, in other words, it means
herself: with us, it means the Universal Church, to which
Rome, as a particular Church, is subject, and ought to yield
obedience. With Rome, it matters not whether the decision
be of the Apostolic times, or of yesterday ; whether against
the teaching of the early Church, or with it ; whether the
whole Church universal throughout the world agree in it, or
only a section, which holds communion with herself: she, as
well as Calvin, makes much of the authority of the Fathers,
when she thinks that they make for her ; but she, equally
with the founder of the Ultra-Protestants, sets at nought their
authority, so soon as they tell against her ; she unscrupulously
sets aside the judgment of all the ancient Doctors of the
Church, unhesitatingly dismisses the necessity of agreement,
even of the whole Church at this day, and proudly taking to
herself the exclusive title of Catholic, sits alone a Queen in
the midst of the earth, and dispenses her decrees from herself.
No, my lord ! they ill understand the character of Rome, or
their own strength, who think that she would really commit
herself, as Cranmer did, to Christian Antiquity, or who would
not gladly bring her to that test ! What need has she of
Antiquity, who is herself infallible, except to allure mankind
to believe her so 1 " I for my part," says one of no mean
note among them,* "to speak candidly, would rather credit
one Pope, in matters touching the mysteries of the Faith,
than a thousand Augustines, Jeromes, or Gregories. For
I believe and know that the sovereign Pontiff cannot err in
things which belong to the Faith, because the Church's
* Corn. Mussua, Bp. of Bitonto, quoted by Mr. Newman, Romanism and po
pular Protestantism, Lect.2. " on Romanism, as neglectful of Antiquity," p. 98.

24
power of determining what relates to the Faith, resides in the
Pontiff. So then the error of the Pontiff would be the error
of the Universal Church. But the Universal Church cannot
err. Tell me not of a Council," &c.
This is the very complaint, which our Divines always
brought against her controversialists. Thus Bp. Jewell :*
" But one thing specially much misliketh M. Harding above
all the rest ; that, the better to disclose the deformities and
weakness of his doctrine, I have alleged so many Canonists
and school Doctors. For all those he weigheth no better
now than Esop's fables. And therefore he saith, ' As for the
gew-gaws of the schoolmen and canonists, I despise them
utterly.' Are all the school-doctors and canonists now be
come intestabiles, i. e. so far out of credit, so infamous and so
vile, that they may not be allowed to bear witness ? Whose
then are they 1 Are they not all M. Harding's own doctors 1
Is he now ashamed of his own 1 — And yet will he suddenly
condemn them all, every one, by one sentence, Abbots,
Bishops, Archbishops, Decrees, Decretals, Cardinals, Saints,
and Popes, and all together ! But we must pardon M. Hard
ing ; he dealeth indifferently and is nothing partial. For
even with the like reverence he useth all the ancient Doctors
of the Church, and others of later time, that fight on his side,
and are allied to him. ' Tertullian,' he saith, 'was an here
tic, and wrote this or that in defence of his heresy.' ' St.
Cyprian,' he saith, 'had an ill cause, and defended a false
hood, and was driven to the very same shifts whereunto all
heretics are driven.' ' It seemeth,' saith he, ' St. Jerome
was deceived by a rumor,' &c. &c. Thus, we see, M.
Harding has a commission to control all manner of Doctors
whatsoever, Greeks, Latins, Old, New, his own and others, if
they corne not readily to his purpose. Nicolaus Cusanusf
saith, 'Pope Eugenius tells us this thing is true, if he will have
it true, and not otherwise.' "
The Anglican Divines, then, whom we follow as the ex-
+ Preface to Defence of the Apology.
t De Concordan. 1. ii. c. 20.

positors of the meaning of our Church, differ from Rome in
the following points. They appeal to the authority of ihe
Universal Church as long as it was one ; Rome, to the Church,
ancient or modern, in communion with herself: they, to the
consent of the Early Church, however it be ascertained ;
Rome, to the decision of Councils confirmed by the Bishop
of Rome : they rest on it as bearing testimony to an Apostolic
origin ; Rome, as the result of her own infallibility : they hold
that the Universal Church is only a witness to the Caiholic
truth, and has no power of forming new articles of faith ;
Rome, that even the Modern Church in communion with her
self, has that power: they, that the Church is. a witness;
Rome, that she is a judge: they, that the more recent may
not contradict the ancient ; Rome, that she may, and may
correct them: they, that the meaning of Holy Scripture, of
which the Church is the interpreter, must always be one and
the same, to be collected from " the agreement of the Cath
olic Fathers and ancient Bishops ;" Rome, that the Church
may, under different circumstances, affix different meanings,
and that the meaning last affixed supersedes the former :*
they, in a word, seek for a genuine Apostolic tradition, to be
established by the consent of all times, all Churches, and the
great Doctors of all those Churches ; Rome (like Ultra-
* See the remarkable extract from Card. Cusa in Mr. Newman's Roman
ism, &c. Lect. 2. " on Romanism as neglectful of Antiquity," p. 97, note.
Here a few sentences may be extracted : his task is to defend the Council of
Constance for refusing the cup to the laity, contrary to our Lord's institution,
and the practice of antiquity, as itself acknowledged. " Let it not disturb
thee, that at different times, the rites of sacrifices and even of sacraments are
found to differ, the truth abiding the same ; and that Scriptures are adapted to
the times, and variously understood, being explained at one time in conformity
to the rite then universally prevalent, and again their meaning being changed
when the rite is changed. For Christ, to whom the Father hath delivered the
kingdom of heaven and earth, in both uses a sort of economy, and either by se
cret inspiration, or by a clearer explanation, suggests what suits each distinct
period. Wherefore if the Church's interpretation of the same Gospel precept be
different now from heretofore, yet this sense now curient in the Church, being
inspired for the use of the Church, as being suited for the times, is to be accepted
as the way of salvation. It is therefore an absurd argument, to try to object to
an universal rite of the [Roman] Church out of the writings of their pre
decessors" 4

26
Protestants) follows modern traditions, assumes them to be
Apostolic, simply because she holds them, and she is infalli
ble ; and so was the ancient Church, in communion with
Rome; and so she must have taught them the same as Rome
does now. And thus she brings in her modern corruptions,
against which the appeal to Christian Antiquity is the surest
safeguard. Scriptural language she can (as did the enemy
of mankind, to whom she is partially in bondage) plausibly
apply : many of her chief corruptions, she (in common with
Ultra-Protestants) rests on the language of Scripture, and (in
common also with them) in contradiction to the ancient
Church ; but the appeal to Antiquity she cannot elude. It
is too full, too circumstantial. No, my lord, they only who
suspect Antiquity, because it is opposed to modern and private
doctrines of their own, need fear committing themselves and
their Church to it ; we have full confidence in our Church,
and know that she can stand ihe test of primitive doctrine,
and that Rome cannot. Rome may entice the unwary by
the name of Antiquity, but she dare not pledge herself to the
reality : if in name she seem to take the same ground as the
Anglican Divines, she must differ from them. Or to look
upon it in another way : Rome differs from us, as to the au
thority which she ascribes to tradition ; she regards it as co
ordinate, our divines as stit-ordinate : as to the way in which it
is to be employed; she, as independent of Holy Scripture, our's,
as subservient to, and blended with it ; as to its limits, she
supposes that the Church of Rome has a power of impo
sing new articles, necessary to be believed for salvation ; our's,
that all such articles were comprised at first in the Creed,
and that the Church has only the power of clearing, defining,
and expound ng these fixed articles : as to ihe office of the
Church therein ; Rome supposes that the Church may select
of different opinions that which she judges right ; our's, that
she must take that which is attested by universal consent : as
to the power of the Church; Rome supposes that the Church
may stamp that ascertain, which before was really uncertain ;
our's, that she only ascertains that to be certain which in fact
was so, but had not formally been pronounced to be so : as to

27
the source of that power ; Rome places it in her own assumed
infallibility ; our's, in the office of the Church, as the deposi
tory of, and witness to, the traditions confined to her : so then,
beyond the name of tradition, the Church of Rome and our
Divines differ in every thing besides.
It might yet be satisfactory to state two or three points
bearing upon this subject :
1st, (lest the name of tradition should appear to imply an in
definite body of truth,) as to the subjects comprehended in the
traditions acknowledged by the Church. These, as drawn
out by the learned Dean Field,* are (1) the number and
names of the authors of books divine and canonical, (2) that
summary of the chief heads of Christian doctrine contained
in the Apostles' Creed, (3) " The form of Christian
doctrine and explication of the several parts thereof, which
the first Christians, receiving of the same Apostles that deli
vered to them the Scriptures, commended to posterities."
[Whence it was enabled to expand the Apostle's Creed into
the Nicene and Athanasian.] (4) "Rites not expressly con
tained in Scripture, though the grounds, reasons, or causes
of their necessity, or benefit, are ; as Infant Baptism." (5)
The particular application of things generally ordained ; " of
this sort, many think, the observation of the Lenten fast, the
fast of the fourth and sixth days of the week, and some
others." Or, as Bp. Beveridgef states them somewhat
less rigidly: (1) The inspiration of Holy Scripture. (2)
Things " which, although they are not read in express and
definite terms in the Holy Scriptures, are yet by the common
consent of all Christians drawn out of the Scriptures (as the
articles of the Creed.) These, and such like, although they
are not, either in the Old or New Testament, declared in so
many words or syllables, yet have they, as founded on both,
ever been agreed on by all Christians, certain few heretics
* Of the Church, p. 375, extracted more fully in the Catena above quoted,
p. 12—15.
t Preface to Codex Canonum Eccl. Prim, vindicatuset illustr., translated at
length, ib. p. 65, sqq. ; and prefixed to the translation of the valuable Commo-
nitory of Vincentius recently published at Oxford.

28
only excepted, of whom no more account is to be had in re
ligion, than of monsters in nature " (3) Observances, " no
where enjoined in Holy Scripture directly and by name, yet
have they, during 1400 years from the Apostles, been every
where received into the public use of the Church ; nor can
there be found any Church during that period not agreeing
thereto. So that there have been, as it were, certain com
mon notions from the beginning implanted in the minds of all
Christians, not so much from any particular passages of Holy
Scripture, as from all; from the general scope and tenor of
the whole Gospel; from the very nature and purpose of the
religion therein established ; and, finally, from the constant
tradition of the Apostles, who, together with the faith, pro
pagated ecclesiastical rites of this sort, and if I may so speak,
general interpretations of the Gospel. For on any other
supposition it would be incredible, or even impossible, that
they should have been received with so unanimous a consent
every where, always, and by all." In the second class of
Bishop Beveridge maybe included, (4) interpretations of spe
cific passages of Holy Scripture, upon which there is univer
sal agreement in the ancient Church.
(2) As to the power of the existing Church; The right of
the existing Church is limited not by any arbitrary line, but
by facts. (1) As to matters necessary to salvation, the whole
testimony of the Church has been given, so that her office
thus far of necessity has ceased.* The Creeds have received
their completion, unless indeed some new heresy on its Arti
cles could arise, in which case the whole Church, could it be
assembled, might give witness against it. (2) In cases not so
fixed, her tradition has in many cases been broken, so that
she could no longer rest her decision upon her present testi
mony, but must collect it from those ages in which it was yet
unbroken. And hence it is, not from any abstract ideal of
the first ages, that our Divines appeal to the Church, " anteri
or to the division of the East and West."
* Hence the Council of Ephesus forbade any additional Creed, beside that of
Nice, being" presented to those converted from Heathenism, Judaism, or any
heresy." This is contravened by Rome in the formation of Pope Pius' Creed.
See Perceval on the Roman Schism, p. 33.

29
(3) The " Indefectibility of the Church" is very different
from the " Infallibility" assumed by Rome. We believe that
(although Councils, which have been termed " General," or
which Rome has claimed to be so, have erred) no real (Ecu
menical Council ever did ; i. e. no Council really representing
the Universal Church. Our Church of old formally accept
ed the six (Ecumenical Councils ;* our great divines, who may
be looked upon as speaking her voice, appeal, generally, to
the period comprehending these six Councils, f as that which
has authority in matters of faith. And this they do, because
the Church was then one, and it was to His one Church, and
as being one, that our Lord's promise was raade.^ And
now, on that ground, her functions are, in this respect, sus
pended ; she cannot meet, as one ; and this coincidence of
the errors of those later days, and the interruption of her har
mony, seem remarkably to illustrate this fulfilment of our
Lord's promise : particular Churches have fallen into error,
because the Church has separated, and the Church is pre
vented from meeting, that she may not, as a whole, fix any of
these errors. What farther fulfilments our Lord's promise
may have hereafter, we know not ; or whether the Church
shall again be at one, and so be in a condition to claim it in
any enlarged degree. It might be so ; for although we have
broken our traditions, yet might an appeal to those of the
Church, when it was yet one, set at rest what now agitates
us. For the present, sufficient for us, what has been bestow
ed in the period of her unity ; the main articles of the faith
have been fixed and guarded by her, and we possess them in
her Creeds, and believe that the Church shall, by virtue of
her Saviour's promise, preserve them to the end. With this,
* In the Council of Calchuythe, a. u. 785 (ap. Perceval on the Roman
Schism, p. 5.) Our Church shortly after, at the great Council of Frankfort,
rejected thePseudo Synod of Nice, together with the Bishops of Germany and
France, (see Palmer on the Church, ii. 200. sqq.) This has never been rescind
ed and the state recognises four specifically, (of which the other two are sup
plements.) and generally " others" without defining them, (1 Eliz. 1. 36.)— See
also, Field and Hammond, ap. Palmer, ii. 171, 2.
t Newman on Romanism, Lect. 8. " Indefectibility of the Church Catho
lic," p. 250.
t See Newman, 1. c. p. 243. sqq. ed. 2.

so
Rome is not content ; we take the event (as it is ever ruled
to be) as the interpreter of prophecy ; she would bind her
Lord to accomplish it in her own way ; will not accept of any
thing short of what seems good to her ; settles that the unity
essential to its accomplishment, concentrates in herself; and
in this way continues it on to the present time, applies it to
every thing, great or small ;* and so gathers the promise
around and identifies it with herself, and makes it part of her
state and majesty. The indefectibility of the Universal
Church is to become the safeguard of the one see of Rome,
and to draw all other Churches to her footstool. This has
been the irpunv \pcvlos of Romanism, and her imposture, that
she has claimed to herself the promise, which belonged to
the whole Church. A high dignity belonged to her as the
Apostolic Church of the West ; and her traditions, as long
as she kept them faithfully, had, naturally, a great estima
tion, when testimony was to be borne to Catholic truth : but
she, instead of being " among the first three," would be alone ;
would have her voice not only essential, but alone essential ;
would make at all events the infallibility of a Council to de
pend upon the confirmation of her bishop ; teaching often
times also that even particular Councils approved by the
Pope, became infallible, or that a general Council, in itself
fallible, acquired an ex post facto infallibility through his ap
proval f And thus, like him who was high among " the
* " Our sentiment then is, that the Church absolutely cannot err, neither in
things absolutely necessary, nor in others, which she proposes to us to be belie
ved or done, whether they are contained in Scripture or no." — Bellarm. Con-
trov. deEccl. iii. 14.
t " It is to be held, as of Catholic faith, that general Councils confirmed by
the Sovereign Pontiff, cannot err, either in faith or morals." Bell. lb. ii. 2.
" The 2nd Prop. ' that particular Councils confirmed by the Sovereign Pontiff
cannot err in faith and morals,' is not equally certain, because that no Catho
lic denies, whereas this some do. But I only do not affirm that it is to be held
as of Catholic faith, because those who hold the contrary have not yet been
condemned by the Church as heretics." — lb. c. 9. " General Councils, before
the confirmation of the Sovereign Pontiff, may err, unless the fathers in their
definitions follow the instructions of the Pontiff." — lb. c. 11. It is enough
to stamp the character of Rome, that such perverted views should be favored
by her.

31
sons of God," but would be higher than his Creator made
him, she fell. The promise, which was a blessing and a
high privilege to the Universal Church, became a snare to her
feet, who arrogantly claimed it to herself. Where our Lord
lodged it, through His Spirit which dwelleth in her, it was
safe ; she who would be wise above that which was assigned
her, has for the Spirit of Truth received a lying spirit, too
mighty for her to control, and by him been goaded on, to
prepare for herself her own destruction. Her claim is the
invention of man, not the promise of Christ ; it bears upon it
the stamp of man's contrivance, in its lust of authority, fur
nishing the pretext for repudiating Canons* of CEcumeni-
cal Councils, from which Rome, for private ends, withdrew
its sanction, and making private synods into (Ecumenical
and infalliable Councils, when its ends are thereby served,
setting herself in the place of the Church universal through
out the world : it has the fruit of man's contrivance, leading
that unhappy Church into presumptuous definitions of ques
tions, against the voice of Scripture and Antiquity, or to
form wrong conclusions from a partial use of either, talnng
from either the first support of her existing system which
comes to hand, without examining carefully whether it do
support her or no, as resting in fact not on Scripture or An
tiquity, but onher own assumed infallibility ; using unrighteous
expedients, as one unaccountable and beyond questioning ;
rash and headstrong in her own defence, (as over confident
persons are,) not giving herself leisure to consider whether
she were in the right or no, but obstinately defending each
point on which she was censured ; and thus multiplying her
own perplexities, her precarious theories, and contradictions
to Antiquity and Scripture, on which she professes to rest.
Thus Satan has led her to the edge of a precipice, and there,
by her very claim of infallibility, holds her fast ; rendering it
humanly impossible for her to retreat, ready to be cast down,
unless God, by an especial act of mere}', break the bond,
* E. g. The 28th Canon of the Council of Ephesus.

32
" take* the prey from the mighty," and bid the " lawful cap
tive" go free. Her vast system rests upon an assumed infalli
bility ; she stands committed to every portion of it ; and yet
she cannot give account to those whom she holds captive,
how they are to know that she is infallible, or in whom this
infallibility resides. f Nevertheless she stakes her existence
on the belief. The Churches under the Roman sway may
purify themselves, as did we ; Rome herself has no escape,
(sorrowful as her doom is, which she has drawn upon her
self,) except through such a confession as those, who have
committed themselves so deeply and so presumptuously,
very rarely it is to be feared, humble themselves to make.
Roman infallibility, then, has no other relation to the doctrine
of Indefectibility of the Church, than that of the corruption
to the truth which it has corrupted ; the Romanist theory is
bound up with her doctrine of traditions, she limits the doc
trine on the one hand to the portion of the Church in com
munion with her, and on the other hand extends it to all sub
jects which that Church may determine ; the Anglican view
regards the promise as belonging to the universal Church, but
restrained to those Articles of the faith which were delivered
to her, and which in her real (Ecumenical Councils she has
defined ; one may add, the Ultra-Protestant view narrows
the promise, like the Church of Rome, in extent to a hand
ful of believing Christians, and, like Rome also, changes the
subjects of the Faith, substituting a system of its own for
Catholic truth ; differing, as before, from Rome in this, that
what Rome claims to the Churches of her own communion,
it applies to individuals.^
The contrast between the Roman claim to infallibility, and
our Anglican acknowledgment of the indefectibility of the
* Isa. xlix. 24.
t Newman, ib. lect. 4. " Doctrine of Infallibility politically considered,"
p. 120, ed. 2.
t"When they interpret these promises, so full of exceeding consolation,
' Lo, I am with you always,' and ' He shall guide you into all truth,' as given
to the universal Church as a whole, not to individual Christians, what else
do they than take away from all Christians the confidence, which ought to
result thence for their encouragement 1" — Calv. Instit. 4. 8. 11.

33
Church, has been so clearly pursued by Mr. Newman,* that
I must beg permission to insert it.
" Both we and Romanists hold that the Church Catholic
is unerring in its declarations of faith for saving doctrine ; but
we differ from each other as to what is the faith, and what is
the Church Catholic. They maintain that faith depends on
the Church, we that the Church is built on faith. By
Church Catholic we mean the Church Universal, as descend
ed from the Apostles ; they, those branches of it which are
in communion with Rome. They consider the See of St.
Peter to have a promise of permanence, we the Church Ca
tholic and Apostolic. Again, they understand by the Faith,
whatever the Church at any time declares to be faith ; we,
what it has actually so declared from the beginning. We
hold that the Church Catholic will never depart from these
outlines of doctrine which the Apostles formally published ;
they, that she will never depart from any of her acts from
that entire system, written and oral, public and private, ex
plicit and implicit, which they received and taught ; we, that
she has a gift of fidelity, they, of discretion."
" Again, both they and we anathematize those who deny
the Faith ; but they extend the condemnation to all who
question any decree of the Roman Church ; we apply it to
those only who deny any article of the original Apostolical
Creed. The creed of Romanism is ever subject to increase ;
our's is fixed once for all. We confine our anathema to the
Athanasian Creed ; Romanists extend it to Pope Pius's.
They cut themselves off from the rest of Christendom ; we
cut ourselves off from no branch, not even from themselves.
We are at peace with Rome as regards tha essentials of faith ;
but she tolerates us as little as any sect or heresy. We ad
mit her Baptism and her Orders ; her custom is to rebaptize
and reordain our members who chance to join her.
" These distinctions are sufficient for my present purpose,
though they are only a (evt out of various differences which
might be pointed out. They are surely portions of a real
* L. c. " Indefectibility of Church Catholic," p. 259.
5

34
view, which, while it relieves the mind of those burdens and
perplexities which are the portion of the mere Protestant, is
essentially distinct from Romanism."
(4) There yet remains one other fear which I would wish
to remove, namely, lest this appeal to Christian Antiquity
should abate of men's reverence to their own Church. It is
natural that they should dread this, who have looked upon
their own Church as a modern Church1. To them the au
thority of their own and the ancient Church must seem to
stand in contrast ; to us the authority of either, though not
equally full, still goes in the same direction. We wish not
to add any thing to our Church, but to develop what she has;
it is admitted by all, that many points, being incidentally no
ticed in her formularies, need expansion : a modern school.
would wish to have this done exclusively by reference to the
Reformers ; we, thankfully acknowledging her to be a sound
member of the Church Catholic, from which her Liturgy is
derived, would resort to the fountain whence our stream is
derived, not to the channels through which it has lately
passed. We would view her in relation to the whole of
which she is a part, the Primitive and Apostolic Church,
whence she is descended, to which she belongs, " the rock
out of which she was hewed, and the hole of the pit from
which she was digged." This has ever been our profession.
" This* is the very chiefest advantage which the warmest
recommenders of tradition in our Church expect from it,
viz. that attention to it should very much elevate men's ideas
of the existing system, proving it divine in many points, where
they now ignorantly suppose it human. This, and not the
establishment of any mere theory, new or old, is the imme
diate object of those who have most earnestly urged, from
time to time, the reverential study of Christian antiquity."
Our own Church is the immediate, the Church universal
the ultimate visible authority ; she is to us the representative
of the Universal Church, as the Church Universal is of her
Lord ; our own derives her authority from the Universal
* Keble, Postscript to 3rd edition of Sermon on Tradition, p. 62. See also
Pref. to St. Augustine's Confessions, p. viii. ix.

35
Church, and cannot claim any, contrary to her : we belong
to her, because we were baptized in her, and she is the de
scendant of the primitive Church in this land, and her Bi
shops " the successors of the Apostles :" we receive as Arti
cles of Faith, what she delivers to us as fixed by the Univer
sal Church ; what she has by her private judgment deduced
from Holy Scripture, we teach, because we also think it to
be so deducible ; if we did not so think, we should obey,
must belong to her, but could not teach : her Sacraments we
receive, because she has received the commission to impart
them ; her rites, because she has the power to ordain or to
change them. To our own Church we owe submission ; to
the decisions of the Church universal, Faith.
This relation in which we stand as members both of a par
ticular Church, and of the " Holy Church Universal," is ex
pressed with such pious humility -by Archbishop Bramhall,
that I too cannot but beg to express, in his language, what
our wishes would be, as far as any of us may, or are forced
to, speak of ourselves. "No* one can justly blame me for
honoring my spiritual mother, the Church of England, in
whose womb I was conceived, at whose breast I was nour
ished, and in whose bosom I hope to die." Yet though his
love was to his immediate mother, his allegiance was more
especially to the " mother of us all." He proceeds after a
while : " Howsoever it be, I submit myself and my poor en
deavors, first to the judgment of the Catholic (Ecumenical
essential Church, which if some of late days have endeavored
to hiss out of the schools as a fancy, I cannot help it. From
the beginning it was not so. And if I should mistake the
right Catholic Church out of human frailty or ignorance,
(which for my part I have no reason in the world to suspect,
yet it is not impossible when the Romanists themselves are
divided into five or six several opinions, what this Catholic
Church, or what their infallible judge is,) I do implicitly and
in the preparation of my mind, submit myself to the True Ca
tholic Church, the Spouse of Christ, the Mother of the Saints,
* Works, p. 141, qnoted more fully by Mr. Newman on Romanism ; Ad
vertisement.

3G
the Pillar of Truth. And seeing my adherence, is firmer to
the infallible rule of faith, that is, the Holy Scriptures inter
preted by the Catholic Church, than to mine own private
judgment or opinions ; although I should unwittingly fall
into an error, yet this cordial submission is an implicit retrac
tation thereof, and I am confident will be so accepted by the
Father of Mercies, both from me and all others who seri
ously and sincerely do seek after peace and truth.
" Likewise I submit myself to the Representative Church,
that is, a free general council, or as general as can be pro
cured ; and until then to the Church of England, wherein I
was baptized, or to a national English Synod. To the deter
mination of all which, and each of these respectively, accord
ing to the distinct degree of their authority, I yield a confor
mity and compliance, or at the least and to the lowest of them
an acquiescence."
I have dwelt the longer upon this subject, because upon
it some of the most vehement charges of approximating to
Rome have of late been founded ; it were easier to draw a
parallel (as has in part been done) between the Romanist
and the Ultra-Protestant. (1) Both agree in appealing to
their own interpretation of Holy Scripture against the agree
ment of Catholic antiquity.* (2) Both claim to this case
* See Mr. Newman on Romanism, Lect. 7. " Instances of the abuse of pri
vate judgment," 5 5, 6, where he shows that Purgatory and the Pope's Supre
macy came in through misapplication of Scripture, against tradition. In like
way, the right to administer the Holy Eucharist in one kind, is rested on pas
sages of Scripture, Luke xxiv. 30, 35. Acts ii. 42, 46 ; xx. 7 ; xxvii. 35, which
would be very strong, were not all tradition of all churches for nearly thirteen
centuries against it. Other instances of this abuse of Scripture argument are
quoted in Mr. Newman's work. The same was observed by Bishop Jewell,
who in his " reply to Dr. Cole," (Works, p. 43,) thus puts a number of them
together. " Howbeit, of such reasons ye have store enough, as I were able
to show you at large, if need so required. As where ye say :
Extra de Q.u£e sunt potestates a Deo ordinatse sunt : The powers that
Majoritate be are ordered by God :
et obedi- Ergo, The Pope is above the Emperor.
entia. Spiritualis a nemine judicatur : The man that is ruled by
God's Spirit, is judged of no man :
Cap. unam Ergo, No man may judge the Pope.
Sanctam. Sancti estote, quoniam ego sanctus sum: Be ye -holy, fori
am holy, saith the Lord :

37
the presence and infallible assistance of the Holy Spirit, the
Romanist as promised to the Church, the Ultra-Protestant
as promised to individuals.* (3) Both appeal (though
Ultra-Protestants less now than formerly) to individual
Fathers, when they make for them, and set them aside when
against them.f (4) Both will take one Father who sides

Pay the tribute

He

Innocentius Ergo, No married man may be a Priest.
dist. 82 Pro- Christ said unto Peter, Solve pro me et te :
posuisli : for me and thee :
Roffensis Ergo, The Pope is head of the Church.
Durandus. Ecclesiasticus saith, In medio ecclesiae aperuit os suum :
opened his mouth in the midst of the congregation :
Ergo, The Priest must turn round at the midst of the altar.
Concilium Fecit Deus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem suam :
Nicenum God made man to the image and likeness of himself:
Secundum Ergo, There must be images in the Church.
sub Iren. Papa juratur in fidem Apostolicam: The Pope is sworn to
Concilium the Apostles' faith :
Basil, sub Ergo, The Church cannot err.
Eugenio. Non est discipulus supra magistrum: There is no scholar
Concilium above his master :
Rom. sub Ergo, No man may judge the Pope.
Silvestro. Papa est dominus omnium benenciorum: The Pope is lord
The Cano- of all benefits :
nists, Ergo, He cannot commit simony, though he would.
Durandus. Domini est terra et plenitudo ejus: The earth is the Lord's,
Eckius. and the fulness thereof:
Dr. Cole at Ergo, The communion cake must be made round.
Westminster. Omnisspiritus laudet Dominum: Let all spirits praise the
Lord:
Ergo, Ye must have organs in the Church.
Lac vobis potum dedi ; or, Ignorantia est mater pietatis : I
gave you milk to drink; or, Ignorance is the mother of de
votion :
Ergo, The people must make their prayers in a strange tongue."
* E. g. Mr. Scott, " Force of Truth," (v. fin.) thus vindicates his absolute
certainty of the truth of the Calvinistic system — " Supposing this narration
true, (for which the appeal is made to the heart-searching God,) and suppo
sing the promises mentioned to be proposed to us, that we may embrace them,
depend on them, and plead them in prayer, considering the glory of the Di
vine veracity as concerned in their accomplishment to every believer; let
them try whether they can possibly evade one of these two conclusions —
either that God hath failed of His promise, or that he hath in the main, and
as far as is expressed, led the author by His Holy Spirit to the knowledge
and belief of the truth." In like way, " Essays on the Church," p. 304.
t Thus Basn,age (Hist, des Eglises Reformers, P. i. c. 6. § 4.) appeals to Cle-

33
with them, against the whole stream of Antiquity if against
them. (5) Both hold, that the Spirit had reserved for these
later times, what He denied to the earlier ; that certain
truth may now be arrived at, where the Ancient Church
was in doubt and error ;* only, again, the Romanist claims
this enlarged illumination or inspiration to the Church ; Ul
tra-Protestants to individuals. (6) Both prefer what is mo
dern to what is ancient, what is farther from the source, to
what is nearer. (7) Both deeply disparage Christian anti
quity. And this agreement is not accidental, but arises from
the same source in each, that each has to support modern
corruptions of doctrine, unknown to Christian Antiquity,
and therefore appeals against her, and will not trust itself
to her, as knowing beforehand that they will be condemned
by her. And so it is scarcely uncharitable to suspect, that,
beneath this professed and conscious dread, lest an appeal to
tradition should give Rome an advantage, there lurks also a
secret and unconscious or half-conscious dread for themselves:
they have good reason to suspect, if they do not absolutely
know, that Christian Antiquity is against them, and so they
would anticipate the. blow, by stifling it ; they fear that her
voice should be listened to, and so would drown it, by their
outcries against her ; and while they close the ear against
mens Romanus, in behalf of his view of justification by faith, supposing the
truth to have been obscured or lost ever after in Christian Antiquity.
* See Mr. Newman on " Romanism." So again Bp. Jewell, 1. c. " It is
a world, to consider the reason ye use to prove your purpose withal. For ye
say, the Church in Christ's and the Apostles' time was but an infant ; but
now she is well-stricken in age, therefore she must be otherwise dieted now
than she was then. This is not the handsomest comparison that I have
heard of. For I never heard before now that Christ and His Apostles were
called infants; or that ever any man before now took upon him to set them
to school. Esay saith, that Christ should be Pater futuri seculi ; that is, the
Father of the world to come, which is the time of the Gospel. And St. Hie-
rom, in your own Decrees, calleth the Apostles, Patres, that is not infants, but
the Fathers of the Church. And I believe, though ye would study and labor
for it, yet would it be very hard for you, either to find out any good substan
tial reason, wherefore ye with your brethren ought to be called the Fathers of
God's Church, or Christ and His Apostles ought to be called babes. O that
ye would indifferently compare the one with the other ! ye should find, that
as like as ye and your Bishops are to the Apostles, so like is your Church to
the Apostles' Church."

39
her, as if she would give witness for Rome, which she would
not give, they hope to escape hearing the testimony
which she would give against the Anti-sacramental system
of Geneva.
But this is an alarming course, and the irreverential spirit
in which it is begun, bodes but ill of its termination. It were
an ungrateful task, were any to set themselves systematically
to show that Christian antiquity were not to be trusted ; yet
this would require patience and research ; but what must
one think of the piety and reverence, which would make
sport with the supposed defects of the Fathers of the
Church, and discover their father's shame ; which would re
peat from mouth to mouth the one or other saying, which
themselves had first misunderstood and distorted, in order
triumphantly to ask, what could be thought of the judgment
of men who could so speak 1 Truly, it seems like the Phi
listines making sport with the mighty man whose eyes they
had first put out, and likely to meet with their end. It was
scarcely in so irreverential, but in the same sceptical spirit,
that Semler, the parent of German Neology, began unravel
ling the belief of his country : but the criticism of the Fa
thers mounted up to the criticism of the Apostles; and the
criticism of the Apostles to that of their Lord ; and the dis
belief in their Lord is in its last stage become a dethroning
of God, and a setting up of self, a Pantheism which worships
God as enshrined in self.
This subject, upon which I have detained your lordship so
long, may also, as the first instance of the supposed Ro
manist tendency of some principles of our great Divines,
illustrate how mistaken is the ground of these vague fears.
Opposed errors will often meet : truth will not approximate
to either, though if looked upon on either side, it will seem
to be nearer to the opposite than these are to each other.
The proverbial truth tells us " extremes meet," as in this
case also is verified ; whereas the mean which our Church
holds will never meet with either extreme ; they parted off
from it ; and however slight the original divergence, become
more and more widely separated from it, and never again

40
join. To a careless or superficial thinker, the mean seems
likely to join the extreme, because it has in it some quality
which is wanting to the other extreme ; but it is not so ; it
agrees with the extreme, not in essentials, but in something
incidental ; the rash man appears to have one quality in com
mon with the brave one, in that he exposes himself to dan
ger ; the brave man's caution may readily appear like cow
ardice, and so the rash thinks the brave cowardly, and the
coward holds him to be rash ; whereas the exposing himself
to danger or no, is but an accident ; the principle on which
he does it, or refrains from it, is that which consti
tutes his character ; he then will neither be rash nor cow
ardly ; but the coward will be rash, and the rash will be
cowardly, if emergencies so determine. Prodigality and
avarice seem to be contraries ; yet are they continually uni
ted, as in Catiline, " alieni appetens, sui profusus :" he who is
simply liberal, will be neither, though by either extreme he
will be confounded with the other. " Extremes meet," be
cause they proceed on no settled principle, but on passion ;
they are guided by no internal rules, but are blown about,
this way or that, by the force of outward circumstances ; the
mean goes on fixed principles, and therefore holds on an
even course, undeviating and therefore never approximating
to either extreme. And so our English Church has by the
Church of Rome been confounded with Ultra-Protestants,
and by Ultra-Protestants has ever been thought to approxi
mate to Rome. In the present instance, it is but accident
that Rome appeals to antiquity, or Ultra-Protestantism to
Scripture ; both have an ulterior object, to maintain their
own system ; but Romanism will found its errors on Scrip
ture, or will disparage Christian antiquity with Ultra-Pro
testantism. And Ultra-Protestantism, in its turn, will neglect
the plain meaning of Scripture, or appeal to Christian an
tiquity, to establish views formed independently of antiquity ;
whereas the genuine English system, being founded on Holy
Scripture as interpreted by Christian antiquity, possesses a
deep reverence for Scripture as the source of the Faith,
and for Antiquity, as its witness and expositor ; and appeal-

41
ing to both, for the office assigned to them by Him who
gave them, has only so much in common with either ex
treme, that it holds the truth which they have perverted, but
approximates in no way to their errors.
Art. XI. Of the Justification of Man.
"Justification" having been lately the subject of a very
elaborate and meditative work by one* of those accused of
departing from the Articles, it is the less necessary to trouble
your lordship with any lengthened detail upon it. Had they,
who bring charges, studied and mastered it, they might have
been benefited by it, and these charges been spared. The
Xlth Article bears the appearance, on its very face, of being
a protest against Romish error ; it does not pretend to em
brace in a few lines the whole subject of justification ; it
contents itself with securing one main point ; it puts in strong
contrast the merits of Christ and the merits of man, and
says, that we are justified solely for the sake of His merit,
and not for our own works and deservings ; and' that merit,
it farther says, is made available to us through faith. " We
are accounted righteous before God, only fcr the merit of
our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not/or our
own works or deservings. Wherefore that we are justified
by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of
comfort, as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Jus
tification." The Article, then, opposes the merit of Christ
to any thing which we have of our own, to "our own works
and deservings," as the meritorious cause of salvation ; and
thus far, we believe, little is imputed to us. It is so plain a
truth, and has been so often inculcated by us, that every sin
of man which is remitted, is remitted only for the sake of
His meritorious Cross and Passion, every good and accepta
ble work is such through His power working in us, that little,
1 believe, has thus far been objected. The objections have
been founded, not on the Article, but on men's inferences
from it. The Article opposes " Faith" as the origin of our
» Mr. Newman's Lectures on Justification.
6

42
justification, to works ; it excludes works from being any me
ritorious cause of justification ; "faith onl)" means in its
language " faith, not works." A modern school has very
strangely extended the reference of the Article, and oppo
sed man's faith to the Sacrament of His Lord. They say,
"faith only" means, that Faith — as opposed to every thing
else, not works only, but Baptism, — is the channel whereby
the merits of Christ are conveyed to the soul to its justifica
tion. But, my lord, such a contrast was plainly neither in the
minds of the writers of the Article, nor is it in their words ;
the whole subject of Baptism was altogether foreign to that
which is handled in this whole series of articles on the rela
tion of faith to works, before and after justification ;
(ix — xvii.) the writers specify what they do mean ; they ex
clude man's works ; they refer every thing to the merits of
Christ : " by faith only" excludes, then, man's works, not
any thing which is not man's. Whether He be pleased to
convey justification directly to the believer's soul, or through
his own ordinance of Baptism, is wholly foreign to their sub
ject. They say nothing about it one way or other,
as neither had they any occasion, since the questions which
have so agitated us of late, as to the efficacy of Baptism, had
not then been raised in our Church. Neither again does the
Article say any thing about the means whereby man is re
tained in a justified state, nor wherein our justification con
sists ; so that it may be perfectly true, that we are "justified
by faith only," as the means whereby we receive it, and yet
through Baptism as the means or channel, through which
God conveys it ; or " by the Spirit," as the sanctifying Pre
sence which makes us acceptable in God's sight ; or " by
works," as St. James says, as that by which the Justification
is continued on in us ; or, as it has lately been very concise
ly and clearly expressed,* " Justification comes through the
Sacraments ; is received by faith, consists in God's inward
Presence, and lives in obedience."
» Newman on Justification, lect. 12. " Faith viewed relatively to rites
and works," p. 318.

43
The same is in part expressed by one who was in his day
a pillar of our Church against heresy.* " The merits of
Christ applied in Baptism by the Spirit, and received by alively
faith, complete our justification for the time being." As well
then might it be inferred that "justification by faith only"
excluded the indwelling of the Spirit, on its first imparting, or
good works as necessary to its continuance, as that it ex
cludes Baptism as the channel whereby God bestows it.
Whatever charge then is conceived to lie against this view
will equally hold against the earlier Non-conformists, f who
had not reduced Justification to a mere imputation, but re
garded it as resulting from the indwelling of the Spirit. In
Mr. Newman's words,:): on the relation of Justification by
faith to Justification by works, "If indeed I said that works
justify in the same sense as faith only justifies, this would be a
contradistinction in terms ; but faith only may justify in one
sense, good works in another, and this is all that is here
maintained. After all, does not Christ only justify 1 How
is it that the doctrine of faith justifying does not interfere
with our Lord's being the sole justifier 1 It will of course
be replied, that our Lord is the meritorious cause, and faith
the means ; that faith justifies in a different and subordinate
sense. As then Christ justifies in the sense in which He
justifies, alone, yet faith also justifies in its own sense ; so
works, whether moral or ritual, may justify us in their own
respective senses, though in the sense in which faith justifies
it only justifies. — Indeed, is not this argument, as has been
suggested already, the very weapon of the Arians in their
warfare against the Son of God 1 They said, Christ is not
God, because the Father is called the only God." And again :
" The instrumental power of Faith cannot interfere with the
instrumental power of Baptism ; because Faith is the sole
justifier, not in contrast to all means and agencies whatever,
(for it is not surely in contrast to our Lord's merits, or God's
* Waterland on Justification, quoted by Mr. Newman, p. 154, note.
t E. g. Baxter quoted by Mr. Newman, 1. c.
t Lect. xii. " Faith viewed relatively to Rites and Works,'' p. 316.

44
mercy,) but to all other graces. When, then, Faith is called
the sole instrument, this means the sole internal instrument,
not the sole instrument of any kind.
" There is nothing inconsistent, then, inFaithbeingthesole
instrument of justification, and yet Baptism also the sole in
strument, and that at the same time, because in distinct
senses ; an inward instrument in no way interfering with an
outward instrument."*
And this connexion of Justification with Baptism, so far
from being at variance with the homily to which the Article
refers, and which men now quote in behalf of a contrary
view, is implied by its very outset. For in the first words it
lays down the necessity man has of a justification out of him
self, which is what the Article requires. " Because all men
be sinners and offenders against God, and breakers of his law
and commandment, therefore can no man by his own acts,
works, and deeds, (-seem they never so good.) be justified, and
made righteous before God ; but every man of necessity is
constrained to seek for another righteousness or justification
to be received at God's own hands, that is to say, the for
giveness of his sins and trespasses, in such things as he hath
offended." Then it speaks of this justification as being be
stowed by God, and received by faith. " And this justifica
tion or righteousness which we so receive of God's mercy
and Christ's merits, embraced by faith, is taken, accepted, and
allowed of God, for our perfect and full justification." And
then, having named the Sacrifice of Christ as the meritorious
cause of our justification, the writer proceeds : " Insomuch
that infants, being baptized and dying in their infancy, are by
this sacrifice washed from their sins, brought to God's favor,
and made His children, and inheritors of His kingdom of
heaven. And they which in act or deed do sin after their
Baptism, when they turn again to God unfeignedly, they are
likewise washed by this Sacrifice from their sins, in such sort
that there remaineth not any spot of sin, that shall be imputed
to their damnation." " Here," observes Mr. Newman,!
* Lect. x. " Justification by Faith only," p. 259.
t Lect. x. "Justification by Faith only," p. 263.

45
" is distinct mention of faith justifying after Baptism, but no
mention of its justifying before Baptism ; on the contrary,
Baptism is expressly said to effect the first justification."
"The writer proceeds: ' This is that justification or righteous
ness which St. Paul speaks of, when he saith, No man is
justified by the works of the Law, but freely by faith in Jesus
Christ.' So it seems that St. Paul too, when he speaks of
justification through faith, speaks of faith as subordinate to
Baptism, not as the immediate initiation into a justified state."
So again Dr. Heylin* sums up this same statement of the
homily : " There we find, that by God's mercy and the
virtue of that Sacrifice which our High Priest and Saviour
Christ Jesus, the Son of God, once offered for us upon the
Cross, we do obtain God's grace and remission as well of
our original sin in Baptism, as of all actual sin committed
by us after Baptism, if we truly repent and turn un-
feignedly unto Him 'again. Which doctrine of the Church
of England, as it is consonant to the word of God, in Holy
Scripture, so is it also most agreeable to the common and re
ceived judgment of pure antiquity."
The doctrine of Justification through Baptism is not op
posed then to Justification by Faith only, in the sense of the
Article, although it is to the theory which some have con
structed upon it. "The necessity of Baptism," says Bishop
Bull,f "and of those things which prepare for Baptism, in
order to obtain a remission of sins, which is set forth in sun
dry places of Scripture, and occurs in almost every page of
the Ancients, is alone a sufficient argument to overthrow
that solifidianism, which many have attempted to build up
out of Holy Scripture and the testimonies of the Fathers ;
as our most learned and pious Thorndike, of blessed memo
ry, has evinced in different places of his writings. For it ap
pears hence, that faith by itself does not suffice to obtain
justification ; but that outward Baptism is required besides,
when it may be had ; but that at all events that promise of a
* On the Apostles' Creed, Art. x. c. vi. quoted in Catena Patrum, No. ii.
Tracts, No. 76. " Testimony of writers in the later English Church to the
doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration," p. 26.
t Apol. pro Harmon. S. 4. § 9.

46
new life, which is wont to be made at Baptism, is of necessity
required ;" and, again,* " In the New Testament, John Bap
tist is said to have been sent by God, ' to preach the baptism
of repentance to the remission of sins,' where are set down
together the end and the means leading thereto : the end is
remission of sins or justification ; the means our Baptism and
repentance." There is, however, another wide difference between the
views which we have inherited from, " to say the least, the
greater number of English Divines," and those now held by
a large portion of the Church, resulting from our different
views of the connexion of justification with Baptism. The
view prevalent with this class appears to have been borrowed
from Luther, and so to be nearly (hat condemned by the
Council of Trent, that " Justifying^ faith is nothing else than
a reliance (fiducia) on the Divine mercy remitting sins for
Christ's sake, or that it is this reliance alone whereby we are
justified." The Tridentine doctrine on the contrary is, that
" Justification is not merely the remission of sins, but also
the sanctification and renewal of the inward man by his vo
luntary reception of grace and gifts. Whence a man be
comes righteous for unrighteous, a friend [of God] for an
enemy, so as to be an heir according to the hope of eternal
life, and the communication of the merits of the Passion of
our Lord Jesus Christ. This takes place in the very act of
the justification of the ungodly, in that, through the merit
of His most Holy Passion, the love of God is through the
Holy Spirit shed abroad in the hearts of those who are jus
tified, and becomes inherent in them, whence in the very
act of justification, man, together with the remission of sins,
receives infused into him, through Jesus Christ, in whom he
is engrafted, faith, hope, and charity." The Anglican doc
trine,^: or that which we conceive to have been the teaching
of the majority of our Church, differs from both these : from
the Roman, in that it excludes sanctification from having any
place in our justification ; from the Lutheran, in that it con-
- lb. S. 3. 5 12. t Sess. 6. can. 12. t Sess. 6. can. 7.

47
ceives justification to be not imputation merely, but the act
of God imparting His Divine Presence to the soul, through
Baptism, and so making us temples of the Holy Ghost, " the*
habitation in us of God the Father, and the Word incarnate
through the Holy Ghost :" or to quote a fuller passage,! " '*
may be remarked, that whatever blessings in detail we as
cribe to justification, are ascribed in Scripture to this sacred
indwelling. For instance, is justification remission of sins ?
the Gift of the Spirit conveys it, as is evident from the
Scripture doctrine about Baptism ; ' One Baptism for the re
mission of sins.' Is justification adoption into the family of
God 1 in like manner the Spirit is expressly called the Spirit
of adoption, ' the Spirit whereby we cry, Abba, Father.' Is
justification reconciliation with God t St. Paul says, 'Jesus
Christ is in you, unless ye be reprobates.' Is justification
life? the same Apostle says, ' Christ liveth in me.' Is jus
tification given to faith ? he also prays ' that Christ may
dwell in Christians' hearts by faith.' Does justification
lead to holy obedience ? Our Lord assures us that ' he that
abideth in Him and He in him, the same bringeth forth much
fruit.' Is it through justification that we rejoice in hope of
the glory of God ? in like manner ' Christ in us' is said to be
' the hope of glory.' "
The three views of doctrine part widely in their practi
cal effects ; the Lutheran:}: view, especially as developed in
the Wesleyans and a seclion of our Church, leads men to
look to their own feelings, as that by which their reliance on
Christ may be ascertained, to analyze them, operate upon
them, work them up, rely at last with satisfaciion upon
them, as tests of their love for Christ. They have been
taught that justification is not the gift of God through His
Sacraments, but the result of a certain frame of mind, of a
going forth of themselves, and resting themselves upon their
Saviour ; this is the act whereby they think themselves to
* Newman on Justif, Lect. 6. " On the gift of Righteousness," p. 160.
t lb. p. 166, 7.
t The Council of Trent condemns those who hold " that it is necessary
to every man to obtain remission of sins, that he should believe assuredly and

48
have been justified ; and so, as another would revert to his
baptism, and his engrafting into Christ, and his thus being
in Christ, so do they to this act whereby they were justified ;
they cherish their then feelings, not to act upon them, but
for their own sakes ; mourn over their fading;* endeavor
to reproduce them; make their Christian life to concentrate
in them; and lose out of sight, as carnal and legal, its ordi
nary, hourly duties. These tendencies, doubtless, are check
ed in individuals ; but whatever checks there are, are the
result of past duty, of an implanted integrity, of God's law
within them, in despite of their system. Their tendency is
to act upon a theory, not upon Scripture ; to suppose that if
the feelings be right, the acts will, as a matter of course, be
right ; and so to neglect that about which Scripture bids
them be diligent. To take the most systematic development
of this theory ; the first thought which occurs to the mind
of a Wesleyan, in speaking of his spiritual state, is, not what
temptations he has surmounted, or failed in, what duties he
has neglected, or performed, but, what were his feelings 1
His " experience" concentrates in these.
without any doubt, that the sins of his own infirmity and disposition are re
mitted to him," and " that a man is thereby absolved from sins and justified,
that he believes assuredly that he is absolved and justified, and that no one
is truly justified, unless he believes that he is justified, and that by this
faith alone absolution and justification are perfected." (Sess. 6. can. 13, 14.)
* This feeling is encouraged in popular hymns, irregularly admitted into
our Churches, as in that, " Oh for a closer walk with God." What a strong
contrast with the peace resulting from continued growth in grace are such
lines as : Where is the happiness I knew
When first I knew the Lord;
And felt the heart-reviving view
Of Jesus and His word 1
What peaceful hours I then enjoyed !
How sweet their memory still !
But noio I feel a painful void
No human joys can fill.
Such lines would describe truly a backsliding Christian, or a dejected one,
who had been taught tb make his feelings the test of his stale; but they are
too likely to make one think himself backsliding, because his feelings are not
what they were. The more practical view is given in Mr. Newman's Ser
mons, vol. i. " On the use of excited feelings in religion."

49
" True faith," observes Mr. Newman,* " is what may be
called colorless, like air or water; it isbutthe medium through
which the soul sees Christ ; and the soul as little really rests
upon it and contemplates it, as the eye can see the air.
When, then, men are bent on holding it (as it were) in their
hands, curiously inspecting, analyzing, and so aiming at it,
they are obliged to color and thicken it, that it may be seen
and touched. That is, they substitute for it something or
other, a feeling, notion, sentiment, conviction, or act of rea
son, which they may hang over and dote upon. They ra
ther aim at experiences (as they are called) within them,
than at Him that is without them. They are led to enlarge
upon the signs of conversion, the variations of their feelings,
their aspirations and longings, and to tell all this to others ; —
to tell others how they fear, and hope, and sin, and rejoice,
and renounce themselves, and rest in Christ only ; how con
scious they are that they are but ' filthy rags,' and all is of
grace, till in fact they have little time left them to guard against
what they are condemning, and to exercise what they seem
to themselves to be so full of. Now men in a battle are
brief-spoken ; they realize their situation and are intent upon
it  By-standers see our minds ; but our minds, if
healthy, see but the objects which possess them. As God's
grace elicits our faith, so His holiness stirs our fear, and His
glory kindles our love. Others may say of us ' here is faith
and ' there is conscientiousness' and ' there is love,' but we
can only say, 'this is God's grace,' and 'that is His holi
ness,' and ' that is His glory.' "
Just the reverse of this is the Romanist. His theory
leads men as naturally to look chiefly to their works, and as
it has a Pelagian tendency, (although it has been held together
with high Augustinian doctrine,) so may it readily lead them
to look to their own works as their own ; to weigh them,
balance them, evil against good, make the one compensate
for the other, settle their several values ; at last, hold the
Almighty their debtor, as if the more eminent saints had a su-
* On Justification, Lect. 13. " On preaching the Gospel," p. 385.
7

5U
pererogation of merits. " It makes," to use Mr. Newman's*
words, " its hi avenly grace a matter of purchase and trade."
" Romanism," as he again says,f " by its pretence of Infallibi
lity, lowers the standard and quality of Gospel obedience, as
well as impairs its mysterious and sacred character ; and this
in various ways. When religion is reduced in all its parts
to a system, there is hazard of something earthly being made
the chief object of our contemplation instead of our Maker.
Now Romanism classifies our duties and their rewards, the
things to do, the modes of pleasing God, the penalties and the
remedies of sin, with such exactness, that an individual knows
(so to speak) just where he is upon his journey heavenward,
how far he is got, how much he has to pass, and his duties
become a matter of calculation. It provides us with a sort of
graduated scale of devotion and obedience, and engrosses
our thoughts with the details of a mere system, to a compa
rative forgetful ness of its professed Author. But it is evident
that the purest religious services are those which are done,
not by constraint, but voluntarily, as a free offering to Al
mighty God. True faith does not like to realize to itself
what it does ; it throws off the thought of it ; it is carried
on and reaches forward towards perfection, not counting the
steps it has ascended, but keeping the end steadily in its eye,
knowing only that it is advancing, and glorying in each sacri
fice or service which it is allowed to offer, as it occurs, not
remembering it afterwards. But in Romanism there would
seem to be little room for this unconscious devotion. Each
deed has its price, every quarter of the land of promise is laid
down and described. Roads are carefully marked out, and
such as would attain to perfection are constrained to move
in certain lines, as if there were a science of gaining heaven.
Thus the Saints are cut off from the Christian multitude by
certain fixed duties, not rising out of it by the continuous
growth and flowing forth of services which in their substance
* On Justification, Lect. 8. " Righteousness viewed as a gift and as a
quality," p. 221.
t On Romanism, &c. Lect. 3. " Doctrine of Infallibility morally consider
ed," p. 125.

51
pertain to all men. And Christian holiness, in consequence,
loses its freshness, vigor, and comeliness, being frozen (as it
were) into certain attitudes, which are not graceful except
when unstudied.
" The injury resulting to the multitude from the same cir
cumstance, is of a different but not less serious nature.
While, of those who aim at the more perfect obedience,
many are made self-satisfied, and still more formal, the mass
of Christians are either discouraged from attempting or
countenanced in neglecting it. If, indeed, there is one of
fence more than the rest characteristic of Romanism, it
is this, its indulging the carnal tastes of the multitude of men,
setting a limit to their necessary obedience, and absolving
them from the duty of sacrificing their whole lives to God."
The Anglican doctrine directs men to look neither to
their faith nor their works, but to Christ alone, the " Author
and Finisher of their faith," not staying to analyze their feel
ings, nor weighing their works in a balance, as if claiming
Heaven either by faith or works, but looking simply to Him,
striving to follow Him, to do as He bids ; to act as He
guides ; to Look off from things behind, to press forward to
things before, as having Him everbefore our- eyes, Whose
Goodness and Greatness and Holiness and Glory are im
measurable, yet Who bade us follow in His steps, and " in
Whom instrengthening," (MwajiowTt,) because indwelling,
St. Paul ".could do all things ;"" Who* is our Righteous
ness, by dwelling in us by the Spirit ; justifies us by entering
into us ; continues to justify us by remaining in us. This
is really and truly our justification, not faith, not holiness,
[with the Romanist,] not (much less) a mere imputation,
[with the Lutheran,] but through God's mercy, the very
Presence of Christ."
I would not be understood to rest the defence of any doc
trine, in any degree, upon its apparent tendencies ; we are
not judges of them ; and might readily mistake them ; and
certainly should, if we would on any such a priori grounds
decide doctrines to be scriptural or unscriptural ; yet, being
* Newman on Justif. Lect. 6. " On the gift of Righteousness," p. 167.

52
persuaded that this doctrine is both Scriptural and Catholic,
we may speak of its tendencies, with the view to abate a pre
judice against it. And in this view the writer so often quoted
contrasts it with those of Romanism and Ultra-Protestant
ism. " I say* the view of justification taken by Romanists and
by a school of divines among ourselves, tends to fix the mind
on self, not on Christ, whereas that which I have advocated
as Scriptural and Catholic, buries self in the absorbing vision
of a present, and indwelling God. And as so doing, it is
a more awakening and fearful doctrine even than that mode
of teaching which insists mainly and directly on our respon
sibilities and duties. For to what does it point as the great
and immediate condition of justification ? to faith and holi
ness of our own ? or, on the other hand, to the mere title of
righteousness, which cannot be literally approached or pro
faned by us " no,-— but to the glorious Shekinah of the Word
Incarnate, as to the true wedding garment in which the soul
must be dressed. Does not such a view far increase, instead
of diminishing our responsibilities 1 does it not make us more
watchful and more obedient, while it comforts and transports
us"? Surely it takes our minds off ourselves in order to fill us
with triumph, awe, and godly fear at what we are and what we
hold within us. When are we the more likely to dread
sinning, when we know merely we ought to dread it, or
when we see the exceeding peril of it? When are we the
more likely to keep awake and be sober, when we have a
present treasure now to lose, or a distant reward to gain ?
Is it not more dreadful, when evil thoughts assail us, more
elevating and ennobling in affliction, more kindling in danger
and hardship, to reflect ( f the words may be said) that we
bear God within us, as the Martyr Ignatius expresses it,
that He is grieved by us or suffers with us according as we
carry or renounce His Cross, — I say, has not this thought
more of persuasiveness in it to do and suffer for Him, than
the views of doctrine which have spread among us 1 Is it
* Lect. 8. " Righteousness viewed as a gift and a quality," p. 220.

53
not more constraining than that which considers that the
Gospel comes to us in name, not in power ; deeper, and
more sacred than a second, which makes its heavenly grace
a matter of purchase and trade ; more glowing than a third,
which depresses it almost to the chill temperature of natural
religion 1"
I cannot refrain from adding one more passage, in which
he winds up his glowing rehearsal of the devotions of the
early Christians, whose life was faith, and their faith not a
speculation, but their life :
" They* had Christ before them ; His thought in their
minds, His emblems in their eye, His Name in their mouths,
His service in their postures, magnifying Him, and calling
on all that lives to magnify Him, joining with angels in hea
ven and saints in paradise to bless and praise Him for ever
and ever. O great and noble system, not of the Jews who
rested in their rites and privileges, not of Christians who are
taken up with their own feelings, and who describe what
they should exhibit, but of the true Saints of God, the unde-
filed and virgin souls who follow the Lamb whithersoever
He goeth 1 Such is the difference between those whom
Christ praises, and those whom he condemns or warns.
The Pharisee recounted the signs of God's mercy upon and
in him ; the Publican simply looked to God. The young
Ruler boasted of his correct life, but the penitent woman
anointed Jesus' feet and kissed them ; nay, holy Martha her
self spoke of her ' much service ;' while Mary waited on
Him for the ' one thing needful.' The one thought of them
selves ; the others thought of Christ. To look at Christ is
to be justified by faith ; to think of being justified by faith is
to look from Christ and to fall from grace. He who wor
ships Christ, and works for Him, is acting that doctrine
which another does but enunciate ; his worship and his
works are acts of faith, and avail to his salvation, because he
does not do them as availing."
» Lect. 13. " On Preaching the Gospel," p. 388.

54

Art. XVI. Of sin after Baptism.
From this difference in the view of Justification, it could
not be, but that there should be a material difference as to
the view of sin after Baptism. And the charges on this sub
ject relate simply to myself. Some, I believe, have gone so
far as to imply that I contravene the Article, although I pre
faced what I said with a statement in its very words ; others
allege only that my statements interfere, according to their
view, with the doctrine of justification by faith. And this
could not be otherwise. For in that they sever Justification
from Baptism, and make it to consist in the " act of reliance
upon the merits of Christ only," sin, according to them, is
forgiven, at once, upon each renewal of this act : and in that
they thus virtually substitute this act for Baptism, a man has
thereupon no more to do with his past sins, than, accord
ing to the doctrine of the Church, he has with those remit
ted by Baptism. Since, moreover, they identify this act with
Justification, then a man's justification is renewed, so often as
this act is renewed : and if any one denies that a man is
forthwith completely justified, it is, with them, all one with
denying that he is "justified by faith only." I say this, by
way of explaining how one who takes this view of justifica
tion must, if he judge another by his principles, do him in
justice unintentionally ; he cannot understand how our own
merits and deservings are not introduced into the act of jus
tification. On the other hand, according to our Church,
we are by Baptism brought into a state of salvation, or jus
tification, (for the words are thus far equivalent,) a state into
which we were brought of God's free mercy alone, without
works, but in which having been placed, we are to " work
out our own salvation with fear and trembling," through the
indwelling Spirit of " God, working in us to will and to do
of His good pleasure ;" a state admitting of degrees, accord
ing to the degree of sanctification ; (although the first act,
whereby we were brought into it, did not ;) a state admitting
of relapses and recoveries, but which is weakened by every

55
relapse ; injured by lesser, destroyed for the time by grie
vous, sin ; and after such sin recovered with difficulty, in pro
portion to the greatness of the sin, and the degree of its wil
fulness, and of the grace withstood.
Now all this does not lie within the scope of the Arti
cle ; the Article expressly condemns persons holding two
opposite errors, " those which say they can no more sin as
long as they live here," and " those who deny the place of
forgiveness to such as truly repent." But who " truly re
pent ;" what are helps towards true repentance ; when a
man, who has been guilty of "deadly sin wilfully commit
ted after Baptism," may be satisfied that he is truly repentant
for it ; whether and to what degree he should, all his life af
ter, continue his repentance for it ; whether he be altogether
pardoned, or whether only so long as he continue in a state
of penitence ; wherein his penitence should consist ; whether
continued repentance would efface the traces of his sin in
himself ; whether he might ever in this life look upon him
self as restored to the state in which he had been, had he
not committed it ; whether it affect the degree of his future
bliss, or its effects be effaced by his repentance, but their ex
tinction depend upon the continued greatness of his repen
tance ; whether cessation of his active repentance may not
bring back degrees of the sin upon him ; whether it shall
appear again in the day of judgment : these, and the like,
are questions upon which the Article does not speak, but
upon which a modern popular theology has decided very pe
remptorily, and will have no interference with its decrees.
According to it, the whole office of repentance is to bring
men to Christ, the terrors of the law are to drive men to
dread the punishment due to their sins, to renounce them,
to seek for reconciliation through the free mercy of Christ ;
and so far is, of course, true : but when men have thus been
brought to " lay hold of His saving merits," then, according
to them, their sins are done away ; they " are covered ;"*
they can appear no more ; "the handwriting is blotted out ;"
a man has no more to do with them than to thank Christ
* Ps. xxxii. 2.

56
that he has been delivered from them. This " apprehension
of Christ's merits" is to them instead of Baptism, a full re
mission of sins, completely effacing them ; and so often as
any man embraces those merits, so often, according to them,
are his sins effaced. To revert to past sin, is to doubt of
Christ's mercy ; to bear a painful recollection of it, is to be
under the bondage of the law ; to seek to efface it by repen
tance, is weakness of faith ; to do acts of mercy, or self-de
nial, or self-abasement, or to fast, with reference to it, is to
interfere with the " freeness and fulness of the Gospel ;" to in
sist upon them, " is to place repentance in stead of Christ."
This system has but two topics, " repent, and believe the
Gospel ;" and so far right ; but these two so narrowed, that
repentance is to precede faith, faith to supersede repentance.
Other offices of repentance it scarcely entertains in thought,
except to denounce or to scoff at.*
It was against this system, my lord, that I spoke : this
abuse of the doctrine of justification by faiih in searing men's
consciences now, as much as the " indulgences" of the Ro
mish system did before. It used to be said that " the Ro
mish was an easy religion to die in ;" but even the Romish,
in its corruptions, scarcely offered terms so easy, at all events
made not a boast of the easiness of its terms ; if it had but
the dregs of the system of the ancient Church, stale and un
profitable as these often were, they had yet something of the
strength or the bitterness of the ancient medicine : they, at
least, testified to a system, when men made sacrifices for the
good of their souls, humbled themselves in dust and ashes;
practised self-discipline ; " accusedf and condemned them
selves, that so they might find mercy at their heavenly Fa
ther's hand for Christ's sake, and not be accused and con
demned in that fearful judgment ;" felt "the remembrance"
of their past sins to be "grievous!, unto" them, "the bur
then" to be " intolerable ;" " were grieved and wearied with
* E. g. in the way in which certain acts of self-discipline instanced from
Bp. Taylor, in Tract 66, p. 8, have been jeered at.
t Visitation of the Sick.
t Communion Service.

57
the burthen of their sins ;" " turned* to God in weeping, fast*
ing, and praying ;" " bewailed* and lamented their sinful
life, acknowledged and confessed their offences, and sought
to bring forth worthy fruits of " penance ;" and in cases of
notorious sin, were " put* to open penance, and punished
in this world that their souls might be saved in the day of the
Lord." The sun of the ancient Church was setting, sadly
obscured by the mists and vapors of earth which had ga
thered round it ; yet it did occasionally gleam through on the
eye, which watched constantly for it behind those mists ; and
even to these clouds which half hid it, it imparted oftentimes
its own, though a melancholy, lustre. Romanism was, in
practice as well as in doctrine, decayed ; yet to those who
" loved the stones and pitied the dust" of the ancient city of
God, its very ruins marked the outline, which they might
trace out for themselves : treasures were buried there for
those who would clear away the heaps which decay accu
mulated over them. To the many, her's was a debasing
system, yet there might be, and was often, reality in it, to
those who would find it.
The refined distinctions, which she made in carrying out
her divisions of mortal and venial sins ; her accurate allot
ment of punishments, (as if she could measure out the de
gree of guilt contracted by each offence against God ;) her
inventions of attrition and contrition ; the assumption of an
absolute power to remit altogether venial, and the eternal
consequences of mortal sins ; not to speak now of the salef
of indulgences or the commutation of penance for money ;
these favored the corruptions of carnal men,! stifled the
* Commination Service.
t The Sale of indulgences was prohibited by the Council of Trent (Sess.
Xxi. c. 9. de reformat.) ¦' that all might at length truly understand that these
heavenly treasures of the Church were employed not for gain but for piety,"
and the extent of previous corruptions admitted ; their use, as a means of
power, is continued. See quotations in Mr. Newman, on Romanism, Lect.
4, " Doctrine of Infallibility politically considered," p. 145. ed. 2.
X See more fully Newman on Romanism, Lect. 3. " Doctrine of Infallibili
ty morally considered," p. 113, sqq. ed. 2.
8

58
misgivings which might awaken them from their security,
lowered the tone and standard, whereat they were to aim,
and threw them on the Church, to whom the dispensation of
those treasures of mercy were committed, rather than on Him,
in whose name she dispensed them. She took upon herself
the office of the Judge, anticipated His sentence, and stood in
His place. Such were the effects of her portion of it, its cor
ruptions ; but insomuch as she retained from Antiquity, the
system bore witness to the holiness of God ; the grievousness
of offending Him ; the "earnestness, indignation, fear, vehe
ment longing, zeal,' revenge," which the Apostle* says
" godly soi row worketh ;" it spoke of holier times and holier
practices than it realized or encouraged, to those who had
ears to hear. But this modern system, whose very boast it
is to make works of no account ;f which teaches people, on
their death bed, after a life of profligacy and infamy, servants
of sin and Satan, destroying, as far as in them lay, the souls
of others, to put away all painful remembrance of past sin,
and to exult and triumph in having cast away " their righte
ousnesses" (which they had not) " like filthy rags," and to
joy as though they had " fought the good fight," and been
approved soldiers ; which would make it, practically easier,
and safer almost, to be saved without works than with them,
speaking often of the danger of relying upon works, and but
little of the danger of being lost for want of them ; which sti
fles continually the strong emotions of terror and amazement
which God has wrought upon the soul, and " healing slightly
the wound" which He has made, makes it often incurable ;
which makes peace, rather than holiness, the end of its minis
trations, and by an artificial wrought-up peace, checks the
deep and searching agony, whereby God, as in a furnace of
* 2 Cor. vii. 10, 11.
t Thus a very popular and in many respects valuable account of the de
struction of a vessel, speaking of the apparent conversion of some, under the
immediate prospect of sudden death, appealed strongly to this proof of the
value of faith without works. " What," it said, "would they have done,
who make salvation depend in any degree upon works, insuch a case, when
there was no time to perform them 1"

59
fire, was purifying the whole man, " by the Spirit of judg
ment, and by the Spirit of burning" — this i3 altogether a
spurious system, misapplying the promises of the Gospel,
usurping the privileges of Baptism, which it has not to confer,
giving peace which it has not to bestow, and going counter
to the whole tenor of Scripture, "that every man shall be
judged according to his works."
This system, however it differs from Romanism in the
means, agrees with it in the end, in lulling the conscience,
ridding man (as he craves to be) of all anxiety as to his past
life, permitting him to forget his past sins ; and that, without
exercising the self-discipline which Romanism, when not
altogether corrupt, still encourages.
Our Church, my lord, here as elsewhere, appears to me
to hold a distinct line, however she has not been able as yet
to revive the " godly discipline" which she feelingly deplores.
Romanism, as well as Ultra-Protestantism, practically frees
a man from his past sins ; our Church bids him confess that
he is " tied* and bound with the chain" of them, and to pray
Him that " the pitifulness of His great mercy may loose us ;''
she teaches us in her daily service, to have our " sins ever be
fore us," that so God may " hide His face from our sins, and
blot out all our iniquities ;" she bids us come day by day with
" broken and contrite hearts" which God " will not de-
pise ;" to " rend our hearts" that " God may repent him of
the evil ;" to seek of God "correction" though " with judg
ment, not in His anger ;" to go daily to our Father, and say
unto Him that we are "no more worthy to be called His
sons." She teaches us daily to confess all the sins of our
past life ; all our past " erring and straying," our having
*' offended against His holy laws," having " left undone what
we ought to have done, and done what we ought not to have
done ;" three times a week she teaches us to pray to be de
livered " from His wrath and from everlasting damnation,"
and " in the day of judgment ;" that He would give us " true
* This prayer was objected to by the Puritans, and consistently with their
system. Their objection shows the more how much of doctrine is contained
in our ancient prayers, that they do breathe a different moral spirit.

60
repentance, forgive us all our sins, negligences, and igno
rances." And in her most solemn service, she would have
us approach with "true penitent hearts ;" still gathering be
fore our eyes, all the sins of our past lives, that " the remem
brance of them" being "grievous unto us, and the burthen of
them intolerable," we may bring them all before Him, pray
Him, " for Jesus Christ's sake, to forgive us all that is past."
In the solemn service, again, with which this season has
just begun, she " admonishes us of the great indignation of
God against sinners," that " we may the rather be moved to
earnest and true repentance ;" and then, after most deep con
fession of sins, gives us not peace herself, but prays, in the
words which He placed in the mouths of His priests to bless,
" the Lord lift up the light of His countenance upon us and
give us peace." She guides us from herself, either preach
ing or blessing, to Him who is " the merciful receiver of all
true penitent sinners," and to His untold, unfathomable, mer
cies in Christ Jesus ; she would have us continually lean on
His mercy, not as confident that our sins were already blot
ted out, but rather as beholding ourselves "full of" all " the
sores" which, by our past sins, we had inflicted upon our souls,
yet trusting that His mercy will yet be greater than our
sins, striving to cleanse ourselves, yet awaiting to the
end His gracious sentence, whereby He shall say ," I will,
be thou clean," and "deliver us from the extreme male
diction which shall light upon them that shall be set on
the left hand, and set us on His right hand, and give us the
gracious benediction of His Father, commanding us to take
possession of His glorious kingdom." And so she continues
even to the end ; she exhorts us all twice every day, after
her Absolution, to beseech God to " grant us true repent
ance" — a truer and deeper repentance than we have ; —
prays for it in the Litany, in connexion with our past " sins,
negligences, and ignorances ;" prays again throughout Lent
that (what a modern system looks upon as taking place once
only in life) " God would create and make in us new and
contrite [broken] hearts ; that we, worthily lamenting our

61
sins and acknowledging our wretchedness," &c. and thus, to
the verge of the grave, or whenever sickness brings death
and judgment in nearer sight, she not only exhorts all " truly
to repent," but prays for them that "the sense of their
weakness may add strength to their faith, and seriousness
to their repentance." She would have both deepened in us
to our last breath, that we may in penitent trust close our
eyes and approach the Judge of all — with the words of that
great example of humble repentance and exceeding faith,
"Lord, remember me when Thou comest into Thy king
dom." The very titles with which she accompanies the
name of repentance, show how deep and earnest her views of
repentance are ; she never names it without some word to
express its reality. Thus, she speaks again and again of
" true repentance ;"* " and seriousness to repentance ;"f
"unfeigned repentance ;"j" " earnest and true repentance ;"i:
" with all contrition ;"i. "faithful repentance ;"^ and in her
service of most solemn joy, the Communion of her Lord, she
comes most broken-hearted ; she has there her deepest con
fession of guilt, and there she most accumulates these titles.
Its unspeakable blessings she sets forth, having first said " if
with a true penitent heart — we receive that Holy Sacrameift :
for then" &c. ; then she exhorts us, " repent you truly of
your sins past — so shall ye be made partakers," &c. ; then
placing that confession in our mouths, she invites us with the
words, " Ye that do truly and earnestly repent you of your
sins ;" then pronounces her absolution upon us, as such as
" with /ifiarft/ repentance turn unto Him ;" so that heraddress,
" Hear what comfortable words our Saviour Christ saith un
to all that truly turn to Him : ' Come unto Me, all ye that
travail, and are heavy laden, and I will refresh you,'" sounds
indeed most comfortably. Her sense of the awful privileges
of the Communion, and her own manifold unworthiness, and
* Twice in the Daily Absolution, in Visitation of the Sick, (where it
occurs three times, being omitted in the prayers for persons troubled in mind
or in conscience ;) Litany ; Commination Service, twice.
t Visitation of the Sick.
t Commination Service,

62
deep expressions of repentance* harmonize truly together :
modern systems would have had neither.
This appears to me then the characteristic difference of the
three systems : Romanism as well as Ultra-Protestantism
would consult readily for man's feverish anxiety to be alto
gether at ease ; our Church sets him in the way in which
God's peace may descend upon him, but forestallsnot His sen
tence. She has no second Baptism to give, and so she can
not pronounce him altogether free from his past sins. There
are but two periods of absolute cleansing, Baptism and the day
of judgment. She therefore teaches him continually to repent,
that so his sins may be blotted out, though she has no com
mission to tell him absolutely that they are ; she repeats to
him his Lord's words, " Come unto me, all ye that labor
and are heavy-laden, and / will give you rest," and so sends
him to her Lord that he may " find rest for his soul," but
does not anticipate His gracious act ; she absolves him, " if
he earnestly and heartily desire it," " by His authority com
mitted unto" her, and then, (even while holding out her
most solemn form of Absolution, as a means of relieving the
troubled conscience,) she confesses the incompleteness of
her own act, in that she subjoins a prayer for pardon of those
sins, from which she had just absolved him ; " O most mer
ciful God, who dost so put away the fins of those who truly
repent, that Thou rememberest them no more; Open Thine
eye of mercy upon this Thy servant, who most earnestly de-
sireth pardon and forgiveness ; impute not unto him his
former sins." The very renewal of her Eucharistic absolu
tion, " pardon and deliver you from all your sins," attests
that she does not hold them to have been all absolutely re
mitted ; but thus she sets him in a way whereby he may ob
tain peace ; she bids him repent, sorrow, sue for pardon, not
forget his repentance, come to Him who can and will give
rest, pronounces over him His Absolution, invites him where
" his sinful body may be made clean by His Body, and his
* Much instruction on the repentant characterof our Liturgy, will be found
in a Tract now being published, No. 86. " On the Indications of a Superintend
ing Providence in the preservation of the Liturgy, and the changes which it
has undergone."

63
soul washed through His most precious Blood," blesses him
with His blessing, " the Peace of God which passeth all un
derstanding," and so dismisses him, bearing with him, as she
hopes, His peace, Who alone is " the Author of Peace,"
Whose alone it is to bestow it. ^ And this is altogether in
accordance with Scripture, which uniformly speaks of
" peace" as the direct gift of God. " Grace be unto you and
peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ," is
the standing* Apostolic salutation to the Church ; and
thence is the Church's blessing,! " tne peace of God, which
passeth all understanding, keep your hearts and minds ; soi.
again, " the Lord of peace give you peace always ;" " My§
peace I give unto you ;" " the God|| of hope fill you with all
peace and joy in believing;" " The fruit*[ of the Spirit is
love, joy, peace ;" God is the " God of peace," our Lord
" is our peace ;"** nor is peace spoken of any where as
coming from any other source but directly from Him.
The difference then between the views in question is not,
as to the hope of pardon to the penitent, not even as to the
prospect of peace in this world ; but as to what is peni
tence, and how that peace is to be obtained ; whether from
men's declarations, or directly from God ; whether at first
or at last, whenever it pleases God to send it ; whether amid
forgetfulness of past sin, or while recalling it in bitterness
of recollection, and praying God for His Son's sake to par
don it ; whether amid continual humiliation, which saith,
" God be merciful to me a sinner," or amid exultation at
being free from self-righteousness. As repentance is God's
* It is used by St. Paul, with a very slight variation, in all his Epistles ; in
Rom. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 3 ; 2 Cor. i. 2 ; Eph. i. 2 ; Phil. i. 2 ; Col. i. 2 ; 1 Thess.
i. 1 ; 2 Thess. i. 2 ; Phil. 3 : " Grace be unto you and peace from God our
Father and the Lord Jesus Christ;" in Gal. i. 3. it is " from God the Father,"
&c. ; in 1 Tim. i. 2. " Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father ;" 2 Tim.
i. 2. " the Father :" Tit. i. 3. " the Lord Jesus Christ the Saviour;" St. Peter
uses a similar salutation, 2 Pet. i. 2. " Grace and peace be multiplied unto
you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord :" and St. John,
writing to an individual, (2 Epist. 3.) the same as that of St. Paul to Timo
thy and Titus, but adding " the Son of the Father in truth and love."
t Phil. iv. 7. 12 Thes. iii. 16. s John xiv. 27.
II Rom. xv. 13. IT Gal. v. 22. ** Eph. ii. 14.

64
gift, and God's woik in a man's soul, so is there obviously
great danger in interfering with it ; " He woundeth" and He
must "heal;" He "killeth" and He must "make alive;"
He " bringeth down to the grave and bringeth up." They
n ust have had but little acquaintance with wounded con
sciences, who know not how terribly He does " chasten
man for sin, making his beauty to consume away," how "He
writeth bitter things against him, and maketh him to possess
his former iniquities ;" and in this awfulness of His chastise
ments, which we very often cannot mitigate, though we
would, He bids us beware how we interfere with his work
in the soul, or apply lenitives, when He is probing the dis
eased and ulcerous part " to the very dividing of the soul
and body." These false kindnesses, (which in one body of
Christians, now daily parting more from the Church, is be
come systematic,) are continually marring the work, which
God had with a healthful severity begun. The penitent, un
timely delivered from his distress, loses the energy of repent
ance, and the hatred of sin, which God was annealing into
his soul, and becomes a common-place and a sickly Chris
tian. What I would urge, then, is, to hold out the prospect
of peace, but as God's gift through the deepening of repent
ance ; not to cut short His work, whether by the Sacra
ment of penance, or inward persuasions, or misapplied pro
mises of the Gospel ; but to direct to His mercies in Chiist ;
and He, who " knoweth whereof we are made, and remem-
bereth that we are but dust," will have pity pn them, " as a
father pitieth his own children," when they have learnt to
" fear Him." Not peace, but salvation is our end ; but peace
also He, the God of peace, will bestow, as He sees most
healthful for them, according to the evenness and consis
tency of their course ; clouding it, if they are remiss or
halting; renewing it, when they humble themselves and press
onward ; and in all cases bestowing upon us more than we
deserve, for His sake " Who is our Peace."

65

Art. XXV. On the Sacraments.
On' the Sacraments, two sets of charges are brought ;
one, that we unduly exalt the Sacraments of our Lord ;
the other, that we are not disinclined to ascribe a sacramen
tal character to other rites, which the Church of Rome has
defined to be Sacraments in the same sense as Baptism and
the Holy Eucharist. And these two charges have naturally
gone together; for in the school of Calvin and Zuingli, the
two great Sacraments have been so lowered, that they who
have learned therein, would speak of them in language
scarcely so high as we should of rites, which are not "Sa
craments of the Gospel." We must then to them appear
both to ascribe to these rites the character of Sacraments,
as they conceive of Sacraments, and to exalt the true Sacra
ments to something higher.
To speak first of that portion of that charge, which relates
to Sacraments generally. The caution of our Church on
this subject is very remarkable ; she no where denies that
there are more than two Sacraments, in some sense of the
word ; nay, in the Articles, Catechism, and Homilies alike,
she implies or asserts that there are more ; in the Articles
she denies only that " those five commonly called Sacra
ments — are to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel,
being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of
the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in ihe Scrip
tures, but yet have not the like nature of Sacraments with Bap
tism and the Lord's Supper:" for in that she says that they
" have not the like nature of Sacraments" with the two great
Sacraments, she rather implies that some of them have some
sacramental character, though not " like" to those two. In
like manner, when, in her Catechism she teaches her chil-
dren,that there are "two Sacraments, only, ordained by Christ
in His Church, generally, [i. e. universally,] necessary to
salvation," she implies that there are other rites which might
have the name, though not of this high dignity, nor " univer
sally necessary," nor " ordained by Christ Himself." And
9

66
precisely this distinction is made in the Homilies, which re
cognise several " sacraments" in that larger sense, at the
very time that, and in the same language as the Articles,
they distinguish between them, and the two great Sacra
ments. " As* for the number of them, [the Sacraments,] if
they should be considered according to the exact signification
of a Sacrament, namely, for visible signs, expressly comman
ded in the New Testament, whereunto is annexed the pro
mise of free forgiveness of sins, and of our holiness and
joining in Christ, there be but two ; namely, Baptism and the
Supper of the Lord. For although Absolution hath the pro
mise of forgiveness of sins, yet by the express word of the
New Testament it hath not this promise annexed and tied to
the visible sign, which is imposition of hands. For this visi
ble sign, (I mean laying on of hands,) is not expressly com
manded in the New Testament to be used in Absolution, as
the visible signs in Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ; and
therefore Absolution is no such Sacrament as Baptism and the
Lord's Supper are, and though the ordering of ministers hath
this visible sign and promise, yet it lacks the promise of re
mission of sin, as all other Sacraments besides the above na
med do. Therefore neither it, nor any other Sacrament else,
be such Sacraments as Baptism and the Communion are. But
in a general acception, the name of a Sacrament may be
attributed to any thing, whereby a holy thing is signified.
In which understanding of the word, the ancient writers
have given this name not only to the other five, commonly
of late years taken and used for supplying the number of the
seven Sacraments, but also to divers and sundry other cere
monies, as to oil, washing of feet, and such like; not mean
ing thereby to repute them as Sacraments, in the same signi
fication that the two fore-named Sacraments are. And there
fore St. Augustine, weighing the true signification and exact
meaning of the word, writing to Januarius, and also in the
third book of Christian doctrine, affirmeth that the ' Sacra
ments of Christians, as they are most excellent in significa
tion, so are they most few in number ;' and in both places
* Of Common Prayer and Sacraments.

67
maketh mention expressly of two, the Sacrament of Baptism
and the Supper of the Lord. And although they are retain
ed by the order of the Church of England, besides these
two, certain other rites and ceremonies about the institution
of ministers in the Church, Matrimony, Confirmation of
children by examining them of their knowledge of the ar
ticles of faith, and joining thereto the prayers of the Church
for them, and likewise for the Visitation of the sick ; yet no
man ought to take these for Sacraments, in such significa
tion and meaning, as the Sacraments of Baptism and the
Lord's Supper are ; but either for godly states of life, neces
sary in Christ's Church, and therefore worthy to be set forth
by public action and solemnity, by the ministry of the Church,
or else judged to be such ordinances, as may make for the
instruction, comfort, and edification of Christ's Church."
This passage is very remarkable for the principles which
it contains, and the caution with which it is expressed ; and
that the more, since the object of the writer, as well as of
the Article, was to guard against an over, rather than an
under-value of these secondary Sacraments, or Sacrament-
als :* he had then to protest against Romanist error, not
against a profane indifference to sacred rites ; and yet he
not only altogether shrinks from denying that sacred rites
maybe termed "sacraments," but expressly calls them so,
only laying down that they are " not such Sacraments as
Baptism and the Communion are," agreeing herein alto
gether with the Fathers. The modern school may apologize
for, or elude the passage, but they clearly would not them
selves have so written. (2) He does not even deny that
some of those which are not, in the highest sense, " sacra
ments," have a spiritual gift conveyed in connexion with
* The word " Sacramentals" is used by Beza (quoted Hooker, E. P. IV.
i. 4. ed. Keble) to designate " any ceremony importing signification of Spirit
ual things ;" the introduction of any such into the Church of God, he declares
to be a " right grievous sin ;" yet, remarkably enough, as Hooker observes,
the title " as sacraments" which Hooker adopts (I. c.) is used by the same
writers, who entitle " the Apostles' imposition of hands" " a sign, or as it
were sacrament."

68
them. On the contrary, of Absolution he expressly says,
that " it hath the promise of forgiveness of sins," only " not
annexed to the visible sign," and is thereby distinguished
from the great Sacraments. So, again, Orders he allows to
have both "the visible sign and promise," i. e. of spiritual
grace ; but not " remission of sins," and thus it also is distin
guished from the proper Sacraments. And this coincides
with our Ordination Service ; for the words, " Receive the
Holy Ghost," had been a manifest impiety, unless the act of
Ordination were, to those worthily receiving it, accompanied
with the gift of the Holy Spirit ; as indeed it is expressly
affirmed by Holy Scripture, that an inward "gift" was be
stowed upon Timothy through his ordination, " Stir up the
gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of my hands,
with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."* So far
ther, he says in general of " other sacraments," that they
" all lack the promise of remission of sins ;" implying at the
same time, that there are others, which he would call sacra
ments, (as Matrimony is expressly termed in another homily, )f
and that what at once distinguished them from the great Sa
craments was, that they conveyed "no remission of sins;"
whereby he virtually allows that they did convey spiritual
grace. And so, probably, he meant that such rites, as did
not " grow of the corrupt following of the Apostles," (Art.
XXV.) had such spiritual grace ; nor indeed does it appear
how a sacred action, which is really a type or image of a
sacred thing, (which is his definition,) should be destitute of
spiritual influences. Such is also the teaching of later Di
vines of chief note in the Church. Thus Hooker vindicates
against the Puritans, the spiritual graces of Confirmation,
with an appeal to the universal teaching of the ancient
Church. " The Fathers every where impute unto it that
gift or grace of the Holy Ghost, not which maketh us Christ
ian men, but, when we are made such, assisteth us in all
* Tim. i. 6. 1 Tim. iv. 14.
t Sermon on Swearing, pt. i. See other authorities among later English
Divines in Palmer on the Church, pt. 6. c. 8. t. 2. p. 442.

69
virtue, armeth us against temptation and sin." — " The Fa
thers therefore, being thus persuaded, held confirmation as
an ordinance Apostolic, always profitable in God's Church,
although not always accompanied with equal largeness of
those external effects, which gave it countenance at the first."
— " By which answer [of St. Jerome] it appeareth that his
opinion was, that the Holy Ghost is received in Baptism :
that confirmation is only a sacramental complement." " Now
what effect their imposition of hands hath, either after Bap
tism administered by heretics, or otherwise, St Jerome in
that place hath made no mention, because all men under
stood that in converts it tendeth to the fruits of repentance,
and craveth in behalf of the penitent such grace as David
after his fall desired at the hands of God ; in others, the
fruit and benefit is that, which hath been before shown." —
" Whereunto [to the fatherly encouragement and exhorta
tion of the Bishops] imposition of hands and prayer being
added, our warrant for the great good effect thereof is the
same which Patriarchs, Prophets, Priests, Apostles, Fathers,
and men of God, have had for such their particular invoca
tions and benedictions, as no man, I suppose, professing
truth of religion, will easily think to have been without fruit."*
Not less remarkable, on the other side, is the light which
this comparison throws upon the views of the writer of the
Homily, as to the two great Sacraments. He does not in
deed rest the question of the number of proper sacraments,
solely on the external distinctions, but goes also to the good
ground of Christian Antiquity ; and asserts them to be dis
tinct, because the Ancient Church ever so distinguished
them. But besides this ground, he also, in the same way as
the Articles and Catechism, alleges the peculiar dignity cast
around the two proper Sacraments, in that in them nothing
was left to be supplied by man ; every thing in them was or
dained by our Lord Himself ; the visible sign, as well as the
promise of the invisible grace, and the promised connexion
between the two : so that although the one or other rite
?Eccl. Pol. V. 66. §4.6, 7.

70
come near to have the character of a Sacrament, yet it falls
short in that it is not equally guarded. Thus he points out
that Absolution " hath the promise of forgiveness of sins,"
but not the connexion with the visible sign ; Ordination
hath a promise and the visible sign, but not the promise which
the others have. And this distinctive promise is, union with
our Lord, and consequent justification and sanctification ; for so
he expressly says, the "exact" definition of a sacrament is a visi
ble sign, expressly commanded in the New Testament, where
unto is " annexed the promise of forgiveness of our sins, E^nd
of our holiness and joining in Christ." Other rites may be
and are means of grace, but no other than the Sacraments
of our Lord are means of direct union with Him. And this
union, justification, sanctification, are, according to this clear
and distinct writer, not merely concomitants, accompanying
the right use of the Sacrament, but they are (he uses the
very phrase to which the Ultra-Protestant theories from his
day to our's most object) " annexed and tied to the visible sign;"
for the absence of such annexation he alleges as the ground
why Absolution is not to be regarded as a Sacrament ; again
coinciding with the language of the Catechism, that " they
are the means, whereby we receive the inward and spiritual
grace ;" they are not only pledges to assure our faith; much
less mere outward signs of what is worked inwardly, but means
and channels whereby God conveys it.
Thus then this passage of the Homily conveys throughout
precisely the view as to the distinction between the true, pro
per Sacraments, and those rites which in some respects
approximate to Sacraments, and the grounds of that distinc
tion, which are now stigmatized as Papistical. I need only
adduce one passage, in which this distinction has of late been
very clearly stated.*
" If justification be the inward application of the Atone
ment, we are furnished at once with a sufficient definition of
a sacrament for the use of our Church. The Romanist consi-

* Newman on Justification, Lect. 6. " On the gift of Righteousness," v. fin.
p. 169, 70.

71
ders that there are seven ; we do not strictly determine the
number. We define the word generally to be an ' outward
sign of an inward grace,' without saying to how many ordi
nances this applies. However, what we do determine is,
that Christ has ordained two special Sacraments as generally
necessary to salvation. This, then, is the characteristic mark
of those two, separating them from all other whatever ; and
what is this but saying in other words that they are the only
justifying rites, or instruments of communicating the Atone
ment, which is the one thing necessary to us 1 Ordination,
for instance, gives power, yet without making the soul accept
able to God ; Confirmation gives light and strength, yet is
the mere completion of Baptism ; and Absolution is a negative
ordinance, removing the barrier which sin has raised between
us and that grace, which by inheritance is our's. But the
two Sacraments ' of the Gospel,' are the instrumensts of in
ward life, according to our Lord's declaration, that Baptism is
a new birth, and that in the Eucharist we eat the living
Bread." Now this distinction, which, with the Homily,- we have
made, the Romanist will not make ; for it would be conceding
the whole question, were he to allow that two of his seven
Sacraments were completely sui generis, so as wholly to be
above, and removed from the other five. The rest would be
a question of words and names only. On the contrary, the
Council of Trent, where it anathematizes any who should
say, that " these* seven Sacraments are in such wise equal
among themselves, that one is in no respect superior to the
other," meant, as Card. Bellarminef explains it, to condemn
those who ascribe to Baptism the same dignity as the Eucha
rist ; and he is very indignant with those impugners of the
Council, who said that they observed this Canon, in that they
did separate Baptism and the Eucharist'from the rest, re
garding the former as the institutions of Christ, the rest, as
the inventions of men. "This," he says, "is to blink the
question," for that first, the Council assumed that all seven
* Sess. 7. can. 3. t De Sacram. L. 2. c. 28.

72
are Sacraments of the New Law ; secondly, that the object
was to condemn a farther error of the Lutherans, who re
garded Baptism as of equal dignity with the Eucharist; third
ly, " the Council itself asserted the Eucharist to excel all
the other Sacraments,* but did not make this comparison as
to the others." Farther, it is part of the Romanist
system to inculcate that each of their Sacraments has
not only something peculiar, but some superiority, over
the rest ; that so there should result a sort of balance
of dignity between them, and none, except the Eu
charist, should be placed above the rest, so as to intro
duce any essential or practical disparity between them.
And thus they guard their number seven : since though they
cannot but admit that Baptism has some especial prerogatives
over others of their Sacraments, so they contend have others ;
so that this is to be no sufficient ground for distinguishing
them. Thus Card. Bellarmine alleges that " Baptismf ex
cels as to the effect of remitting sin, in that it remits origi
nal sin, and actual sins with all the punishment due to them,
which other Sacraments do not ; Confirmation excels as to
the effect of grace toward good-doing, for it presupposes the
effect of Baptism, and superadds more abundant grace ; the
Eucharist excels all, as to the substance of the Sacrament —
as having not only an operative power, but containing truly
Christ Himself, the Author of that power ; Penance excels
all in necessity, except Baptism, with which it has this ex
cellence in common ; Extreme Unction in a manner excels
Penance, as to the effect of grace, like as Confirmation ex
cels Baptism, for it presupposes the whole effect of Penance,
and adds more abundant grace, which can not only wipe
away all sins, if present, but remove the very traces of sin ;
Orders excels all except Confirmation, as to the minister, in
that it can be conferred by a Bishop only ; nay, herein it
seems to excel Confirmation ; since Confirmation, sometimes,
by dispensation, may be conferred by a mere priest — also it
excels the rest, in that it places man in a higher grade than
* Sess. 12. cap. 3 t L. c.

73
other Christians ; lastly, Matrimony excels in signification ;
for it signifies the union of Christ with the Church, whence
it is called by the Apostle a ' great Sacrament.'" No one
can fail to see the object of these ingenious and fine-drawn
distinctions, (which were held generally in the council of
Trent itself,*) nor how presumptuously and wantonly Rome
sacrifices the intrinsic greatness of one at least of the two
great sacraments; nor the total difference of character be
tween her distinctions, and those of the Homily and ourselves.
So then, this distinction between the " proper Sacraments
and offices of the Church, to which there is allied a Sacra
mental efficacy," so far from being one connected with Ro
manism, was of old adopted in our Church against Roman
ism ; and when Romanists would distinguish between the
efficacy of their Sacraments, they do it altogether in a dif
ferent way ; for a different end ; and assuming that they are
all in one respect equal, as being all " proper Sacraments."
Baptism.
A late Lutheran writerf admits that " as to the Sacrament
of Baptism there is no controversy of much moment between
the two Churches" [Lutheran and Romish.] It is then
hardly worth while to enter into the question, what the Ro
mish church means by the " Character" impressed upon the
baptized, and whether this may have a sound sense or no.
There remains, of course, one great difference between the
two Churches, not peculiar to Baptism, but affecting much
men's comfort and security, in receiving either Sacrament,
that the " intention of the Priest to do what the Church
does," is, according to Rome, requisite to make the Sacra
ment valid. A well-known instance in the late history of
France of one who confessed, on his death-bed, that he for
years administered the Sacraments, meaning expressly "not
* " All agree that if you regard the necessity and utility of the Sacraments,
Baptism ought to have the preference ; but Marriage, if you regard what it
signifies ; Confirmation, if you look to the dignity of the minister ; and the
Eucharist, if to the veneration due to it." P. Sarpi, 1. ii. c. 85.
t Marheineke Instit. Symbol. § 36.
10

74
to do what the Church did," illustrates at once the danger
of such definitions, and the insecurity which this tenet, secu
red as it is by an anathema, must cast over those of the Ro
mish Communion, whether they have indeed the Sacra
ments or no. " If any one say," are the words of Catharin,
Bp. of Minori, in the Council of Trent,* " that these cases
[of meaning to make the administration of the Sacraments a
jest] are rare, would to God that in this corrupt age there
were not reason to think that they are very frequent !" The
very belief that there was a power to invalidate the Sacra
ments would be used by Satan as a temptation to make men
essay to do so. Ultra-Protestants, strangely enough, come
round to the same result of casting uncertainty on the effi
cacy of Baptism, in that they make it, in infants, to depend
upon the faith of the parents, sponsors, congregation, or
* Sarpi, Hist, du Concil. de Trente, 1. ii. c. 85. He was arguing that " the
intention of the minister," required by the Council of Florence for the validity
oi a Sacrament, should be restrained to the " outward intention, whatever the
inward purpose of the officialor might be ;'' in other words, that all which
should be necessary to the validity of a Sacrament on the part of the Priest,
should be an outward conformity with the rites of the Church. He urged,
" supposing an internal intention necessary, then, if a Priest having the care
of four or five thousand souls should be an unbeliever yet a great hypocrite,
who, whether in the Baptism of Infants, or the absolution of penitents, or the
consecration of the Eucharist, had the intention of not doing what the Church
does, thenit must be said that all the children were damned, the penitents un
absolved, and that none of the communicants had derived any benefit." " He
insisted much," continues the historian, " on the affliction which an affection
ate father would feel, if, seeing his child dying, he doubted the intention of
the Priest who had baptized it ; or, the disquiet of one who received Baptism
in an imperfect frame of mind, should he have reason to suspect that the Priest
who had baptized him, was a false Christian, and that instead of intending to
baptize or to confess him, or to give him the Eucharist, he had meant only to
wash him in jest, and to make a sport of all the rest," on which follow the
terrible words quoted in the text. The decree of the Council finally was, " if
any one say that in ministers, when they make and confer the Sacraments
there is not required at least the intention of doing what the Church does, let
him be anathema." Courayer says, that the mode in which Catharin ex
plained the Council of Florence, was insensibly adopted in the schools as the ex
planation of that of Trent, though opposed in the Council itself, and though the
Council seemed to require an internal intention on the part of the Minister.
As far as it is adopted, it is a manifest evasion of the decree, " on account " as
Courayer says, " of the inconvenience resulting from its obvious sense."

75
Ministers, not on Christ's institution and promises, although
they be ministered by evil men." Art. XXVI. And whereas
they would call it " popish" to believe that an infant is, through
the faith of the Church, which brings it unto Christ, accepted
by Him, and regenerated by His Spirit, whatever be the cha
racter of the immediate human agents, they themselves coin
cide with the Romish error just stated.* The principle of
St. Augustine, on the contrary, that children being able to
put no bar of an opposite will, God's goodness flows unre
strained towards them, is, in our own Church, thus beauti
fully expressed by Hooker ;f " He which with imposition of
hands and prayer did so great works of mercy for restoration
of bodily health, was worthily judged as able to effect the
infusion of heavenly grace into them, whose age was not yet
depraved with that malice which might be supposed a bar to
the goodness of God towards them. They brought Him
therefore young children to put his hands upon them and
pray." In the same way again Archbishop Bramhall :| " Secondly,
we distinguish between the visible sign, and the invisible
grace ; between the external sacramental ablution, and the
grace of the Sacrament, that is, interior regeneration. We
believe that whosoever hath the former, hath the latter also,
*" Why leave two or three expressions in the Baptismal Service and her
Catechism, so unguarded by explanation, as to induce many to imagine that
every child is really regenerated in that ordinance, and made a true and living
member of Christ, by a certain form of words, however, and by whomsoever
(being a priest) pronounced, and even in spite of the unbelief or carelessness
of all the parties concerned." — Essays on the Church, p. 269. Another ushers
in, with an apology, a hypothetic case of a fox-hunting clergyman, in illus
tration of the same point, (Fraser, p. 18.) So with regard to the other Sacra
ment, it is used as part of an argument ex absurdo ; " in infidel and debased
Spain and Italy, our Lord's Body and Blood is constantly offered to the peo
ple, inasmuch as the priests who there officiate — unbelievers as most of them
are — are yet the right line of Apostolic succession !" — Essays, p. 312. Yet
what has the unbelief of the Priest to do with the privileges of the people 1
" does their unbelief make void the righteousness of God 1"
t Eccl. Pol. V. 66. 1. ed. Keble.
t Of persons dying without Baptism, Works, p. 979, quoted in Tracts,
No. 76. Catena Patrum, No. 2. " Testimony of writers in the later English
Church to the doctrine of Baptismal regeneration," p. 20.

76
so that he do not put a bar against the efficacy of the Sacra
ment by his infidelity or hypocrisy, of which a child is not capa
ble, and therefore our very Liturgy doth teach that a child
baptized, dying before the commission of actual sin, is un
doubtedly saved." And more recently, Waterland :* " The
second is the case of infants. Their innocence and incapacity
are to them instead of repentance, which they do not need,
and of actual faith, which they cannot have. They are capable
of being savingly born of water and the Spirit, and of being
adopted into sonship with what depends thereupon; because
though they bring no virtues with them, no positive righteousness,
yet they bring no obstacle, no impediment."
The modern school, which denies as " Popish" this doc
trine, (and it is upon it that the question of the baptismal re
generation of all infants in fact turns,) have apparently yet to
learn that Christian Baptism is not that of the servant but of
the Lord ; that in the language of the Ancient Church, " it
is not man, but Christ, who baptizeth."
The chief charge against Rome as to the Sacrament of
Baptism is, not that she has unduly exalted it, but, on the
very contrary, that she has depreciated it. She insists indeed
on its necessity, and there leaves it. This is the very coldest
way, in which it could have been spoken of ; she enlarges
not on the gifts bestowed through it, on the presence of our
Lord thereat ; on His communicating Himself to the soul,
or His applying His own most precious Blood, thereby ; or
on the sacred presence of the Holy Ghost the Comforter, and
His thenceforth making the baptized His temple unless Hebe
grieved away. These blessed truths she rather casts into the
shade, though she would not deny them : in her anxiety to
secure a peculiar presence of our Lord in the Holy Eucha
rist, she rather conceals, and is unwilling to dwell on, His
sacred presence in this Sacrament, whereby He makes us
members of Himself : in her wish to vindicate the equality
and dignity of her other Sacraments, as Sacraments, she is
obliged to disguise that which constitutes the peculiar great-
* On Regeneration, 2. quoted ib. p. 46.

ness of the two proper Sacraments,— the union with and pre
sence of our Lord, — and vindicates it to one only in a carnal
way. The dignity also which she ascribes to her Sacraments
of Confirmation and Penance, leads her members the more
away from looking to their Baptism : for Confirmation pre
supposes, as Belarmine says, the gifts of Baptism, and adds
more abundant grace, and so, " excels it as to the effect of
grace for good-doing ;" and when one sins among them, he
is to look, not to God's mercies in Christ pledged to him in
Baptism, and all the undefined and overflowing favor and
loving-kindness involved in being made a member of the ever-
blessed Son, but to a distinct Sacrament of Penance. Thus,
in both ways, her members are taught to look upon Baptism
as a mere preliminary act, in the back-ground, as it were, of
the Christian life ; the foreground upon which their eye is
fixed, being taken up by their Sacrament of Penance and the
Holy Eucharist. It is, indeed, a remarkable instance of the
effect of her whole system, even upon parts where she has
not introduced error : it illustrates also mournfully the can
cerous nature of error in any portion of revealed truth, how
it spreads and preys upon the parts yet sound. As to Holy
Baptism, Rome innovated not, and yet she has doubly lower
ed it ; by a carnal glory which she would shed around the
Holy Eucharist, and by the obstinacy wherewith she would
maintain the number of her seven Sacraments, and the hu
man theories she had to resort to in order to uphold them.
This indeed was the charge, brought by our early Controver
sialists against Rome, — that she depreciated the Sacrament
of Baptism, to make way for her theory respecting that of
the Holy Eucharist ; and so they would remedy her error on
the latter, not in the modern way, by lowering both Sacra
ments, but by showing that Baptism had the same glo
rious privileges belonging to it, on which Rome would build
up its carnal explanation of our Lord's presence in the Holy
Eucharist. Thus Bishop Jewell,* " Are we not partakers of
the same Divine Substance in the Sacrament of Baptism ? St.
* Defence of Apologie, p. 22. See also Replie to Harding, p. 285. and farther
references in " Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism," p. 179. sqq. ed. 1.

78
Augustine saith, ' by Baptism we are incorporate into Christ,
and are made one Body with His Body.' Leo saith, ' The
Body of Him that is new born in Baptism, is made the flesh of
Christ crucified,' that is to say, ' Flesh of His Flesh, and
Bone of his Bone V Yet nevertheless, the very substance of
water remaineth still. Even so, notwithstanding we be made
partakers of the Divine Substance of Christ, in the receiving
of the Holy Mysteries, yet the substance of bread therein re
maineth still. And forasmuch as ye would prove by these
words of St. Ambrose, that Christ is present in the Sacra
ments, the same St. Ambrose also saith, that Christ is like
wise present in the water of Baptism. Thus he saith, &c."
And in another place he explicitly brings this charge against
the Romainsts. "Forasmuch* as these two Sacraments being
both of force alike, these men [the Romanists] to advance
their fantasies in the one, by comparison so much abase the
other, I think it good, briefly and by the way, somewhat to
touch what the old Catholic Fathers have written of God's in
visible workings in the Sacrament of Baptism. The Fathers
in the Council of Nice say thus."
So then this school, while they think they have been oppo
sing Romanist tendencies, have abandoned the strongest
argument against them, and the most likely to recover them
from their errors as to the Holy Eucharist.
But although in reality Rome has not, as to this Sacra
ment, admitted any positive statement, (at least none of any
greater moment,) un-Catholic and un-Primitive, great and
main points there are in the doctrine of Baptism, which by
those who have followed an " extreme reformation," have
ever been accounted part of the corruptions of Popery. It
was one of the objections of the Non-Conformists to our
Liturgy, at the Savoy-Conference, and held to be " sinful,"
that the Minister was " obliged to pronounce all baptized
infants regenerate ;" and modern Dissenters continue the
charge. f Those, however, in our Church, who in this and
* Reply, p. 249, 50. quoted more at length. Ibid.
i See Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism, p. 176, ed. 1.

79
other doctrinal points, have followed the teaching of the
Non-Conformists, (since they cannot, as Ministers of the
Church, blame the Liturgy,) throw the blame upon .those who
understand it as the non-conformists out of the Church, and the
Bishops within it, at that time equally did. It is, indeed, not
one of the least strange phenomena of the day, that a truth
should be by newspapers and periodicals branded in members
of the Church as a modern " heresy," which eighty years
past, it is acknowledged, was held by almost every minister
of the Church,* which is still held probably, at all events by
all her Bishops ; nay, that it should have been (until of late,
when the field has been widened) denominated as " the Ox
ford heresy," and placed as the head and front of our offend
ing. I own, my lord, I have myself shrunk from stating fully
the degree of evidence which there is, that Baptismal regen
eration is the doctrine of the Church of England, lest in
these days, when men hold so laxly by their Church, and
are ready to quit her upon any ground of difference, — ready
to suspect her, and very slow to suspect themselves, — the re
sult of proving that Baptismal regeneration is the doctrine of
our Church, would be that men would rather forsake their
Church than embrace her doctrine. It seems to be looked
upon as a first principle, that the duty of a Minister is to
preach what he thinks the Gospel any how ; and so if one
discovers that he cannot consistently preach in the Church,
he forthwith increases some old schism, or forms a new one,
instead of remaining still, until he should see his way more
clearly. Our schisms already threaten to make us a bye-
word and a reproach, throughout the whole world ; we carry
our disgrace with us wherever we go ; and are in danger of
becoming a plague-spot to the Christian name, instead of being
(as we might have been) one of the largest Communions, and
the most flourishing of all collective Churches. The En
glish nation is in the way to become the very type of schism.
* " Romaine states, that among the whole of the clergy, about 10 000 in
number, of his time, there were not seven that preached the Gospel of Christ.''
— Travels in Town, t. ii. p. 105.

so
Rent as we are, I would not willingly contribute to make the
rent worse. Those who wish to pursue the subject calmly,
might be amply satisfied by the very clear and full state
ment in the valuable work of Bishop Bethell ;* for myself,
I had rather continue to be termed " heretic" by those who
know me not, than give occasion to any to become a " schis
matic." It was the fault of the Church, in the last century,
or rather of those who had the mastery over the Church,
that her Ministers, by preaching her doctrines negatively or
coldly, gave occasion to many whose spirit God had stirred,
to seek instruction rather in the writings of those not of her
Communion— the old Non- Conformists — than within herself.
They were reproached in their day, as their successors now
in turn reproach those who would build up the ancient doc
trine. Their forefathers' was the happier lot. As how
ever it has been sown, so must we reap ; the true leaven
will, we hope, in time leaven the whole lump, not by expel
ling any particles of it, but by converting them into itself;
Moses' rod will swallow up the rest ; meanwhile, while it is
our duty to teach our own people that sound doctrine, one
would rather endeavor to gain access in some other way to
those whom we are not obliged to instruct, and not upon a
topic on which they are least inclined to be patient, urge
upon them the words of a mother, whom they reverence not
enough to obey against their own views, and whom possibly
they might forsake. Others may do it, who could do it with
less invidiousness. Not as if I entertained any doubt, my
lord, that we speak with our Church in this point, and that
every syllable of her teaching in her services for Baptism,
Confirmation, and the Catechism, goes the same way ; and
that her Articles imply the same ; (many who held other
wise, have seen this, when they came to study thur Church's
services dispassionately ;) but that it seems useless and un
gracious for us to press upon them, that their Church holds
the doctrine, until their prejudices against it shall first be, as
those of many are being, somewhat softened. And then the
* General View of the Doctrine of Regeneration in Baptism, c. 6. ed. 2.

81
teaching of their Church will be plain to them. We -would
wish to gain, not to exasperate them. And in turn we might
perhaps claim so much courtesy that the name of " heretic"
or " heresy" should not be so freely used of doctrines, which
themselves confess, certain expressions* in the services of
the Church seem at first sight to favor. It seems hard mea
sure to bestow on us the title " heretic" for taking literally
those words of our Church, which they defend by supposing
them to be spoken " in the judgment of charity," thereby
allowing that our's is the plain and grammatical meaning,
only that on other grounds it is to be taken with some allow
ance. And this courtesy we would claim rather for their
own sakes lhan for our's.
And to this reconciliation it may perhaps the rather tend,
if I add, that we do not wish to enforce any technical view
of Baptismal regeneration : for myself, I should be fully
content with any view, which acknowledged in its simple
sense the words which our Church teaches every child to
say of itself, " wherein I was made a child of God, a mem
ber of Christ, and an inheritor of the kingdom of Heaven ;"
(meaning, of course, really what is there said, a real child
of God, and a real member of Christ, not simply an " out
ward member of an outward body of people called Chris
tians.") The same truth may be variously viewed ; contem
plated on different sides ; nay, it must be, according to our
moral character, differently appreciated ; and so it may be
that persons holding different language may in fact be ex
pressing different parts of the same truth, and speaking of it
in different relations, but still hold it. The Western Church,
after St. Augustine, chiefly spoke of the blessings of Bap
tism as the remission of sins ; the Eastern, as the introduc
tion of a new principle of life ; but both as flowing from our
engraffing into Christ. To us, engrafting into, or being made
a member of Christ, appears the fullest, as it is the most ex-
* See above, p. 75. " This one ordinance, Baptism, is made with many
the point on which every thing turns. This probably arises from a feelin"-
that their main strength lies in this direction. We admit that the Church is
more open to misconstruction on this'point than on most others." — Fraser p 16
11

82
alted expression of that doctrine, and yet in harmony also
with what we see of the corruption of the actual Christian
world, in that, though all have been made branches of the
true Vine once, they only, which bear fruit, abide in Christ ;
the rest are " cast forth as a branch and withered." Yet
though we would be thankful to be made the instruments of
raising men's sense of the privileges of their Baptism, and
cannot but see that, when it was held in its fulness, it cast a
reality over other doctrine, and was a high spring to Chris
tian action, we wish not to restrain the liberty of others.
There is unquestionably in Christian antiquity a tone about
this and other connected truths, with which our present lan
guage and feelings and habits stand in melancholy contrast ;
but the whole must rise together ; a higher doctrine of the
Sacraments will increase men's sense of their Christian re
sponsibilities ; and more elevated Christian action, (and by
God's mercy Christian action is rising, we trust, towards a
higher standard amongst us,) will fit men to receive higher
notions of the Sacraments, and enable them to hold them
safely. But to this there are many approximations ; and
those, who are sensible of their own infirmities, will hail
every approximation with joy, not measuring rigidly how
far it seems from their ideal, but rejoicing that, with them
selves, it is approaching to it.
As tending to this end of peace, which your lordship would
so gladly promote, I may be permitted to adduce a statement
by another hand, in which the writer assigns the bounds
within which Baptismal regeneration has been held by the
chief Divines of our later Church, and separates off other
questions in themselves important, yet still not essentially af
fecting the main question. In these detached questions many
will find that their difficulties lie ; and although a man's views
of Baptismal regeneration will be affected by the way in
which he settles these questions, yet are different views on
them consistent with holding the main doctrine, and some
may perhaps thereby be enabled to employ the Liturgy of
their Church more literally than they at present do. It will

83
happen also not unseldom on these points also, that people
using nearly the same language, employ it in a lower or
higher sense ; as, one by admission into the Christian cove
nant will understand only an outward, another a mystical,
though undefined, change of condition.
The writer then thus explains wherein he conceives the
great body of our Divines to be agreed as to this doctrine,
and what may be. termed open questions among them.
" By* this doctrine is meant, first, that the Sacrament of
Baptism is not a mere sign or promise, but actually a means of
grace, an instrument, by which, when rightly received, the
soul is admitted to the benefits of Christ's atonement, such
as the forgiveness of sin, original and actual, reconciliation
to God, a new nature, adoption, citizenship in Christ's
kingdom, and the inheritance of heaven, — in a word, Regen
eration. And next, Baptism is considered to be rightly re
ceived, when there is no positive obstacle or hinderance to the
reception in the recipient, such as impenitence or unbelief
would be in the case of an adult; so that infants are neces
sarily right recipients of if, as not being yet capable of ac
tual sin.f
" There is a variety of questions connected with the sub
ject beyond the two positions above set down, on which the
writers under review differ more or less from each other, but
not so as in the slightest degree to interfere with their clear
and deliberate maintenance of these. Such, for instance, as
the following : — Whether grace be given in and through the
water, or only contemporaneously with it. Again, whether
Baptism, strictly speaking, conveys the blessings annexed to it,
or simply admits into a state gifted with those blessings, as
being the initiatory rite of the covenant of mercy. Or, again,
whether or not Baptism, besides washing away past sin, ad
mits into a state in which, for sins henceforth committed, Re
pentance stands in place of a Sacrament, so as to ensure for-
* Preface to Catena Patrum, No. 2, (Tracts, No. 76.) " Testimony of
writers in the later English Church to the doctrine of Baptismal regenera
tion." t See above, p. 75.

84
giveness without specific ordinance ; or whether the Holy
Eucharist is that ordinance ; or whether the full and expli
cit absolution of sin after Baptism is altogether put off till the
day of judgment. Or, again, there may be difference of
opinion as to the state of infants dying unbaptized. Or,
again, whether Regeneration is an instantaneous work com
pleted in Baptism, or admits of degrees and growth. Or,
again, whether or not the Holy Spirit can utterly desert a
soul once inhabited by Him, except to quit it forever. Or,
whether the change in the soul made by Baptism is indelible,
for good or for evil ; or may be undone, as if it had never
been. Or, how far the enjoyment of the grace attached to
it is suspended on the condition of our doing our part in the
Covenant. All these are questions, far from unimportant,
but which do not at present come into consideration ; the
one point, maintained in the following extracts, being, that
infants are by and at Baptism unconditionally translated from
a state of wrath into a state of grace and acceptance for
Christ's sake." Art. XXVIII. Of the Lord's Supper.
On the other great sacrament, the distinction between the
doctrine of our Church, and that of Rome on the one hand,
and Ultra-Protestantism on the other, is in reality so broad
and distinct, that there is the less difficulty. Nor is it, like
Baptismal regeneration, the point of divergence of two sys
tems; and so it may be considered with less view to its con
sequences as to other portions of truth. And one result of
this has been, that many who, from being entangled in a mo
dern system, have parted more or less from our Church's
teaching upon Baptism, hold much higher and truer views of
this Sacrament. Then also, as recurring in their actual
Christian life, they could the less look upon it in an abstract
way, or as a theory; their devotion and love for their Re
deemer has sustained their doctrinal views; and the teach
ing of their Church has found a more ready entrance, when
received apart from controversy, amid the most solemn part
of the devotions of the Christian man. This teaching, which

85
we receive in its plain sense, contains, we are persuaded, the
full Catholic truth ; we u ish neither to add to it, nor to take
from it. I would state it in connexion with, or in the
words of our Formularies. It is, that the " Body and Blood
of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the
faithful in the Lord's Supper ;"* that they are conveyed by
means of the elements, in that the articlef says that " the
Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only
after an heavenly and spiritual manner ;" for the word
" given," as opposed to ''taken and received," implies, as
has been remarked,:}: that it accompanies in some mysteiious
way, the distribution of the elements, in that it is " given" by
the Priest, and " taken and received" by the Communicants ;
and another article^ says, that the Sacraments " are effectual
signs of grace, by the which He doth workinvisibly in us."
Farther, we really, though " spiritually, eat the Flesh of
Christ and drink His Blood ;"|| and, as the fruit of (his, "we
dwell in Christ and Christ in us ; we are one with Christ and
Christ with us;" and of this real indwelling the farther fruit,
as the Homily^f said, is our justification and sanctification,
" that our sinful** bodies are made clean by His Body, and
our Souls washed through His most precious Blood ;" and a
continued fitness for Him to dwell therein, " that we may
evermore dwell in Him, and He in us:" farther, we do not
simply " feed on," as if it were an act of our faith only, but
we are by God/ed "withff the Spiritual food of the most pre-
* Church Catechism. t Art. XXVIII.
t Knox on the use and import of the Eucharistic Symbols, Remains, t. i.
p. 170.
§ Only one out of mine "Reformed" Confessions, i. e. such as express the
Zuingli-Calvanist doctrines as to the Sacraments, has the word " efficacia,"
effectual, and that one in a different sense; and two only use the word
" through," or " by," and they explain it away. See Scriptural Views of Holy
Baptism, Note L, p. 238, ed. 1.
II Exhortation at the Communion.
IT The homily defined this to be the characteristic of the true Sacraments.
See above, p. 66, sqq.
** Prayer just before the Consecration.
tt " We most heartily thank Thee, for that Thou&ast vouchsafe to feed us,
who have duly received these holy Mysteries, with," &c. — Thanksgiving
after the Communion.

86
cious Body and Blood of His dear Son," yea, " He* hath
given His Son our Saviour Jesus Christ to be our Spiritual
food and sustenance in that holy Sacrament ;" and if we join
hereto the lesson which one of the writers of the homilies
bids us " takef of Emissenus, a godly father, when we go up
to the reverend communion, to be satisfied with Spiritual
meats, we look up with faith upon the holy Body and Blood
of our God ; we marvel with reverence ; we touch it with our
mind ; we receive it with the hand of our heart; we take it
fully with our inward man."
On this combined teaching of our Articles, Catechism, and
Liturgy, we believe the doctrine of our Church to be, that in
the Communion, there is a true, real,:): actual, though Spirit
ual, (or rather the more real, because Spiritual,) Communi
cation of the Body and Blood of Christ to the believer through
the Holy Elements ; that there is a true, real, spiritual, Pre
sence of Christ at the Holy Supper; more real than if we
could, with Thomas, feel Him with our hands, or thrust our
hands into His side ; that this is bestowed upon faith, and re
ceived by faith, as is every other Spiritual gift, but that our
faith is but a receiver of God's real, mysterious, precious, Gift;
that faith opens our eyes to see what is really there, and our
hearts to receive it ; but that it is there independently of our
faith. And this real, spiritual Presence it is, which makes it
so awful a thing to approach unworthily. It is the Presence
of the Holy Ghost within us, imparted by Baptism, and hal
lowing our bodies as His temple, which makes the profana
tion of the bodies of the baptized so terrible a sin ; it is " the
dignity of that holy Mystery" which causes " the great peril
of the unworthy receiving thereof;" its being " a Divine thing
to those who receive it worthily," which makes it " so dan
gerous to them that will presume to receive it unworthily."
On no theory, whereby the sacred elements should be mere
representations, or signs, or pledges, or tokens, of an absent
* Exhortation.
t First part of homily of the worthy receiving and reverent esteeming of the
Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, end.
t " Verily and indeed." — Church Catechism.

87
thing, or means to kindle our faith, would the unworthy re
ception of the Holy Eucharist be so much more dreadful,
than profane conduct in Church, where also Christ is " in
the midst of" us. All which Scripture says of this case, " not
discerning the Lord's Body," " guilty of the Body and Blood
of the Lord," implies an immediate, unseen, Presence of that
Body, which the wicked discern not, cannot partake of, but
offend against, and so, " eat aud drink judgment to them
selves," in " that they eat and drink the Sacrament of so great
a thing." We do not then yield to the Romanists, as to the greatness
of our privileges ; we do not think that our Lord is less
really and spiritually present than they ; that He communi
cates Himself less by His Sacraments than they ; that we
less receive His Botly and Blood, that our sinful bodies are
less cleansed by His glorious Body: that it is less "the
salve* of immortality and sovereign preservative against
death ; a deifical communion ; the sweet dainties of our
Saviour; the pledge of eternal health ; the defence of faith;
the hope of the Resurrection ; the food of immortality ; the
healthful gra.ce ; the conservatory to everlasting life ;" we do
not believe "This is My Body" less than they ; we blame
them, not as exceeding as to the greatness of the spiritual
gift contained in that Sacrament, (all human language and
thoughts must fall short,) but for their carnal conceptions of
it ; for attempting to explain to man's senses the mode of his-
Saviour's Presence ; for trying to solve the apparent con
tradiction that the elements are still what they were, but are,
over and above, to us the Body and Blood of our Lord ; for
longing, with the weak faith of Nicodemus, to know the how
of things Divine and Spiritual, and so for debasing them, and
* Sayings of the Fathers, quoted in the first part of the " homily of the wor
thy receiving and reverent esteeming of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood
of Christ," as " sayings of godly men," "the ancient Catholic Fathers," "truly-
attributed to this celestial banquet and feast," of which it says, together with
some of Holy Scripture, "if we would often call to mind, O how would
they influence our hearts to desire the participation of these mysteries and of
tentimes to covet after this bread, continually to thirst for this food."

88
by their explanations leading, at least their Priesthood, to
pride, and then to unbelief.
We would not then, my lord, insist upon words, if others
will acknowledge the realities ; we are content ourselves to
receive the words "The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which
was given for thee," &c, as they were used in the ancient
Church, from which our own preserved and restored them,
not as denoting something absent, but as implying the spirit
ual unseen Presence of that blessed Body and Blood, convey
ed to us through the unchanged though consecrated elements,
unchanged in material substance, changed in their use, their
efficacy, their dignity, mystically and spiritually. We see
not why we need avoid language used by the Fathers, as well
as by the ancient Liturgies, and quoted with approbation by
great Divines of our Church, that " the bread and wine is
made the Body and Blood of Christ,"* seeing that its being
spiritually the Body and Blood of Christ, interferes not with
its being still corporeally what the Apostle calls it, "the
bread and wine," nor with the nature of a Sacrament, but
rather the better agrees thereto. We would not insist on
these words ; only we fear that when men object to them,
they object not to the words, but to the realities, not to the
terms, but to the truth they convey.
For deeply as Rome has erred, and much error as she
has thereby given occasion to in others, we fear that others
have erred still more deeply. Not Zuingli alone, but Calvin,
have, in their way, so explained the mode of Christ's presence
as virtually to explain it away. With the fear of a weak
faith that would fain guard in a way of their own against
* " To whom Christ hath imparted power both over that mystical body
which is the society of souls, and over that natural which is Himself, for the
knitting of both in one ; a work, which Antiquity doth call the making of
Christ's Body." — Hooker, E. P. V. lxxvii. 2 ed. Keble. " We are not igno
rant that the ancient Fathers generally teach, that the bread and wine in the
Eucharist by and upon the consecration of them do become and are made the
Body and Blood of Christ. But we know also, that though they do not all
explain themselves the same way, yet they do all declare their sense to be very
dissonant from the doctrine of transubstantiation." Bp. Bull, Corruptions of
the Church of Rome, iii. 2. Works, t. ii. p. 255. ed. Burton.

so
man's giving God's glory to the outward elements, they trans
ferred the presence of Christ simply to the believer's soul,
and thus, on their side, destroyed " the nature of a Sacra
ment," depriving it of its inward fulness, as the Romanists,
by the doctrine of Transubstantiation, had removed the out
ward sign. Their theory can hardly be better characterized
than by words used by one of a very different school from
ourselves, that "the faith of the believer" is not only (which
all acknowledge, and as our Article states) " the mean
whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Sup
per," but is " the true consecrating principle — that which
brings down Christ to the heart of each individual." The
Zuingli-Calvinist theory, however it might disguise itself
(often from itself) in words, came to this : that the outward
elements were not channels or instruments of grace, but that
their only office was to kindle the faith of the individual, to
set Christ before his eyes, that so he might in mind ascend
into heaven, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God,
feed on Him there by faith, appropriate his merits, and there
by become united with Him. And these things they often
speak of eloquently ; but the Sacraments themselves had no
more share in even this elevation of the Christian's soul, than
the hearing of God's word, upon which, according to them,
their efficacy depended.
We would maintain then, my lord, that here also our
Church holds the Catholic truth distinct from the modern
novelties, whether of Rome, or Zurich, or Geneva ; that she
holds a real, spiritual presence of our Lord in the Holy Eu
charist, that He really and truly therein and thereby imparts
Himself, His Body and His Blood, to the believer ; and that
through this gift bestowed by Him, and received through
faith, Christ dwelleth in us and we in Him : we maintain on
the other side, that Rome ha3 grievously erred by explaining
in a carnal way the mode of this Presence, and requiring this
her carnal exposition to be received as an article of Faith.
She anathematizes* us, in our Church, for holding that " in
* Sess. 12, can. 2.
12

90
tbe most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist there remains the
substance of bread and wine," and "denying that wonderful
and remarkable conversion of the whole substance of bread
into the Body, and of the whole substance of wine into the
Blood, so that there remain only the appearances of bread
and wine," " which," it proceeds, " the [Roman] Catholic
Church most aptly terms Transubstantiation." We suppose,
also, that they meant it in a carnal and erroneous sense, that
they say, "that the Body and Blood of Christ is" not only
" really," but " substantially present in the Sacrament of the
Holy Eucharist ;" for " substantially" they explain to be not
simply equivalent to "really," but " corporeally,"* that "the
Body of the Lord is sensibly^ touched by tbe hands, broken
and bruised by the teeth." Farther, we think it presump
tuous to define, as they do,ithat "Christ is wholly contained
under each species," whereby they would excuse their mo
dern innovation of denying the cup to the laity, and would
persuade them by a self-invented and unauthorized theory of
modern days, that they receive no detriment thereby. Again,
we hold it rash to define peremptorily, " that§ the Body and
Blood of Christ remain in the consecrated elements which
are not consumed, or are reserved after the Communion,"
(meaning thereby that they so remain, independently of any
subsequent participation, as of the sick, or by the communi
cants,) although doubtless they are not common bread and
wine, but hallowed. Then, also, we reject what Rome main
tains under an anathema, " that || in the Holy Sacrament of
the Eucharist, Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God, is to
be adored with the outward adoration of Divine worship, and
to be set forth publicly to the people, in order to be adored,"
nay, " that this most holy Sacrament rightly received to the
same Divine worship as is due to the true God ; and that it
was not therefore the less to be adored, because instituted by
* E.g. Bellarm. Controv. de Sacr. Euch. L. 1. c. 11.
t Id. lb. L. 3. c. 24.
t L. t. cap. 3. and can. 3.
§ Can. 4.
II Can. 6.

91
Christ the Lord to be received. For that the same Eternal
God was present in it, whom, when the Eternal Father
brought into the world, He said, and let all the angels of
God worship Him." Lastly, as connected wilh and depen
dent upon Transubstantiation, we cannot but hold that the
" Sacrifice of masses, in the which it was commonly said that
the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and dead, to have re
mission of pain and guilt, were blasphemous fables and dan
gerous deceits," and interfere " with the offering of Christ
once made" upon the Cross.
These are the modern corruptions of Rome, which our
Church, in her Articles, condemns ; and against these, which
all spring from the one invention of the doctrine of Transub
stantiation, we have repeatedly and often strongly spoken.*
We have specified the refusal of the cup to the laity, as one
of the practical grievances of the Church of Rome, which
should alone, without farther disputing, restrain any from
joining himself to her Communion. f How it may be with
those, who have access to no other, we have no right to de
termine, though one cannot doubt but that they sustain here
in a grievous loss ; and the miserable state of Roman Ca
tholic countries in general , may be, in part, owing to this
loss ; but, for any voluntarily to cast himself out of a Com
munion, as our own, in the which he may receive it, and to
join himself to that in which it is denied him, is such a wan
ton trifling with privileges, and casting away of God's gifts,
and tempting of Him, that I should think this ground alone
(which any plain man can understand) reason enough why
no member of our Church should join her. It was felt, at
the time of the Reformation, to be a very great practical
cruelty ; so much so, that observers of no mean note have
not doubted, that it was the chief ground why the religious
so earnestly sought for a Reformation, and that, had Rome
conceded this point, the Reformation would never have
taken place in the way in which it did. Rome admitted that
* See Appendix, Nos. 14. 25. 31, 32, 33. 35. 49. 78. and reprint of Bishop
Cosin, ib. Nos. 10, 11.
t Ib. Nos. 14. 22.

92
her modern practice was contrary to the institution of our
Lord, and contrary also to the mode in which the Church
Universal, for nearly thirteen centuries of her existence, had
interpreted that Institution ;* but in that wantonness of au
thority, into which her assumed infallibility betrayed her, she
preferred contravening antiquity, and risking division, ra
ther than abandon any practice which she had established,
even though not, as she professes, matter of faith. Yet she
would not depart from her existing customs, or the tradition
of two centuries ; and so being unable to justify herself on
Scripture, as explained by antiquity, she had recourse to a
priori grounds, " thatf it is most firmly to be believed, and no
wise to be doubted, that the whole Body and Blood of Christ
is truly contained as well under the form of bread as under
the form of wine." Miserable and rationalistic arguments
* " This present holy general Council determines — that although Christ in
stituted the venerable Sacrament after supper, and administered it to His dis
ciples under both kinds of bread and wine, yet, notwithstanding, the laudable
authority of the sacred Canons and the approved custom of the Church has
and does observe, that this Sacrament ought not to be consecrated after sup
per, nor received by the faithful except fasting, except in case of sickness,
&c, and in like way, that although this Sacrament was in the primitive Church
received by the faithful under both kinds, yet to avoid any perils and scandals,
the custom has with reason been introduced, that it be received by the officia
ting priests in both kinds, and by lay people, under the kind of bread only."
Council of Constance, sess. 13. Vasquez, (quoted by Bishop Hall, ' The Old
Religion,' c. 8.) says, " We cannot deny that in the Latin Church there was
the use of both kinds, and that it so continued until the days of St. Thomas,
which was about the year of God, 1260." " Thus it was," adds Bishop Hall,
" in the Roman Church ; but as for the Greek, the world knows it never did
eommunicate but under both kinds. These open confessions spare us the la
bor of quoting the several testimonies of later ages."
This instance illustrates the difference between the mode in which Anglo
and Roman Catholics view the relation of the Church to Holy Scripture; An
glo Catholics take the two facts, that the Church never did consecrate after
supper, but always did administer in two kinds, as an authoritative interpre
tation of our Lord's will, and supposes that He willed what He did to be fol
lowed in the one case, not in the other : the Romish Church regards the former
only as a proof of the dispensing power of the Church, and so proceeds to
dispense in the other, contrary to primitive practice. Thus, Anglo Catholics
take the Primitive Church in both cases as a witness ; Romanists make her a
judge, and as establishing a precedent only, which the existing Church may
follow out at her own discretion.
t Council of Constance, 1. c.

93
in Divine Mysteries ! as i", where all is subject of Faith,
there were any safe rule bit to adhere as closely as possi
ble to what seems to be tie Divine Ordinance. It seems
strange that that misguided Church should not have felt the
risk of declaring what the Church Universal had of old es
teemed part of the Divine Institution, to be superfluous, and
did not dread thus templing God to withdraw His grace al
together, which they thus presumptuously argued about.
This rationalistic argument was met in its own way, that if
additional grace were not bestowed through the communion
of the Cup, then "the administering* Priest received no
benefit from it, and (painful as it is to state it) it was wholly
useless and indifferent." Thus a feigned reverence, (lest
haply some accident should befall the consecrated element,)
covered a real irreverence; and real unbelief as to the virtue
of the Sacramental Blood was veiled by a scrupulous care
for its protection. So it ever is, when men forget that " to
obey is better than sacrifice," and would be more jealous for
the honor of holy things, than God who gave them. The
honor of the Eucharist was alleged ; the honor of man was
the secret motive, lest by concession of the Cup to the laity,
the dignity of the Priesthood should be levelled. f But thus
Rome, rashly binding itself to the hasty and presumptuous
decision of the Council of Constance, has inflicted a grie
vous privation upon her own members, and placed a mark
upon herself, which must ever be a hinderance to her own
power, and prevent her recovering her undue sway over our
Church. An instinctive devotion will guide and protect the
religious members of our Church, who might otherwise have
been just the most alive to the splendor of many of her pre
tensions. They might not be able to disentangle their way
amid abstract arguments ; but they will feel that it would be
a loss to be deprived of their Saviour's Blood. Those who
engage unprepared in abstract controversies may relapse ;
the devout Communicant will be safe, who argues not, but
* By many theologians even of the Council of Trent. Sarpi, L. 6. c. 30.
where several other arguments are given.
t Tridentine Theologians, ap. Sarpi, 1. c. especially the Spanish, ib. c. 31.

94
obeys. All which Rome could give them, they have already
in the Church wherein they were baptized ; and they have
more. Not here to mention tie risk of forfeiture which
might be involved in joining what is here a Schismatic Com
munion, our Church, though she rightly reject the Sacrifice
of Masses, has ever been acknowledged to have that where
of it is the corruption, the true commemorative Sacrifice, re
presenting to God the Death and Passion of His Son, and so
acceptable to Him, such as the Church Catholic ever held
it ;* she has the true Communion of the Body and Blood of
Christ, administered by those ordained by the successors of
the Apostles, and that, unimpaired by any " will-worship or
voluntary humility," which pretending a self-invented respect,
would deprive the laity of a portion of their inheritance and
of God's gift. We need not now put ourselves in the position
that Rome would concede this, and retain her other corrup
tions, f to concede it, Rome must be other than she now is ;
a strong ground for refusing it was, lest other demands should
be made of her.i. Why then distract ourselves with such
gratuitous hypotheses that Rome would concede, what for
above four centuries she has not conceded 1 Why suppose
that what she refused, when pressed by people and empe
rors, § when she might thereby have retained whole Churches
* See Catena, No. 4. Tracts, No. 81, " Testimony of writers of the later
English Church to the doctrine of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, with an historical
account of the changes made in the Liturgy as to the expression of that doc
trine." Courayer, Defense de la Dissert, sur la Validite des Ordinations An-
glaises, 1.4. c. 6.
t Essays on the Church, p. 292.
t This was urged by the Spanish Bishops and those dependant upon Spain,
who were the chief opposers of the concession of the Cup at the Council of
Trent, Sarpi, 1. 6. c. 3 1 , and influenced the legates to resist the united applica
tions of the Imperial and French Ambassadors, ib. c. 35.
5 The Ambassadors of the Emperor and of Bavaria were especially urgent
at the Council of Trent, forthe restoration of the Cup; they were joined by
those of France, Sarpi, 1. vi. c. 35. The Imperial Ambassadors urged that
there "were Catholics in Hungary, Austria, Moravia, Silesia, Carinthia
Carniola, Styria, Bavaria, Suabia, and other parts of Germany, who ardently
desired the Cup ;" in Hungary they went so far, as to " oblige the Priests, by
depriving them of their goods, and threatening of their life, to administer the
Cup to them." The Imperial and Bavarian ambassadors continued to urge

95
in her Communion, she would row grant in the hope of re
covering a few individuals, and ihereby own herself doubly
in error 1 Why embarrass ourselves with imagining that
what she refused at Trent because she had refused it at Con
stance, she should now concede, ilthough she has sanctioned
by an anathema* the a priori ground upon which she refused
it 1 She can concede it only on the supposition that the ur
gent demand of it is reasonable ; but she has anathematized
those " who deny that Jesus Christ, the Author and Source
of all grace, is received wholly and entirely under one spe
cies," and so has cut herself off from thinking the demand
reasonable ; and yet, by the strange destiny annexed to these
presumptuous reasonings, she has elsewhere awakened the
suspicion of loss attached to the denial of the Cup, which she
would here allay. For since many members of the Synod of
Trent did think it a loss,f she was constrained elswhere sim
ply to state, " that| the faithful vrho receive under the one
species of bread, are not deprived of any grace necessary to
salvation," and so, as was at the tirfie remarked, § she " in a
manner avowed that they are deprived of some grace, though
not absolutely necessary. Whereupon they asked, has any
human authority the power to hinder the super-abundant and
non-necessary grace of God 1 and if so, does charity admit
of thus placing hinderances in ihe way of good 1" Thus she
has placed herself in the position of making unauthorized
distinctions as to the grace necessary for us in working out
our salvation, and exhibits herself as an unnatural mother,.
who half recognises that what she withholds is a blessing,.
and yet refuses it.
the Council and the Pope, both during its session and after its close. Sarpi,.
ib. c. 53 ; vii. 47; viii. 88. Cassander (ap. Bishop Hall, 1. c.) says, "Where
fore not without cause are most of the best Catholics, and most conversant
in the reading of ecclesiastical writers, inflamed with an earnest desire of ob
taining the cup of the Lord ; that the Sacrament may be brought baek to that
ancient custom and use, which hath been for many ages perpetuated in the.
Universal Church." " We need," adds Bishop Hall, " no other advocate."
* Sess. 21. can. 3.
t Visconti, ap. Courayer, notes to Sarpi, 1. 6. c. 39.
't Sess. 21. cap. 3.
§ Remarks on the Decree recorded by Sarpi, 1. c.

96
But, so closely do faithful adherence to Apostolic doctrine
and to Apostolic practice accompany each other, it is plain,
my lord, that it is only upoi the high Catholic doctrine of the
Holy Communion, that the denial of the Cup is a privation.
They who receive the hoi; elements faithfully, acknowledge,
as they receive each consecrated element, that they are re
ceiving respectively, " the body of our Lord Jesus Christ,
which was given for" them, and His Blood, which was for
them shed. They reason not, how His Body is separate from
His Blood, or what additional blessing the Communion of His
Blood bestows upon them. Instinctive reverence, the fruit
of reverent Communion, forbids them to inquire or to risk a
forfeiture. They pray, " that their sinful bodies may be
made clean by His Body, and their souls washed by His most
precious Blood ;" they hear, severally, the ancient and hal
lowed words of the Universal Church, " The Body of our
Lord Jesus Christ,". . . ." The Blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ ;" and with an unreasoning piety, which has a mightier
hold than any subtilty of Romanist distinction, they would
dread to forfeit either poriion of the Gift bestowed upon them.
But upon any Ultra-Protestant theory, which regards the
consecrated elements as "visible symbols of His absent Body
and Blood," as representations, means of kindling our faith,
and the like, the privation of the Cup were no loss. Who
soever having embraced this theory, should continue to re
gard it as such, must do so by virtue of a piety which his theo
ry had not mastered. It is the reality of the Communication
of His Blood by means of those forms which He has instituted
to convey it, which makes " the Cup which we bless" a bless
ing, its loss a privation. They who think of the Holy Sym
bols, as outward only, may retain them as an act of obedience,
(and so far is well,) but cannot feel it an essential Blessing.
And thus, my lord, it again appears how a jealous adherence
to the high Catholic Doctrines of Antiquity is at the same
time a safeguard to retain the affections of our people. Such
is not our end ; but it is a reward annexed to faithfulness.
Whether those who blame us for insisting so much upon this

97
practical cruelty of the Church of Rome, would themselves
feel it as a cruelty, or adequately appreciate the blessings
which they enjoy through the restoration of Primitive prac
tice in our Church, is for them to determine.
On the other hand, our Church, as holding the original
Catholic truth, of which the corruptions of Rome are the
debasement, appears to me yet farther removed from those
modern traditions, the inventions of men who deny that truth.
Rome, in this respect, has the truth, though mingled with er
ror, and clouded and injured by it ; the Zuingli-Calvinist
School have forfeited it. In a word, our Church holds with
Rome the reality of the Communication of the Body and
Blood of Christ through the Holy Eucharist, but denies her
carnal way of explaining it, and protests against the corrup
tions thereby entailed ; but in what Rome retains in truth,
she must needs hold with her against those who, explaining
to human reason Divine mysteries, cannot but explain away
what is mysterious, and resolve the hidden gifts of the Sacra
ment into aids of contemplation, outward attestations of
God's gifts, exhibitions to our outward senses, mere remem
brancers of His death.
I would only observe, in conclusion of this topic, that I
wish not to ascribe to our accusers the whole extent of
Zuinglian doctrine, however I must think that they fall short
of the doctrines of our Church. Happily, the faith of indi
viduals is so sustained by the Liturgy of our Church, that
few carry out the erroneous notions of a foreign school, even
while they form their minds in it, or embrace detached views
out of it. I wish not to speak of individuals, but of systems ;
individuals, I doubt not, are better than their systems, and
far other than their system would be, if developed without re
straint ; the devotions of our Church have influenced such of
her members far more than they are probably themselves
aware, and have conveyed to, them truth, which they are
afraid to express in words, lest it should tend to the exalta
tion of what seems to them outward ; we would not blame
them; we would only wish to exhibit to them the system
13

9S
which they have partially embraced, that they might extricate
themselves wholly from it.
Art. XXIII. Of ministering in the Congregation.
We have no objection to admit that the Articles of Edward
VI., from which our present are, with some modifications,
derived, were formed upon a plan of comprehension ; it is an
historical* fact that, although the scheme failed, they were
intended as a general basis of union of Protestants in one
Episcopal body. Nor does there seem any necessity that a
Church, whose ministers are episcopally ordained, should put
forth any formal statement that they must of necessity be so.
We therefore acquiesce very readily in the indefiniteness of
our Article on this head, which states, that we ought "to
judge those lawfully called and sent, which be chosen and
called to this work by men, who have public authority given
unto them in the Congregation to call and send Ministers in
to the Lord's vineyard," without defining who are invested
with this authority. For if any one be willing himself to re
ceive Ordination at the hands of a Bishop, surely, my lord,
nothing farther is gained by requiring him to confess that this
is the only lawful Ordination. But comprehensive Articles
are not at the same time exclusive. Our Articles surely are
not in such wise a rule of belief, that we are to hold nothing
for true which is not contained in them ; we are not bound
to have no opinion beside them, provided we hold none against
them. Yet this is what these charges come to. The com
pilers of the Articles, intending them for subscription, requi
red no more definite opinion upon the subject ; therefore, say
these, they forbade it. But the Articles are not the only, often
not the fullest, statements of the doctrines or tenets of our
Church. They are often to be interpreted or to be filled up
out of her other documents. Thus, as on the Sacraments,
the teaching of the Ai tides is materially cleared and filled
up by the Catechism and the Services, so, on Ordination, a
consistent Churchman would naturally have recourse to those
* See Authorities, Tract 81, p. 27, note.

99
services to which in her Articles (Art. XXXVI.) she refers.
The Preface then to " the Form and Manner of making, or
daining, and consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons,
thus speaks :
" It is evident unto all men diligently reading the Holy
Scriptures and ancient Authors, that from the Apostle's time,
there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church
— Bishop's, Priests, and Deacons. And therefore to the intent
that these orders may be continued, and reverently used and
esteemed, in the united Church of England and Ireland, no
man shall be accounted and taken to be a lawful Bishop,
Priest, or Deacon, in the united Church of England and Ire
land, or suffered to execute any of the said functions, except
he be called, tried, examined, and admitted thereunto, ac
cording to the form hereafter following, or hath had formerly
Episcopal Consecration or Ordination."
For herself, then, clearly, our Church regards none to be
lawfully consecrated or ordained, except those who have re
ceived Episcopal Consecration or Ordination ; and in her
practice, conformably to this rule, she admits a Romish
Priest, who relinquishes his errors, to exercise his functions
without re-ordination, but not one w'ho has received Presby
terian Ordination. The principles, however, of this Preface
go farther ; for Episcopacy is stated to be an Apostolic Ordi
nance, and if Apostolic, then Divine. And this view I need
not say has been held by the great stream of our Divines ;*
nor, having an Apostolic Ordinance, have men, until lately,
been ashamed to avow it.
It would then be altogether inexplicable how the avowal
of what is commonly entitled "Apostolical succession," should
have been received with so much tumult, had one not reason
to believe, that many of the anonymous writers, who have
been for some years raising it, belong to bodies which have
forfeited that Ordinance.
Leaving these, however, I might take this occasion to re
move some of the misconceptions which have been 'raised
about it. The objection is ordinarily thus couched : " If the
? See Catena Patrum, No. 1. Tracts, No. 74.

100
Sacraments are necessary to salvation, and can only be ad
ministered by one Episcopally ordained, then among Presby
terian bodies there are no Sacraments, and consequently no
salvation, or at least they are left to the uncovenanted mer
cies of God."
Yet to make deductions from a doctrine, is not the safest
way of understanding it. Men in these days are not apt to in
fer, that because there is no salvation except through the name
of Jesus Christ, therefore all the Heathen must be condemn
ed ; nay, though our Articles say, that they are to be " held
accursed that presume to say that every one shall be saved
by the law or sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent
to frame his life according to that law and the light of nature,"
(Art. XVIII.) people are content to stop short, resting in the
positive revealed truth, that salvation is through Christ alone ;
but not inquiring " who then shall be saved V
And within these same bounds we have confined ourselves.
Episcopacy and Presbyterianism (as excluding Episcopacy)
cannot be true together, any more than any other two oppo-
sites. If Episcopacy be Apostolic and an ordinance of God,
Presbyterianism is not ; if Presbyterianism is, then Episco
pacy is not ; and this was ever so held until these modern
days, when men have consented to merge their differences in
a common indifference ; and is probably still held by the Dis
senters from our Church. For they felt that to justify their
schism, it was necessary to show that our Church required
things unlawful, and Episcopacy was accordingly counted
among the signs that our Church was a portion of Antichrist.
Episcopacy was denounced as Antichristian.*
Without imitating their harshness, we, in our turn, would
* See, e.g. Archbishop Bramhall, quoted below, p. 111. Beza divides Epis
copacy into Divine, human, and Satanic. Divine, according to him, is the
ministry generally ; human, is the placing one Presbyter above the rest with
limited authority ; Satanic, is where the Episcopacy is entirely separate from
the Presbytery, and has exclusive authority. This is repeated by the Puri
tan writers in their answers of the English Church, e. g. Calderwood, Altare
Damascenum, c. 4. yet Beza himself said of our Bishops, " Let her enjoy this
singular bounty of God, which I wish she may hold for ever." (Quoted by Bp.
Hall, Episcopacy by Divine right, p. 1, c.4.)

101
say, since Episcopacy is an Ordinance of God, to abandon it is
sin; thedegree of that sin, or its effects, we are not called upon
to pronounce on, nor would we. Only, as watchmen, we are
bound to warn against this, as against every other sin ; and the
more against this, because men are now so careless about it.
Even Calvin spoke very differently when he said, " they are
worthy of any Anathema, who,* when they can have Bishops,
have them not." So neither then would we take upon our
selves to say any thing as to the efficacy of the Sacraments
administered by those whom we cannot hold to have been
rightly ordained. We hold only that they have not duly re
ceived the Commission to administer them. And this will be
plain to any Presbyter, if he make the case his own. As
Presbyters, we received no Commission, either alone, or in con
junction with others, to ordain others to dispense the word
of God, and His holy Sacraments ; and what we have not re
ceived, we cannot give. That word and those Sacraments
we do administer, because we have been commissioned so to
do ; we do not pretend to empower others, because, not be
ing commissioned, we have not been empowered. In like
manner, neither Luther nor Wesley, (any more than Calvin,
who was himself never ordained,) had any commission, by
themselves, or with other Presbyters, to ordain others ; and
so those ordained by them have received no commission to ad
minister the Sacraments. Mere length of time cannot mend
the original invalidity. And this original difficulty seems to
have been felt alike by Luther and Wesley. It is well known
that Wesley reluctantly took the step of ordaining at all ;
that he meant those whom he ordained, to be subordinate
auxiliaries to the ministry ; and that, to the last, he refused,
in the strongest terms, his consent that those thus ordained
should take upon them to administer the Sacraments ;f he
* See Bp. Hall, Episcopacy by Divine right, p. i. c. 2.
t He was consulted how to proceed with a society, who threatened to leave
the connexion, unless permitted to have the Sacraments administered by their
own preachers. His answer was, " Modern laziness has jumbled together
the two distinct offices of preaching and administering the Sacraments. But
be that as it may, I will rather lose twenty societies than separate from the
Church." This was only about three years before his death. The letter was
first published in the Brit. Mag. vol. vi. p. 297.

102
felt that it exceeded his powers, and so inhibited it, however
it might diminish the numbers of the society he had framed.
In like manner, Luther, as has been observed,* gave to those
ordained by him, new titles ; not venturing to attribute to
them those belonging to the offices conferred by the regular
ordination. But irregular practice is the parent of irregu
lar principles ; and the wider deviation incident to that prac
tice begets a new train of principles. Man must justify him
self in his own sight ; if then he conform not his practice to
his principles, his practice will bend his principles. The le
gality of even Presbyterian Ordination, the theory, that the
right of Ordination resides " in the body corporate of the
Church, "f (to be of any use in this argument it must be " in
any section of the Church,") these and the like, are so many
afterthoughts to justify what was done in the first instance, on
Saul's plea of "necessity ;" "\\ forced myself, therefore,
and offered a burnt-offering."
But while maintaining that they only are commissioned
to administer the Sacraments, who have received that com
mission from those appointed in succession to bestow it, we
have never denied that God may make His own Sacraments
efficacious, even when irregularly administered ; we should
trust it might be so : some of us are bound up by ties of
affection to those very Protestant bodies, which it is supposed
we should so harshly and wantonly cut off from the Church
of Christ. The very same affection for them which would
make us long to see them safely restored to the full privileges
of the Church, makes us trust that the Father of mercies has
not " one blessing" only, but has " a blessing for them also,
even for them."
Still every one would apprehend risk in certain cases of
irregularity : few, for instance, would think themselves safe
in receiving the Lord's Supper from a layman or from a wo
man ; and the greater the irregularity, and the less excuse
* Palmer on the Church, part i. c. 12, sect. 4, t. i. p. 387.
t Episcopacy, Tradition, and the Sacraments, considered in reference to the
Oxford Tracts, p. 21.
1 1 Sara. xiii. 12.

103
for it, the greater would be esteemed the risk. Thus, dissen
ters would obviously run greater risk of having the efficacy
of the Sacraments diminished, than the present Presbyterians
of Scotland ; and these perhaps more than the German bo
dies, whose forefathers did not wilfully renounce the privi
lege of Episcopacy, and have not a pure Apostolic Church
with which they might unite, nor have had before their eyes
the instructive example of her patient and suffering piety.
Nor, again, are we called upon to think what mitigating ef
fect inveterate prejudice may have ; the present Protestants
have been brought into their state not by their own deed,
but by the acts of former generations. Their continuance
in that state may be an evil and a loss of privileges, entailed
upon them by the act of their forefathers, which they have
not cut off; but not the same to individuals as if they had
been the authors of it. On the other hand, it is for them to
consider that they have not the same plea of necessity which
their forefathers urged ; that they may readily repair the ir
regularity for the future ; that such an act would doubtless
be pleasing to God, as evincing an anxiety to conform them
selves altogether to His will, and so might bring down a bless
ing on themselves, as well as contribute to the ultimate res
toration of unity in the whole Church.
But our immediate practical question is at home. And
what Churchman would venture to say that none of the dis
senters, that no shade of them, run any risk 1 that people
were equally safe as to the Lord's Supper, however adminis
tered 1 that if administered by the congregation to each other,
that if a family were to administer it among themselves, they
would be quite secure ? And if there is risk in dispensing
with a Minister altogether, why should men be quite certain
that there is none in dispensing with one Apostolically ordain
ed 1 why should we think it an unreasonable thing, that risk
should be involved in neglecting an Ordinance of God 1 The
Church of old held that the efficacy of the Sacraments,
even when administered by ordained but schismatic minis
ters, was, at the least, suspended, so long as persons remained

104
in schism. This is the ground which we have taken, not in
volving ourselves and others needlessly in questions as to
God's dealings with others, but providing, as far as in us lay,
for the safety of our own people. We have told them, that,
at the least, they are safer if they abide in the Church. I
might cite to this end, one of the earliest tracts* in this series,
when the Apostolic succession, being so lost out of sight,
was more continually put forward than there is, happily, now
any occasion to do. " Jesus Christ's own commission is the
best external security I can have, that in receiving this bread
and wine, I verily receive His Body and Blood. Either the
Bishops have that commission, or there is no such thing in
the world. For, at least, Bishops have it with as much evi
dence as Presbyters without them. In proportion, then, to
my Christian anxiety for keeping as near my Saviour as I
can, I shall of course be very unwilling to separate myself
from Episcopal communion. And in proportion to my cha
ritable care for others, will be my industry to preserve and
extend the like consolation and security to them." And
again, f " Why should we talk so much of an ' establishment,'
* Tract 4, p. 3. The question, " Do you then unchurch all the Presbyte
rians 1" was also there answered, p. 5, and many hard words might have
been saved, had persons read what is said in the Tracts, instead of making
inferences from them, unread. The kirk of Scotland was also kindly spoken
of in,the very poem, so often cited in proof of want of charity towards it,
" Samaria." There is certainly an analogy between the proceedings of Jero
boam and those of John Knox. The making of the calves, although eminent
ly " the sin wherewith Jeroboam made Israel to sin," was not his only sin:
it is added, " he made priests out of all the people, " which were not of the sons
of Levi," (the Hebrew word means rather, " out of the people indiscriminately,"
than as in the English version, " of the lowest people,") and these were to offer
not to the calves, but " on the high-places," where the true God was worshipped,
though not as He had appointed. This sin then was a self-chosen ordination.
And this Scotland likewise committed, in rejecting Episcopacy, which she
already had in a pure Church. As God, however, left not Samaria without
seers so also has He raised up gifted men for Scotland, and has doubt
less among those, who have forsaken the Apostolic Church, His seven thou
sand, who have not been involved in any of the farther consequences of that
first sin. Tract 47 (on the " Visible Church," No. 4,) contains a warm
statement how the sense of the superior privileges of our Church is compati
ble with charity, and tends to individual humility.
t Tract 4, p. 5.

105
and so little of an ' Apostolical Succession V Why should
we not seriously endeavor to impress our people with this
plain truth — (hat by separating themselves from our com
munion, they separate themselves not only from a decent,
orderly, useful society, but from the only Church in this
realm which has a right to be quite sure that she has the Lord's
Body to give to the people."
And this language does not at all go beyond the glowing
words of Hooker, in vindicating the divine commission which
must necessarily belong to "the ministry in things divine."
And he too, however he might make allowances for cases of
apparent necessity, (which was the more natural in those
times, when the tendency of Ultra-Protestantism had not
been developed,) held that the Episcopal Ordination was the
only authorized transmission of that authority.* He says
thenf ..." In that they are Christ's ambassadors and His
laborers, who should give them their commission, but He
whose most inward affairs they manage 1 Is not God alone
the Father of spirits 1 Are not souls the purchase of Jesus
Christ 1 What angel in heaven could have said to man, as
our Lord did unto Peter, ' Feed My sheep, — preach — bap
tize — do this in remembrance of Me. Whose sins ye retain,
they are retained ; and their offences in heaven pardoned,
whose faults you shall on earth forgive V What think we 1
Are these terrestrial sounds, or else are they voices uttered
out of the clouds above 1 The power of the ministry of
God translateth out of darkness into glory 1 it raiseth man
from the earth, and bringeth God Himself from heaven ; by
blessing visible elements it maketh them invisible graces ; it giveth
daily the Holy Ghost ; it hath to dispose of that flesh which
was given for the life of the world, and the blood which was
poured out to redeem souls ; when it poureth malediction upon
the heads of the wicked, they perish ; when it revoketh the
* See Mr. Keble's Preface to Hooker, p. lxv. — lxx.
t Eccl. Pol. V. lxxvii. 1, 2. 7. ed. Keble, quoted Tracts, No. 74. Catena,
No. 1. " Testimony of writers in the later English Church to the doctrine
of the Apostolical succession."
14

106
same, they revive. O wretched blindness, if we admire not
so great power ; more wretched, if we consider it aright,
and notwithstanding, imagine that any but God' can bestow
it 1 To whom Christ hath imparted power, both over that
mystical body which is the society of souls, and over that
natural which is Himself, for the knitting of both in one, (a
work which antiquity doth call the making of Christ's Body,)
the same power is in such not amiss both termed a kind of
mark or character, and acknowledged to be indelible. . . .
' Receive the Holy Ghost ; whose sins soever ye remit, they
are remitted ; whose sins ye retain, they are retained.'
Whereas, therefore, the other Evangelists had set down,
that Christ did, before His suffering, promise to give His
Apostles the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and being risen
from the dead, promised moreover at that time a miraculous
power of the Holy Ghost, St. John addeth, that He also in
vested them even then with the power of the Holy Ghost
for castigation and relaxation of sin, wherein was fully ac
complished that which the promise of the keys did import.
Seeing, therefore, that the same power is now given, why
should the same form of words expressing it be thought fool
ish r
We would speak, then, my lord, as we have spoken, posi
tively ; we would point out to those who are of our Commu
nion, this security in remaining in her ; to those who, or their
forefathers, have deserted her, the superior safety in returning
to her. The argument, that they only can lawfully adminis
ter in Divine things, who have been called thereto, is so plain,
and so impressed upon men's minds by natural reverence,
that such as have had no outward call, have ever rested their
claim upon an inward call, and so acknowledge the princi
ple : but however men have in this way persuaded themselves
that they were called to preach the word, no one, I believe,
ever yet imagined himself so called to administer the Sa
craments. Indeed the general tendency of this class has
been to neglect the Sacraments, and substitute preaching for
them, following that to which they conceived themselves
called, and magnifying it to the derogation of the Ordinances,

107
to administer which they had no call. The administration of
the Sacraments, when it has been ventured upon, has gene
rally been, as in the case of the Wesleyans, a subsequent ex
pedient, to round a system, and make it independent of the
Church. We doubt not, then, but that by God's blessing,
the more courageous avowal of the undoubted privileges of
our Apostolic Church would regain many of her lost children
to her, and save her from having to deplore the loss of others ;
would check the growth of schism, and tend to heal her
breaches. And the vehemence with which this principle has
been attacked by Dissenters, might show men that its impor
tance has been felt by those without also ; they would not
trouble themselves about the maintenance of an abstract prin
ciple, unless they saw its tendency (which has already to
some extent been realized) to strengthen the Church, and
to diminish the several secessions from it. To these, our
own Church's erring children, is our first duty. Yet may it
perhaps not be too much to hope, that the more complete de
velopment of the principles of our Church, may influence
also those religious bodies, the foreign Protestants, about
which persons profess so much concern. And thus the time
may be hastened, when we may be all " one" fold under One
Shepherd." Certainly, if we have been entrusted with privi
leges, which other reformed bodies lost, it was not, that they
should be " put under a bushel, but on a candlestick, that"
our " candle which our God hath lighted for us may give
light to all them that are in the house." It were ungrateful
to Almighty God, who, amid so many perils, some common
to the general " breaking up of the fountains of the great
deep" whereby the previous corruptions were cleansed,
others peculiar to our own land, still provided that our Ark
should be borne safe above the waters ; it were real unkind-
ness to other bodies of Christians, to dissemble our privileges,
and not rather to glory in them, and in Him who gave them,
that others may be kindled with a godly zeal, and behold,
and partake of them.
Although, however, we have been careful not to go be
yond our measure, and have not needlessly spoken of other

108
bodies, yet may it be useful to allude to one remarkable fact
bearing on this question. The doctrine of Apostolical suc
cession and that of the Sacraments, viewed in the abstract,
would to most, probably, not seem at first sight to be so con
nected together, that a false view of the one would involve
error upon the other ; much less, that the denial of the one
should entail a fundamental change in the other. Yet so it
has been. It seems as though people had been deterred by
an instinctive dread from taking upon themselves the office of
administeringthe Holy Eucharist, with the full consciousness
of its mysteriousness. It is too awful for man to undertake
unbidden ; he cannot invest himself with the belief that, in
Hooker's words, " in blessing visible elements" he has a pow
er to " make them invisible grace," any more than he can
give himself the commission so to do : man's belief in this
awful privilege, so surpassing human thought, must come
from above ; he can only believe it, when he has solemnly
been invested with it. Accordingly, where people have act
ed without this commission, there they have unconsciously
lowered the doctrine. In the thoughts of many Wesleyans, at
least, " means of grace" will signify — not the Holy Eucharist,
but their own peculiar discipline, their " class meetings" or
their " love-feasts." They have often lost even the ab
stract belief, that the Holy Communion is any way more
solemn, or attended with more mysterious blessing. With a
ministry " not of the sons of Levi,"* they have " ordained a
feast" also " like unto the feast which is in Judah," and have
come to think their own feast, which they had " devised of
their own heart," to be as acceptable to God, and as rich in
blessing to them, as that " ordained by Christ Himself." And
so likewise to other bodies ; the farther any have departed
from the doctrine of the Apostolic succession, so much the
lower has their doctrine of the Sacraments become ; as at the
very outset, the system of Luther, (himself a Priest,) though
in part erroneous, was higher than that of Calvin and Zu-
ingli, who were laymen. And yet now after the lapse of
* 1 Kings xii. 31—33.

109
three centuries, even the peculiar doctrine of Lutheranism is
well nigh extinct ; those who maintain it are, in one large
country of the reformation, a proscribed sect. Mostly it has
amalgamated itself with the Calvinistic doctrine. Shrinking
then from saying any thing as to God's dealings with indivi
duals it would yet seem that, upon their own scheme of doc
trine, the Holy Eucharist must be to many bodies, at least,
other than it is to us. For what we believe it to be, that they
reject. They do not believe that it conveys really, though
spiritually, the Body and Blood of Christ ; painful as it is to
say, they repudiate as Popish, the real, invisible, Presence of
Christ ; they resolve into a figure the real actual Indwelling
of Christ thereby. Since then faith is the means, whereby
we become partakers of the gifts already stored up for us,
what would there be harsh or unkind in thinking that they
had not, what they deny themselves to have " especially
when our object is to persuade them to return where they
may believe and may have it 1 It is the substance of their
own statement, when one says, in a passage* singled out
for blame, " In the judgment of the Church, the Eucharist
administered without Apostolical commission, may to pious
minds be a very edifying ceremony, but it is not that blessed
thing which our Saviour graciously meant it to be ; it is not
'verily and indeed taking and receiving' the Body and Blood
of Him, our Incarnate Lord." For they themselves so speak
of it, as an outward means to kindle faith ; they place the
very essence of Sacraments in their instructiveness ;f what in
jury then is done them, if any say that they have not, what
they refuse 1 or why may we not claim to our own Church,
what she professes to receive from God's all-gracious hand 1
What they claim, is not denied them ; we trust that the
" edifying rite" which they hold the Communion to be, may
be, by God's mercy, beneficial to them ; why should they
grudge us its being to us " that blessed thing which we be
lieve our Saviour graciously meant it to be." If they will
* Tract 66, p. 7.
t See Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism, p. 122-4. 245. ed. 1.

110
not " enter in themselves," why should they " hinder those
who are entering 1"
This view of the case, whereby we are enabled to maintain
uncompromisingly the truth, and yet to entertain kindly and
charitable and sympathetic feelings for those who have lost
some of the privileges of our Church, is so fully and so ten
derly put by the great Bratnhall, that I would again extract
his words ; and our previous selection of them might have
shown people our sentiments, would they have read before
they blamed.
" But* because I esteem them Churches not completely
formed, do I, therefore, exclude them from all hopes of sal
vation 1 or esteem them aliens from the commonwealth of
Israel 1 or account them formal schismatics 1 No such
thing. First, I know there are many learned persons among
them who do passionately affect Episcopacy ; some of which
have acknowledged it to myself, that their Church would ne
ver be rightly settled, until it was new moulded. f Baptism
is a Sacrament, the door of Christianity, a matriculation into
the Church of Christ : yet the very desire of it in case of ne
cessity, is sufficient to excuse from the want of actual Bap
tism. And is not the desire of Episcopacy sufficient to ex
cuse from the actual want of Episcopacy, in like case of ne
cessity 1 or should I censure these as schismatics 1
" Secondly, there are others, who though they do not long
so much for Episcopacy, yet they approve it, and want it
only out of invincible necessity. In some places the sove
reign is of another communion ; the Episcopal chairs are
filled with Roman Bishops. If they should petition for Bish
ops of their own, it would not be granted. In other places
the magistrates have taken away Bishops ; whether out of
* Vindication of the Church of England, disc. 3. quoted more fully. Tracts,
No. 74, Catena on the " Apostolical succession," p. 12, 13. It appears from
Abp. Bramhall, that the charge of want of charity for maintaining the Apos
tolical succession was then brought by the Romanists.
t It were difficult to point out the difference between this admission of the
" Reformed" themselves, and a saying of Mr. Froude's selected for censure, as
referring to the " Reformation, every where but in England." (Essays, p. 285.)
" The Reformation was a limb badly set — it must be broken again in order to
be righted." Remains, vol. i. p. 433.

Ill
policy, because they thought that the regiment not so proper
for their republics, or because they were ashamed to take
away the revenues, and preserve the order, or out of a blind
zeal, they have given an account to God : they owe none to
me. Should I condemn all these as schismatics for want of
Episcopacy, who want it out of invincible necessity 1
" Thirdly, there are others who have neither the same de
sires, nor the same esteem of Episcopacy, but condemn it as
an Antichristian innovation, and a rag of Popery. I con
ceive this to be most gross schism materially. It is ten times
more schismatical to desert, nay, to take away (so much as
lies in them) the whole order of Bishops, than to subtract
obedience from one lawful Bishop. All that can be said to
mitigate this fault is, that they do it ignorantly, a3 they have
been mistaught and misinformed. And I hope that many of
them are free from obstinacy, and hold the truth implicitly in
the preparation of their minds, being ready to receive it
when God shall reveal it to them. How far this may excuse
(not the crime but) their persons from formal schism, either
a toto or a tanlo, I determine not, but leave them to stand or
fall to their own Master."
And again, in answer to the same charge whereto we are
subjected, of having " a design to bring the Pope into Eng
land," in that they " unchurch either all or most of the Pro
testant Churches, and maintain the Roman Church and not
their's to be true :"
"His* assumption is wanting, which should be this : but
a considerable party of Episcopal divines in England do un
church all or most of the Protestant Churches, and maintain
the Roman Church to be a true Church, and these to be no
Churches. I can assent to neither of his propositions, nor
to any part of them, as true, sub modo, as they are alleged by
him. " First, I cannot assent to his major proposition, that all
those who make an ordinary personal uninterrupted succes
sion of Pastors, to be of the integrity of a true Church,
* Vindication of Grotius, disc. 3, quoted ib. p. 14 and 16.

112
(which is the ground of his exception,) have, therefore, an
intention, or can justly be suspected thereupon to have any
intention, to introduce the Pope. The Eastern, Southern,
and Northern Churches, are all of them for such a personal
succession, and yet all of them utter enemies to the Pope.
Secondly, I cannot assent to his minor proposition, that either
all or any considerable part of the Episcopal divines in Eng
land, do unchurch either all or most part of the Protestant
Churches. No man is hurt but by himself. They unchurch
none at all, but leave them to stand or fall to their own Mas
ter. They do not unchurch the Swedish, Danish, Bohe
mian, Churches, and many other Churches in Polonia, Hun-
garia, and those parts of the world, who have an ordinary
uninterrupted succession of Pastors, some by the name of
Bishops, others under the name of Seniors, unto this day ;
(I meddle not with the Socinians :) they unchurch not the
Lutheran Churches in Germany, who both assert Episcopacy
in their confessions, and have actual superintendents in their
practice, and would have Bishops, name and thing, if it were
in their power. Let him not mistake himself: those Churches
which he is so tender of, though they be better known to us
by reason of their vicinity, are so far from being 'all or most
part of the Protestant Churches,' that being all put together,
they amount not to so great a proportion as the Britannic
Churches alone. And if one excluded out of them all those
who want an ordinary succession without their own faults,
out of invincible ignorance or necessity, and all those who
desire to have an ordinary succession either explicitly or im
plicitly, they will be reduced to a little flock indeed.
" But let him set his heart at rest. I will remove this
scruple out of his mind, that he may sleep securely upon
both ears. Episcopal divines do not deny those Churches to
be true Churches, wherein salvation may be had. We ad
vise them, as it is our duty, to be circumspect for themselves,
and not to put it to more question, whether they have ordi
nation or not, or desert the general practice of the universal
Church for nothing, when they may clear it if they please.
Their case is not the same with those who labor under in-

113
vincible necessity. What mine own sense is of it, I have de
clared many years since to the world in print ; and in the same
way received thanks, and a public acknowledgment of my mo
deration, from a French divine. And yet more particularly in
my reply to the Bishop of Chalcedon, Pres. p. 144, and
cap. 1. p. 164. Episcopal divines will readily subscribe to
the determination of the learned Bishop of Winchester, in
his answer to the Second Epistle of Molineus. ' Neverthe
less, if our form (of Episcopacy) be of divine right, it doth
not follow from thence, that there is no salvation without it,
or that a Church cannot consist without it. He is blind who
does not see Churches consisting without it : he is hard
hearted who denieth them salvation. We are none of those
hard-hearted persons ; we put a great difference between
these things. There may be something absent in the exte
rior regiment, which is of divine right, and yet salvation to
be had.' This mistake proceedeth, from not distinguishing
between the true nature and essence of a Church, which we
do readily grant them, and the integrity or perfection of a
Church, which we cannot grant them, without swerving
from the judgment of the Catholic Church."
Exactly the same line is taken by the mild and moderate
Bishop Hall, as all know, a tender lover of peace, and whose
natural prejudices, through his education by a Puritan mo
ther, ran the other way ; yet these were his matured thoughts.
It is well also to hear the solemn feelings with which he
commenced his " Episcopacy by Divine Right." " For me,
I am now breathing towards the end of my race, the goal is
already in my eyes — I that am now setting foot over the
threshold of the house of my age, what aim can I have but the
issue of my last account, whereto I am ready to be summon
ed before the Judge of quick and dead 1 Setting, there
fore, that awful Tribunal, to which we shall shortly be present
ed, before our eyes, let us reason the case with a modest
earnestness." This frame of mind of the aged and pious
man, who thought the defence of Episcopacy, as a " Divine
institution," an acceptable employment of his latter days,
15

114
when " the time of his departure was at hand," is surely
somewhat different from those of the younger men now, who
adduce anxiety about the Apostolic succession as a foremost
testimony, that we " pay* greater attention to the form and
vehicle to which the divine mercy is conveyed to us, than to
the truth and power of the blessing itself." Bishop Hall then
proceeds to distinguish between the case of the Scottish
Bishop, with whom he was expostulating for having re
nounced his Episcopal function, and that of the foreign Pro
testant bodies : " know,f their case and your's is far enough
different ; they plead to be by a kind of necessity cast upon
that condition, which you have willingly chosen ; they were
not, they could not be, what you were, and still might have
been. Did any of them forsake and abjure that function of
Episcopacy, which he might freely have enjoyed with the full
liberty of professing the reformed religion V It is then on
this same plea of necessity, that Bishop Hall excused the Ger
man reformers ; — because^ they were willing to " maintain
and establish Episcopal government, desirous to restore it,
troubled that they might not continue it ; might they have
enjoyed the Gospel, they would have enjoyed Episcopacy ;"
" all the world sees the Apologist professeth for them, [the
German reformers,] that they greatly desired to conserve the
government of Bishops ; that they were altogether unwilling
ly driven from it ; that it was utterly against their heart, that
it should have been impaired or weakened ; that it was only
the personal cruelty and violence of their Romish persecu
tors which was then excepted against :" he excuses it, be-
cause§ " they took up this equality of government only pro
visionally ;" because " they meant not to traverse the state of
the Clergy, or to submit it to their orders, whensoever the
Clergy or whole state of France should happen to admit the
Reformation ;" because " they were by the iniquity of their
times in a manner forcibly driven (at least as they imagined)
upon this form, and necessarily put to their choice whether
+ Essays on the Church, p. 309, 10. t Episcopacy by Divine Right, p. i, § 2.
t Episcopacy by Divine Right, p. i. § 3. § Ib. s. 5,

115
they would still submit to Popery, or no longer submit to
Episcopal Administration, which there was only managed by
Popish hands." He likens the abandonment of Episcopacy
in such a case, to a " mariner casting out his goods in a
storm," " cutting off a limb to prevent the deadly malignity
of a gangrene," " pulling down the next roof when an house
is on fire in the city ;" and yet though he would not take up
on himself to judge others, yet we see that he himself would
have waited, with a more constant faith, " until the tyranny
were overpast," rather than throw over with his own hands
the deposit committed to him. " Fear not, thou bearest
Caesar," was thought assurance enough when the storm lay
vehemently upon his vessel ; much more then to us, " Fear
not, thou bearest an Ordinance of thy Lord's ; it is thy Lord
Himself ' asleep in the hinder part of the ship.' " For in the
midst of this palliation of their case, Bishop Hall cannot but
express his own doubts, whether any plea of necessity should
have been admitted in such a case : " Though also," he adds,
" it is very considerable, whether the condition they were in,
doth altogether absolutely warrant such a proceeding ; for was
it not so with us, after Reformation was stept in, during those
fiery time of Queen Mary 1 Was it not so with you, when
those holy men, Patrick Hamilton, and George Wischart,
sowed the first seeds of Reformation among you in their own
blood 1 With that spirit the Holy Ghost indued them, of
patience and constancy crowned with martyrdom, not of tu
mult and opposition, to the disquiet of the state and hazard of
the reformation itself; or to the abjuring and blaspheming
of an holy Order in the Church, and dishonoring of Al
mighty God, while they pretended to seek his honor." More
over, Bishop Hall only excuses, in a degree, those who did
this upon necessity, as they thought, in order the more strong
ly to contrast their case with that of those who did the same
without necessity. " This was their case ; but what is this
to your's 1 Your [the Scotch] Church was happily gone out
of Babylon ; your and our most gracious and religious so
vereign sincerely professeth, maintaineth, encourageth, the

116
blessedly-reformed religion ; his Bishops preach for it, write
for it, and profess themselves ready, after the example of
their predecessors, to bleed for it. And how can you now
think of paralleling your condition with the foreign 1"
The loss of Episcopacy, when it seemed for the time that it
could not be had, Bishop Hall looks upon with " pity ;"* its
voluntary rejection he entitles, " tof cast mire in the faces of
the blessed Apostles, who received it from their God and
Saviour, and, by the guidance of His Spirit, ordained it :"
those who had abandoned it, he " beseeches} and adjures by
that love they profess to Hear to the truth of God, by that
tender respect they bear to the peace of His Zion, by their
zeal to the Gospel of Christ, by their main care of their hap
py account, one day, before the tribunal of the most right
eous Judge of the quick and dead ; to lay all this that he had
said, seriously together," and " for God's sake and his own,
not upon groundless suggestion to abandon God's truth and
ordinance, and adore an idol made of the ear-rings of the
people, and fashioned out with the graving-tool of a supposed
skilful Aaron ;" " and for you," he adds,§ " my dearly be
loved brethren at home, for Christ's sake, for the Church's
sake, for your soul's sake, be exhorted to hold fast to this
holy Institution of your Blessed Saviour, and his unerring
Apostles, and bless God for Episcopacy."
So might an aged saint write, when our evils were yet
fresh, and our wounds green ; but now that they are thought
past healing, it is to be held that they are not wounds, but
natural functions of the body. Truth is to be held one thing
in England, another across the Tweed. Alas for the change,
when " the holy Institution of our Blessed Saviour" is held
to be a thing wholly outward, and anxiety for it a sign of
formalism !
But the doctrine of the Apostolic succession, rightly put
forward does not protect our people against dissent, or Ultra-
Protestantism only ; it is equally a protection against Rome.
And hence have the agents of that Church " sought" many
* Epistle dedicatory. t P. 1. § 1. t P. 3. § 8. § s. 9.

117
" false witnesses," in order to invalidate our succession and
our orders ; and when she has " found none," has resorted to
so many frivolous pretences. For since there cannot be in
the same place two successors of the Apostles, the admission
that we have the Apostolical succession must, on principles
which they cannot but acknowledge, altogether exclude
them. Hence it has been observed,* " The objections against
the validity of the English ordinations have been almost ex
clusively devised and employed by the Romanists of Eng
land and Ireland ; who having revolted from their own
Churches, resorted to every imaginable expedient to establish
their new community, per fas et nefas, on the ruins of the
Church of Christ. The churches of the Roman communion
were in part deceived by the artifices and falsehoods of these
men ; but notwithstanding the errors and prejudice which
they created, many theologians of that communion were fully
persuaded that our ordinations were valid."
Hence also the great displeasure, which was excited by
Courayer's writing his able defence of our orders. It was
objected to him at the time, " itf interposed an obstacle to
the conversion of many English."
The Apostolical succession then is not an abstract argu
ment, but a tangible fact, tbe value of which any plain man
can feel. Any one can understand that our Lord promised
to be with the Apostles and with their successors to the end
of the world ; nor do any other even claim to be the suc
cessors of the original Bishops of our Church, who were
ordained by Apostles or Apostolic men, except those who
now fill those sees, the Bishops of the Anglo- Catholic Church.
The Romanist Bishops were but of yesterday, nor do they
even pretend to be Bishops of our sees : they assume only to
be Bishops in partibus infidelium ; among us they are only
the delegates of the Bishop of Rome. And thus they ac
knowledge themselves schismatics : the Romish communion
in this country has, as well as the dissenters, separated itself
* Palmer on the Church, pt. vi. c. 10. t. ii. p. 452.
t Le Gluien ap. Palmer, 1. c. p. 451.

118
Irom those who have received their Commission from the
Head of the Church. To quote again the tranquil and
learned writer just cited :* " The Romish party in these
countries committed schism in separating from the commu
nion of the Church, and the obedience of their legitimate
pastors, in the reign of Elizabeth. It is certain, that du
ring the reigns of Henry VII I. and his successors, until the
eleventh year of Queen Elizabeth's reign, there were not
two separate communions and worships in England. All
the people were subject to the same pastors, attended the
same churches, and received the same sacraments. It was
only about 1570 that the Romish party, at the instigation of
foreign emissaries, separated itself and fell from the Catholic
Church of England." — "A society formed in this manner, by
voluntary separation from a Church of Christ, was totally
cut off from the unity of the Catholic Church ; nor is it to
be alleged in reply, that the new community was recog
nised by the Roman Bishops and some of the Western
Churches ; for this only proves that the Roman Bishops
encouraged schism, and the other Churches were misled by
their excessive veneration for the Roman See, and by the
misrepresentations of the enemies of the Church of Eng
land ; therefore their sanction to the new community, being
given on erroneous information, could not afford any justi
fication of it.
" It is evident, then, that the whole separation or schism
was originated and effected by the Roman pontiffs and their
adherents, not by the Churches among us. I repeat it, as a
fact which ought never to be forgotten, that we did not go
out from them, but, as the Apostle says, they went out
from us, thus bearing what is, as Bossuet well observes, the
invariable mark of schism and heresy in every age : ' Non
enim nos ab illis, sed illi a nobis recesserunt.'
" Hence it follows that the Romish communities in Eng
land are not Churches of Christ ; and we have an additional
proof of this in the fact, that they were unable to show any
» Palmer, pt. ii. c. 6. §11. " The Romish Sect schismatic."

119
succession of the episcopacy in their conventicles. The
Pope indeed sent a titular bishop to them in 1625, whose
successor went to France in 1629, and returned no more ;
and up to the present time the Romish community has not
had any bishops, for although the vicars-apostolic (as they
call themselves) pretend to the episcopal character, this cha
racter is by no means essential to their office ; their succes
sors may be priests or monks, and they have no ordinary
power over the English Romanists, being merely deputies of
the Roman Pontiff, who may revoke their commissions, with
out any trial, at his own will and pleasure. Consequently,
as vicars-apostolic they have no episcopal jurisdiction in Eng
land ; and as titular bishops, * in partibus infidelium,' they
have no jurisdiction any where. Therefore they are not,
properly speaking, bishops ; and the Romanists of England
are devoid of any apostolical succession of bishops, not to
speak of some serious difficulties which affect the validity of
their orders* in these countries, and which will be consider
ed elsewhere."
" The singularity of one pastor in each place, descended
from the Apostles and their scholars by a perpetual succes
sion," to use Bishop Bilson's words, has been uniformly re
cognised by all Churches in the world. The only excep
tion allowed has been where the nations speaking different
languages are united in the same city, in which case each
was allowed to have the blessing of a Bishop, whose lan
guage they could understand. f Otherwise it was a princi
ple acknowledged by the universal Church, and formally ra
tified by the Council at Nice, that in one place there could
be but one Bishop. " One God, One Christ, One Bishop,"}
was the exclamation of the Roman people, when the Empe
ror proposed to them to have two Bishops to govern the
Church in common. " We are not ignorant," says Corne-
* The consecrations of their earlier Bishops by one Bishop, which many
among themselves account invalid. Ib. pt. vi. c. xi.
+ This justifies the appointment of an English Bishop in Paris.
* Theodoret, v. 3. quoted by Bingham, ii. 13. 6.

120
lius* to St. Cyprian, that " as there is One God, One Christ
the Lord, whom we have confessed, One Holy Spirit, so
there ought to be One Bishop in a Catholic Church." There
can be but one representative of the Chief Shepherd in one
place. " Theref can be but one Bishop in a Church at a
time, and one Judge as Vicegerent of Christ." " Since}
there can be no second after the first, whoever is made after
him who ought to be alone, is not a second Bishop, but is
none." Whence the Martyr St. Cyprian designates such an
appointment as " setting§ up a profane altar, erecting an
adulterous chair, offering sacrilegious sacrifices against the
true Priest."
Again, then, my lord, the doctrine of the Apostolic suc
cession, so far from having any connexion with Romanism,
is a bulwark against it. The Romanists account the promi
ses to St. Peter to be confined to their single see ; the Anglo-
Catholics, with the Primitive Church, that they are inherited
by the Bishops universally ; Rome has in her corrupt days
ever essayed to intrench on the independent authority of
Bishops as of Churches ; she would have them derive their
authority mediately through her existing Bishop, not, together
with her Bishop, from the One Bishop. The doctrine of the
Apostolic succession involves our independence from the
undue authority of Rome. Whatever priority of dignity
there may be, the Bishop of the smallest city is as much the
representative of the Chief Bishop as the Patriarch of the
greatest. But, besides this, the argument which the Romanists so
frequently urge, to take " the^safer side," is thus found to
be on the side of our own Church. It is indeed the bounden
duty of any man, in dubious cases, to take the safer side, i. e.
that which seems more likely to have the favor of God ; but
the " safer side" is not with those who deny him the " Blood"
of Christ, " which is shed for many for the remission of
sins ;" the " safer side" is not with those who forsake those
* Ep. 46. al. 49. quoted ib. t Cyprian, ep. 55. al. 59. ad Cornel, quoted ib.
i Id. ep. 52. al. 55. ad Antonian. ib. § Ep. 67. al. 68. ad Steph. ib.

121
whom He has appointed to succeed His Apostles in this
Church, and with whom He has promised to be ; the " safest
side" is not with those who " form divisions among us," and
whom the Apostle has given us this mark " to avoid." The
" safest side" is that so feelingly urged by the good Bishop
Hall.* " Let me therefore confidently shut up all with that
resolute word of that blessed Martyr and Saint, Ignatius — ' let
all things be done to the honor of God ; give respect to your
bishop, as you would God should respect you. My soul for
their's, who obey their bishops, presbyters, and deacons ; God
grant that my portion may be the same with their's.' " " And
let my soul," adds the pious Bishop, " have the same share
with the blessed Martyr that said so."
No, my lord ! they again little know where our Church's
" great strength lies," who would have us ungratefully give up
our Apostolic origin ; it is a portion of God's truth ; the
birthright which He gave us ; and whoso is ashamed of any
portion of God's truth, of him will God be ashamed ; our
Church, if she profanely despise her birthright, may after
wards " find no place for repentance, though she seek it care
fully with tears." Rome comes to us with high pretensions ;
true, that manyof them are but "art and man's device,"
many but the corruptions of the truth ; seen by the side of
the truth, the counterfeit will be evident ; but if we withdraw
the truth committed to us, it will pass for gold. There is
much in the system of Rome to engage imaginative and ar
dent minds ; and if the corresponding truth which we have,
is hidden from sight, they will embrace it, although painfully
feeling the error wherewith in that Church it is mingled. We
must set in array our union with the Ancient Primitive Church
against their greater extent of actual Communion ; the Catho
licity of descent against the Pseudo-Catholicity of usurped
and corrupted dominion ; the Catholicity of agreement with
quod semper, quod ab omnibus, quod ubique traditum est,
against the Pseudo-Catholicity of modern corruptions ; Apos
tolic succession against the claim of one universal Episcopa
cy ; our union through continued succession with our Invisi-
* Episcopacy by Divine Right, conclusion.
16

122
ble Head, against the union with the one supposed visible
head : we must show our people that all which they would
seek for in Rome, they may find in the Church wherein they
were baptized, if they will but study her character, and avail
themselves of their privileges ; that it be not said of us, when
too late, "felices nimium sua si bona norint !" "If thou
hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things
which belong unto thy peace." Else will they search in the
schismatic communion of Rome among us, and think that
they will there find, what they had in their own Church and
knew it not.
To close this subject in the words of Bishop Stillingfleet :*
— " Three ways, Bishop Sanderson observes, our dissenting
brethren, though not intentionally and purposely, yet really
and eventually, have been the great promoters of the Roman
interest among us : (1) by putting to their helping hand to the
pulling down of Episcopacy  (2) by opposing the in
terest of Rome with more violence than reason ; (3) by fre
quently mistaking the question, but especially through the ne
cessity of some false principle or other, which having once
imbibed, they think themselves bound to maintain, whatever
becomes of the common cause of our reformation."
I have now, my lord, gone through all the subjects ex
pressly treated upon in the " Tracts," which have been re
garded by those of an ultra-Protestant school as approxima
ting to Popery ; and I have shown, I trust, that we, together
with our Church, hold a distinct and tangible line, removed
from modern novelties, whether of Rome or Ultra-Protestant
ism. In the main outlines, the views which we have put forth
as those of our Church, will be familiar to your lordship, as
those of the standard Divines of our Church : we wish to set
forth no new doctrines ; we would only revive what circum
stances connected with the sin of 1688 have thrown into a
partial oblivion ; we appeal to the formularies of our Church
as interpreted by our standard Divines, and agreeing with
* Unreasonableness of separation ; Pref. quoted Catena, No. 1. Tracts, No.
74. p. 26.

123
the best and purest ages. These, as the very titles of our
Tracts convey, have been the main topics upon which we
dwelt ;* we wished to put forth no system of Divinity ; what
we wrote were " Tracts for the Times," i. e. on such topics
as the times seemed to stand in especial need of; they were to
fill up the lacunas of a popular system, to recall to men's minds
forgotten or depreciated truths, to invite them to enlarge or
correct or modify their systems by the consideration of points
upon which they had not hitherto dwelt, — " the Holy Catho
lic Church," (our belief of which we daily confess,) and the
Ordinances of her Lord, committed to her keeping, whether
His Sacraments, or rites, practices, and observances, (such
as fasting, Ember days,) which she has ever observed, and
which are essential to her well-being ; her Apostolic succes
sion ; her public prayer ; her holy days and seasons ; or the
character of the Liturgy, in which so much of her doctrine
is embodied. Occasionally, other topics have been dwelt
upon, and defects have been pointed out, either in the great
rival system of Rome,f or in the popular way of treating our
own.} But the great object which runs through the whole
was to bring up men's practice to the standard of their
Church, as it is; to remove ill-founded objections to it ;§ to
develop to them points which they had not apparently con
sidered ; to realize more the system, in which we actually
live, to live up to what we have.
* Thus the first two volumes were divided into (1) Liturgical, (2) on Ordi
nances, (3) on the Apostolic Succession, (4) on the Doctrine of the Church, (5)
on the History of the Church, (6) Records of the Church, to which, in the first,
were added some tracts explaining (7) the Argument for the Church.
t No. 27, 28. Bishop Cosin's History of Popish Transubstantiation ; 71. on
the Controversy with the Romanists ; 72. Archbishop Usher's prayers for
the dead, not connected with Purgatory ; 79. on Purgatory.
t No. 73. " On the introduction of rationalistic principles into religion,"
(against explaining the mysteries of the Faith, through viewing them simply as
they operate upon man.) No. 80. " On reserve in communicating Religious
Knowledge," (against indiscriminately obtruding religious knowledge on
minds unfit to receive it, " casting pearls before^swine.")
§ As inNo. 13. Principle of selection ofSunday Lessons; 3. on Alterations
in the Liturgy ; 9. and 43. on Shortening it ; 22. on the Athanasian Creed,
&c.

124
Such was our object ; and such topics (as any will have
seen who has watched the nature of the attacks upon us)
have been, until very lately, the exclusive subjects of censure.
The "heresy" of Baptismal regeneration, its supposed con
nexion with the " opus operatum" of Rome, or its variance
from their view of justification ; the supposed austerity of
the repentance insisted on ; imagined asceticism, confounded
with the penance of the Church of Rome ; the uncharitable-
ness of maintaining Apostolic succession or its formality ; or
the high sense of the mysteriousness and sacredness of the
Holy Eucharist : these were the exclusive topics of contro
versy. The topics above dwelt upon are parts of the entire Ca
tholic system ; none of them stand insulated ; they run into
each other, and modify our faith or practice ; " the Holy
Catholic Church," and " the forgiveness of sins," or the
" One Baptism for the remission of sins," enter among the
few articles of the Creed. It is obvious from the very cha
racter of the controversy which was raised, that the mode of
man's justification before God, the character and importance
of the works done by and in him, repentance, future judg
ment, the mode of man's union with Christ, and His indwell
ing in man ; the fruits of the mystery of our Blessed Lord's
Incarnation ; the Communion of Saints ; man's relation to
His Redeemer, not as an isolated being, but as a member of
" the Church, which is His Body ;" the universality of Di
vine grace : or, to take another class, the character of Schism,
the duty of submission or independence of individual Chris
tians ; the mode of extending the influence of the Gospel ;
the duty of receiving articles of faith, without perceiving their
bearing upon practice ; these and many more are affected by
the way in which the subjects thus dwelt upon are determined.
Of late, however, as the conflict has thickened, other ground
has been occupied, and other weapons been employed ;
and on these subjects also I must offer some explanation to
your lordship, premising only that these on the contrary were
topics, insulated in themselves, and in no case insisted upon,
or inculcated by us, but, at most, simply introduced in the

125
course of treating upon other subjects. The two subjects
to which I refer are " prayers for God's departed saints," and
"celibacy." With the former of these has strangely been
united, that of Invocation of the Saints, contrary to the ex
press and careful teaching of the Tracts.
Prayers for those departed in the faith and fear of God.
I have said that this subject was mentioned by us inciden
tally ; I would add, that in whatever degree it has been
brought into notice, has been through the diligence of those
who blame us, not by ourselves. " Prayers for God's de
parted saints," as I have already stated more at length, were,
in the first instance, simply noticed historically,* as one of
the points, in which all the ancient Liturgies agreed, as also
that they did in others, such as " the Kiss of Peace," and the
hymn " Therefore with Angels and Archangels," &c. No
stress was laid upon the fact ; no observation made, except
that such prayers had been "excluded from the English ritual ;"
(others which had just been named having been retained ;)
the subject of the tract in which this mention of it occurred
was wholly different, on the consecration and oblation of the
Holy Eucharist : there was no hint of regret at its exclusion ;
much less any desire of its restoration. It was, apparently,
only mentioned, because from the nature of the argument it
could not be avoided.
I have said this, my lord, because I freely confess that I
should myself think it inexpedient to bring forward such a
topic in public discussion ; it is a matter of sacred consola
tion to those who feel themselves justified in entertaining it ;
a solemn privilege to the mourner ; but not, after that (in
consequence of abuses connected with it in the Romish sys
tem) it had been withdrawn from our Church, to be rashly
and indiscriminately revived. Those, who acknowledge it
as in itself justified by primitive practice, are content that
our Church has placed no restriction upon its private use by
her sons ; she has no where blamed it ; though those once
in authority in her withdrew it, (against their earlier judg-
* Tracts, No. 63.

126
ment, and as matter of practical wisdom only,) from her
public services. It must from its very nature be of too so
lemn a character, and too connected with feelings of sacred
sorrow, to be gratuitously brought out of its resting place,
the hearts of those whose friends are lost out of sight.
An opponent,* two years past, to serve a temporary and lo
cal purpose, drew it out of the obscurity in which it lay, and,
on that occasion, I showed} that it was neither connected
with the doctrine of purgatory, nor new in the later English
Church, having been justified or employed by such Divines
as Bishop Andrews, Bull, Collier, Dean Field, (I might have
added Archbishop Usher, Bishop Taylor,- and Barrow,) as
well as by a living writer, who could not be accused of any
Romanist tendency ; that it was disconnected from Purgatory
even by Bucer and Calvin, when objecting to it as it stood in
our first reformed Liturgy. Since that time, neither in tracts
nor sermons, orally or in writing, have we any way inculca
ted it ; and the late publicity which the topic has acquired,
has been independent of us. We are aware that our Church
does not encourage it ; we are satisfied that she does not dis
courage it ; she discourages only such prayers as the Ro
manists use, which are connected with the modern doctrine
of Purgatory, not those of the Primitive Church, which, as
have been shown by Archbishop Usher and others, are oppo
sed to that doctrine.
Here, also, my lord, we would contend, that our Church
keeps her " via media ;" both Romanist and Ultra-Protestant
dogmatize about the state of departed souls ; the Romanist,
following a natural instinct of human nature, decides, that al
most all souls undergo a painful purification after death, by
which " Infectum eluitur scelus, aut exuritur igni."} The
Ultra-Protestant, supposing all sins to be absolutely hidden
and covered by the imputation of Christ's righteousness, de-
* The author of the " Pastoral Epistle from the Pope, to some members of
the University of Oxford."
t Earnest Remonstrance to the author of the Pope's Pastoral Letter, &c,
p. 18, sqq.
t Mn. vi. 742.

127
cides as peremptorily that the departed saints are already in
full possession of the joys of heaven ; he conceives of them
as already " like the angels of God in heaven ;" he speaks of
the "joys of heaven" as already bestowed upon them : con
sistently with his theory, he leaves out of sight, "judgment
to come," as well as the "resurrection of the body." The
world, now as in Homer's time, thinks of them as ctyc^a /rap^a,
compassionates them as inactive, and, withdrawn from their
world, despises or forgets them. Our Church, in contrast to
all these, cherishes their memory ; blesses God for them ;*
thinks of them as " resting in Christ,"} and of their " spirits"
as " living with God in joy and felicity,"} yet desires " their's
and our perfect consummation and bliss, both in body and
soul, in His eternal and everlasting glory."} She holds " all
who depart hence in the Lord, to be " in peace and at rest,"
and this was held by the Ancient Church also, and, as being
inconsistent with Purgatory, is the very point of divergence
from Rome ;} she regards them in a state of, as yet, imper
fect happiness, and so differs from the Ultra-Protestant ; and
in both, her view coincides with the prayers of the Ancient
Church, which speak of those departed as at rest, yet pray
"that God would show them mercy, and hasten the resurrec
tion, and give a blessed sentence in the great day." So that
although, for the safety of her children, she relinquished the
practice, her doctrine is in accordance with it. And, cer
tainly, it is of much importance that this should be rightly un
derstood, for, as Archbishop Usher observed, " Our Roman
ists do commonly take it for granted, that Purgatory and
prayer for the dead be so closely linked together, that the one
doth necessarily imply the other." It is the wisdom of their
controversialists§ so to bind up the ancient practice with the
* Prayer for the Church Militant. t Burial Service.
t Bishop Taylor, Dissuasive from Popery, c. 1. sec. 4. Archbishop Usher,
Answer to a Jesuit, c. 7. sec. 2. &c. Bishop Bull, Serm. 3. and Corruptions of
the Church of Rome, t. ii. p. 260.
§ In a recent popular book, by Dr. Rock, professing to illustrate the Ro
manist doctrines from monuments of ancient art, is a chapter on Purgatory;
yet there is not an approximation to the doctrine of Purgatory in any one in
scription cited ; nothing beyond the primitive character of prayer for the de
parted saints.

128
modern corruption, that they should seem to be really blend
ed together ; it is ours to show them to be distinct ; else are
we enlisting man's natural and dutiful veneration for Antiqui
ty on the side of Rome, and ourselves misleading them, and
tempting them to abandon us. Those who condemn all
prayers for Christ's departed servants, as Popish, are doing
Rome an honor which she little deserves, and making her out
in this respect to be primitive, instead of the corrupter of
primitive practice.
In another point of view — if " to pray for the dead was
the dictate of human nature,"* as well as the practice of the
Primitive Church — and no one, probably, who has observed
himself, will doubt this — it is surely putting the members of
our Church in a needlessly disadvantageous position, to teach
them that our Church proscribes such prayer, that it is not
to be had but in Romanism,
Why narrow thus what our Church has left undefined I
why, if when our Church prays that God would " give us
grace so;to follow their good examples, that with them, we
may be partakers of his heavenly kingdom," any think that
she longs for their " final consummation in bliss" also, should
any one seek to hinder it 1 or if any, understanding in a pri
mitive sense a primitive prayer, " most humbly beseeching
Thee to grant that by the merits and Passion of Thy Son Je
sus Christ, and through faith in His Blood, we and all Thy
whole Church may obtain remission of our sins, and all other
benefits of His Passion," should think that those emphatic
words, " all thy whole Church," were not to be restrained to
the Church militant, but included that portion of the Church,
also, which is at rest, and prayed that they also might enjoy
such " benefits of His Passion," as belonged to their state of
rest, why should he be hindered If Surely, both wisdom and
charity require that we should not narrow our pale, nor pro
scribe a practice of the primitive Church, even though wis
dom and charity prevent its formal restoration. A formal
* Dr. Short's Hist, of English Church, § 15.
t So again in, the Burial Service, " that we with all those that are departed
in the true faith of Thy holy Name, may have our perfect consummation," &c.

129
restoration would, in the corrupt state of modern manners,
probably lower still farther the standard of holiness ; men
would probably abuse these prayers as a ground of carnal
security, and by a worse corruption than that of Rome, look
to them as available for those not " departed hence in the
faith and fear of God." In order to have with impunity all
primitive ordinances, we must have also primitive purity and
primitive discipline. To restore privileges before we restore
strictness of life, were to begin at the wrong end. But our
Church, as has recently been in a very elaborate sentence
decided, * condemns not such prayers, and why should we
take upon ourselves to pronounce, where she has thought it
most becoming to be silent, or restrain the liberty which she
has left unfettered 1 Invocation of Saints.
There is, however, another subject ordinarily connected
with this, (though in truth not very naturally,) upon which
our Church has not been silent, " Invocation of the departed
saints ;" and it is not without some amazement, even with
continued experience of the carelessness of controversy, that
I find it supposed that we have on this point contravened the
direct teaching of our Church ; I can scarcely adequately re
present to your lordship how much care was taken to pre
vent any mistakes upon the subject, or how strange the mis
statements which have been made. In brief, they consist in
representing us as approving that which was in the Tracts
directly condemned. The case was this : on several grounds
it was thought useful to translate a portion of the Breviary ;
> such were the following,} "to claim whatever is good and
true in those devotions for the Church Catholic in opposi
tion to the Roman Church, whose only real claim above
other Churches is that of having adopted into the Service
certain additions and novelties, ascertainable to be such in
history, as well as being corruptions doctrinally." (2) To
* The office of the Judge promoted in Breeks v. Woolfrey, given fully in the
Brit. Mag. vol. xv. p. 91.
t Tracts, No. 75. p, 1, 2.
17

130
illustrate our own Prayer-book as being taken from it ; (3)
to suggest matter for our private devotions ; (4) to "impress
a truer sense of the excellence and profitableness of the
Psalms, than it is the fashion of this age to entertain ;" (5)
by showing the corruptions to be of a later date, to add one
more "fact, discriminating and separating off the Roman
from the Primitive Church." It was observed again, that
" these* portions of the Breviary" [the invocations to the
Virgin and other Saints] "carry with them their own plain
condemnation in the judgment of an English Christian ; no
commendation of the general structure and matter of the
Breviary itself will have any tendency to reconcile him to
them ; and it has been the strong feeling that this is really
the case, that has led the writer of these pages fearlessly and
securely to admit the real excellencies, and to dwell upon
the antiquity of the Roman ritual. He has felt, that since
the Romanists required an unqualified assent to the whole of
the Breviary, and that there were passages vthich no An
glican could ever admit, praise the true Catholic portion of it
as much as he might, he did not in the slightest degree ap
proximate to a recommendation of Romanism." This, how
ever, was not all ; for after distinguishing the different parts
of these corrupt additions, it was said that even those least
objectionable, " now do but sanction and encourage that di
rect worship of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints, which is
the great practical offence of the Latin Church, and so are
a serious evil." Then it was pointed out that the oldest of
these forms were the least objectionable, and were of a dif
ferent kind from those now common in the Roman Church ;
still, though " more could be said towards their justification
than for those other addresses," they "are now," it was said,
" a serious evil ;" it was not said that they could be justified,
much less were they recommended ; it was only said that
more could be said towards it ; but that they were " a serious
evil." Having, as it would seem, thus guarded against all
possibility of mistake, the writer of this Tract proceeded to
* lb. p. 8.

131
translate whole portions of the Breviary, as it stands, exhibit
ing together both the true Catholic portion and the Roman
ist additions, but referring back in almost every case to the
pages of the preface in which these had been thus decidedly
condemned. Now it will scarcely seem credible, my lord,
that the sole foundation for the allegation; that we " advocate
prayers to the saints," are those very extracts from the Bre
viary in which they are so manifoldly condemned ; that be
cause we would " re-appropriate to the Catholic Church, in
opposition to the Roman Church," "the true Catholic por
tion" of the Breviary, (which the Romanists have never en
trusted their people with in their own tongue,) therefore it is
asserted that we would re-appropriate those very prayers
which we distinguish from it : that when we speak of the
least of these corruptions as a " serious evil," we would wish
to " re-appropriate" the greatest as a " treasure."* But
neither is this the whole 'extent of the misrepresentation ;
for in another Tract in the same volume, to which the atten
tion could not but be called, as it was expressly " on the
Controversy with the Romanists," " the invocation of saints"
is mentioned among " the} practical grievances to which
* " The seventy-fifth number of the Tracts for the Times is composed of
selections from the Romish Breviary, prepared and recommended for Pro
testant use; in the preface to which the Editor says, 'our adversaries have
in this, as in many other instances, appropriated to themselves a treasure'
[viz. ' the true Catholic portion,' see above, p. 130] which was our's as
much as their's. The publication then of these selections is, as it were, an
act of ' re-appropriation.' And among these prayers thus re-appropriated
to Protestant use, we find the following," [whereon follows one of the class,
p. 61. which had been expressly designated as " a serious evil," and two
others, which fell under the same class.] " Prayers for the dead, and prayers
to the Saints, are both advocated" [whereon follows a hymn, of which it is
yet noted in the very margin, " It is remarkable, that this hymn, which is
the only one of those here translated, which savors of Romanism, is the
only one, except one other, which is not known to be ancient ¦/' so that the
translator again remarks the coincidence of Romish corruption and absence
of proof of antiquity,] Essays, p. 239. Another writer says, " the whole is
declared in the preface, to be a ' re-appropriation of a treasure, which had
lon°- been lost.' " Fraser, p. 23 ; and yet this same writer in the next page
refers to the Tract in which" invocation of the saints" is mentioned among
the " chief points to be urged in controversy with Rome."
t No. 71. p. 9.

132
Christians are subjected in the Roman Communion, and
which should be put in the foreground, in this controversy."
The grounds also taken in that Tract are so decided, that it
may be satisfactory to transcribe what is said on this head.*
" 6. The Invocation of Saints. Here again the practice
should be considered, not the theory. Scripture speaks
clearly and solemnly about Christ as the sole Mediator.
When prayer to the Saints is recommended at all times and
places, as ever present guardians, and their good works plead
ed in God's sight, is not this such an infringement upon the
plain word of God, such a violation of our allegiance to our
only Saviour, as must needs be an insult to Him 1 His ho
nor He will not give to another. Can we with a safe con
science do it 1 Should we act thus in a parallel case even
with an earthly friend 1 Does not St. John's example warn
us against falling down before angels 1 Does not St. Paul
warn us against a voluntary humility and worshipping of
angels 1 And are not these texts indications of God's will,
which ought to guide our conduct 1 Is it not safest not to
pay them this extraordinary honor 1 As an illustration of
what I mean, I will quote the blessing pronounced by the
Pope on the assembled people at Easter : —
" The holy Apostles Peter and Paul, from whom has been derived our power
and authority, themselves intercede for us to the Lord. Amen.
" For the prayers and righteous deeds of the blessed Mary, ever Virgin, of
the blessed Michael the Archangel, of the blessed John the Baptist, of the holy
Apostles Peter and Paul, and of all the saints, Almighty God have mercy upon
you, and Jesus Christ absolve you from all your sins, and bring you to life
everlasting. Amen.
" The Almighty and merciful Lord grant to you pardon, absolution, and re
mission of all your sins, time for true and fruitful penitence, an ever penitent
heart, and amendment of life, the grace and comfort of the Holy Ghost, and
final perseverance in good works. Amen.
" And the blessing of God Almighty, the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost, comedown upon you and remain with you always. Amen."
Thus then, my lord, invocations of the very kind, which
the authors of the Tracts are said to recommend, are in
stanced among the chief " practical grievances" to which
Christians in the Roman communion are subjected.
* Tract 71, p. 13, 14.

133
All which can be said in answer is, that though alljias
been condemned, a distinction has been made between the
older and the more recent, between a confession " in the pre
sence of all saints" as well as of the congregation present,
and a beseeching of the prayers of the "blessed Michael
Archangel" and " all saints" together with the congregation
present, and direct, exclusive prayers to them. None are
countenanced, but it is said that the older stand on different
ground. And do they not 1
For since St. Paul " charged Timothy, before God and
the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect Angels," would it be safe
to pronounce a confession " in the presence of holy angels,"
anti-scriptural, especially when we know that " there is joy
in the presence of the Angels of God over one sinner that
repenteth 1" Sin " gives occasion to the enemies of God to
blaspheme ;" why should not a person, in confessing his sins,
wish to take shame to himself, and to repent of, and disown
them, in the sight of all the holy beings whom he has shocked
by them, as well as of men * Bishop Taylor, in his Golden
Grove, has the following form : " Whatsoever they [my
sins] are, &c, &c. ' I call the whole court of heaven to
witness that I do sadly repent of them all, &c. ' Lord, be
Thou merciful to me a sinner.' " And, " I have this day in
thy sight, and in the presence of all the holy angels that at
tend Thee in the conversion of a sinner, made my firm reso
lution," &c. and " Rejoice over me, O ye holy angels, a
great part of whose ministry it is to rejoice at the conversion
of a sinner."
So, again, with regard to the request of their prayers toge
ther with those of the congregation, it is obviously of a differ
ent character from prayers exclusively addressed to them.
For the exclusive address of unseen beings has an obvious
tendency, at once, to fall into a sort of worship ; it is too like
the mode in which we address Almighty God, to be any way
safe ; the exclusive request of their intercessions is likely at once
to constitute them intercessors, in a way different from God's
servants on earth, and (which is the great practical evil of
these prayers in the Roman Church) to interfere with the

134
Office of the Great Intercessor. The union of members of
the Church who are yet in the body with those unseen, is a
check upon both these dangers ; it brings down the appli
cation from the character of worship ; it shows that both
seen and unseen saints are applied to in the same way ; it lays
a restraint upon the mind, and checks feelings which might
betray it into giving to the creature the honor due to the Cre
ator alone. There is then surely a difference between the re
quest, " therefore I beseech thee, blessed Mary, Ever Vir
gin, the blessed Michael Archangel, the blessed John Bap
tist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all saints, and you my
brethren, to pray the Lord our God for me," and such a pray
er as " Holy Mary, succor the wretched, help the weak-
hearted, comfort the mourners, pray for the people, inter
pose for the clergy, intercede for the devoted women ; let all
feel thy help whoso celebrate thy holy commemoration," or
" Holy Mary, pray for us sinners, now and in the hour of
death," which were distinguished from it. And is not good
done, by showing that the more corrupt forms came in later "?
So at least thought Bishop Hall,* who makes just the
same distinctions between ancient and modern as were here
made : " Of all those errors which we reject in the Church
of Rome, there is none that can plead so much show of anti
quity, as this of invocation of Saints : which yet, as it hath
been practised and defended in the later times, should in vain seek
either example or patronage amongst the ancients ; however there
might be some grounds of this devotion secretly muttered, and
at last expressed in panegyrick forms, yet until almost 500
years after Christ, it was not in any sort admitted into the
public service. It will be easily granted that the blessed Vir
gin is the prime of all saints ; neither could it be other than
injurious, that any other of that heavenly society should have
the precedence of her : Now the first that brought her name
into the public devotions of the Greek Church, is noted by
Nicephorus, to be Petrus Gnapheus, or Fullo, a Presbyter of
Bithynia, afterwards the Usurper of the See of Antioch, much
* The Old Religion, c. 14. " The newness of the Romish Invocation of

135
about 470 years after Christ ; who (though a branded here
tic) found out four things (saith he) very useful and benefi
cial to the Catholic Church ; whereof the last was, (Ut in
omni precatione, &c.) that in every prayer the Mother of
God should be named, and her divine name called upon.
And as for the Latin Church, we hear no news of this invo
cation, in the public Litanies, till Gregory's time, about some
130 years after the former. And in the mean time some Fa
thers speak of it fearfully and doubtfully. Others of the Fa
thers have let fall speeches directly bent against this invoca
tion. And those of the Ancients, that seem to speak for it,
lay grounds that overthrow it : however it be, all holy Antiqui
ty would have both blushed and spit at those forms of Invocation?
which the late Clients of Rome have broached to the world ; if
perhaps they speak to the Saints tanquam deprecatores (ve!
potius comprecatoref) as Spalatensis yields ; moving them to
be competitioners with us to the throne of grace, not pro
perly, but improperly, as Altissiodore construes it ; how
would they have digested that blasphemous Psalter of our La
dy, imputed to Bonaventure, and those styles of mere Deifica
tion which are given to her : and the division of all offices of
piety to mankind, betwixt the Mother and the Son 1 How
had their ears glowed to hear, Christus oravit, Franciscus
exoravit, Christ prayed, Francis prevailed ] How would
they have brooked that which Ludovicus Vives freely con
fesses, Multi Christiani, &c. Many Christians worship (divos
divasque) the Saints of both sexes, no otherwise than God
Himself? Or that which Spalatensis professes to have ob
served, that the ignorant multitude are carried with more en
tire religious affection to the blessed Virgin, or some other
Saint, than to Christ their Saviours These foul supersti
tions are not more heinous than new, and such as wherein
we have justly abhorred to take part with the practisers of
them." But there is probably here also not mere misconception,
but a real difference of habit of mind and feeling between
the three views. Romanist and Ultra-Protestant are alike
rigorous in opposite ways. The Romanist is not content

136
with the persuasion that Christ's departed servants, being ad
mitted near the Presence, and under the shadow of the
throne of glory, and by the heavenly Altar,* continue the
intercessions for the Church here below, which they offered
while in the body ; he will not rest satisfied in the assurance
of God's good will to us herein ; he must fain obtain to him
self a personal interest in their intercessions, appropriate
them to himself, make them personally his. friends, and so he
steps beyond antiquity, and asks them directly to intercede
for him, prays to them, makes them his Intercessors, ap
proaches to God and Christ through them, instead of casting
himself directly upon God's mercy in Christ; at last, in prac
tice, substitutes them as Intercessors, for the One Interces
sor. He begins by laying down that it is " good} and useful
suppliantly to invoke them, and to flee to their prayers, aid, and
help, to obtain benefits from God through His Son Jesus
Christ our Lord, who alone is our Redeemer and Saviour,"
and condemns as "impious, those who deny that they are to
be invoked, or assert that the invocation of them to pray for
each of us individually, is idolatry ;" he ends by making
them his mediators, as beings more like himself, whom he
can approach with less of awe, with less earnest resolution
of holiness, less anxiety about his sins, in his own words, as
" meek and mild,"} and not as a " consuming fire." The
Ultra-Protestant, revolted at this abuse, will not hear of their .
interceding at all, proscribes all thought of it, cuts himself
off — not from their communion and fellowship, but from all
* Rev. vi. 9.
t Cone. Trid. Sess. 25. de invocat. venerat. et reliquiis Sanctorum tt
sacris imaginibus.
t " Only we shall recite a few words of Antoninus, their great Divine
and Archbishop of Florence ; ' it is necessary that they, to whom she con
verts her eyes, being an advocate for them, shall be justified and saved.'
And whereas it may be objected out of John that the Apostle says, ' If any
man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous,'
he answers ' that Christ is not our Advocate alone but our Judge ; and since
the just is scarce secure, how shall a sinner go to Him as to an Advocate %
Therefore God hath provided us an advocatess, who is gentle and sweet, in
whom nothing that is sharp is to be found.' " Bp. Taylor, Dissuasive from
Popery, c. 2. sect. 8 ; compare Mr. Froude's observations founded on their
actual practice, Remains, t. i. p. 294. quoted Appendix, No. 91 .

137
sense of it and its blessedness ; will be thankful for the
prayers of weak sinners like himself, but will not feel the
privilege of their prayers who are " delivered from the bur
den of the flesh, and the miseries of this sinful world," and
in the abodes of love, love us more holily ; is jealous of every
mention of them, and so forgets them ; and either restrains
the doctrine of the " Communion of Saints" to the charities
of this life, or makes it a mere abstract statement that all
the redeemed belong to one body. Our Church, between
both, recognises with the ancient church, the actualness of
the Communion of Saints ; that " God* has knit together
His elect in one communion and fellowship, in the mystical
body of His Son, Christ our Lord ;" it rejoices in God's
assurance,} that through " the due receiving of the holy
mysteries," " we are very members incorporate in the mys
tical body of His Son, which is the blessed company of all
faithful people," and prays, that we may " continue in that
holy fellowship ;" weekly " blesses} His Holy Name for all
His servants departed this life in His faith and fear ;" accom
panies their departure from this life, with "hearty§ thanks
that it hath pleased Him to deliver them out of the miseries
of this sinful world ;" prays God that His " Holy Angels||
may, by His appointment, succor and defend us on earth ;"
but there stops short, is content to feel the blessedness of that
mystical union, and with the assurance that it must be a bless
ing, without intruding into that holy fellowship with selfish
and unauthorized prayers to them to intercede for us indivi
dually, or approaching them with language which, if they
hear it, must be shocking to them, as belonging rather to
their Lord.
We may then have a vivid and thankful sense of our
privilege of belonging to a body, part of whom have passed
through our trials, tribulations, and infirmities, and "have
been brought out of great tribulation, and washed their robes
* Collect for All Saint's Day. t Thanksgiving after Communion.
t Prayer for the Church Militant. § Burial Service.
II Collect for St. Michael and All Angels.
18

138
in the Blood of the Lamb ;" we may take comfort that they,
together with their Lord, sympathize with the imperfect mem
bers of His body, and intercede for us before Him, with
greater purity than our earthly friends ; we might think of
it with respectful affection and gratitude ; we might thank
God for it; we might even pray Him, that they might inter
cede as for us, without even approximating to the errors of
the Church of Rome. In a word, we might be thankful
that they do intercede for us, without making them our in
tercessors or praying them so to do. In Origen's beautiful
language,* "Nor doth the High Priest alone pray with those
who pray truly, but the ' angels' also 'in heaven,' who ' re
joice over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety
and nine just persons, who need no repentance,' and the
souls of the saints who fell asleep before us : — For whereas
in this life knowledge is manifested to those accounted wor
thy, ' through a glass, darkly,' but then revealed ' face to
face,' it were inconsistent if the like were not to be the case
as to other excellencies, especially since what is laid up be
forehand in this life is then really perfected. But one of
the chiefest excellencies, according to the divine word, is
love of our neighbor, which the Saints, who have fallen
asleep before us, must necessarily be supposed to have much
more exceedingly towards those who are yet engaged in the
strife of this life, than those who are yet beset with human
infirmity, and but helping the weaker in a common strife.
Not here alone does brotherly love fulfil that saying, ' if
one member suffer, all the members suffer with it, and if one
member be honored, all the members rejoice with it.' For
it beseemeth well the love of those who have departed this
present life, to say, ' the care of all the Churches ; — who is
weak, and I am not weak ? who is offended, and I burn
not V and the more, when Christ professeth that He is sick
in each of the sick saints ; and in like way, that He is in
prison also, and naked, and both a stranger and hungered
and athirst ; for who of those who read the Gospel know-
• De Orat. § 11. t. i. p. 213, 14. ed. de la Rue.

139
eth not that Christ, ascribing to Himself the things which
befall believers, accounteth them as His owp sufferings'?
And if the angels of God, coming to Jesus, ministered to
Him, and it were not fitting to conceive of this ministry of
the angels about Jesus, as restricted to the brief period of
His bodily sojourn among men, when He was among be
lievers, ' not as he that sitteth at meat, but as he that serveth,'
how many angels, think you, minister to Jesus, who willeth
to bring together the children of Israel one by one, and col
lect them from the dispersion, and saveth those who fear and
call upon Him ! — for not in vain do ' the angels of God as
cend and descend upon the Son of man,' being seen by the
eyes enlightened by the light of true knowledge ; yea, the
angel of each, even of the ' little ones' in the Church, ' al
ways beholding the face of the Father who is in heaven,'
and contemplating the Divinity of Him who created us,
prayeth together with us, and worketh together in such
things which we pray for, as admit thereof."
I have dwelt upon this topic, because some of the more
ancient forms which have been objected to, may express no
thing more than this consciousness, that the saints at rest do
pray for us, and so help us by their prayers. The words " in-
tercedentibus omnibus Sanctis," need mean no more than this :
nor need the words " whose* deeds of grace working together
with our prayers," mean more than St. Paul means, when he
says,} " I fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of
Christ in my flesh, for His body's sake which is the Church."
Practically, what was said more than excluded the use of any
of these forms ; they were spoken of as, practically, "a seri
ous evil ;" yet it is wise, as well as charitable, not to interpret
what may be innocent, by later usages which are not so, nor
to do Rome the service of carrying up her corruptions into
ages which knew not of them, by putting the same glosses
upon their words which she would. The liability of their
being misunderstood should preclude our using them : yet
ought we not ourselves to misunderstand or misinterpret
them. * Essays, p. 239. t Col. i. 24.

140

Celibacy.
There yet remains one specific charge, which is to prove
an inclination towards the Romanist system, the praise of
celibacy. It is urged as an objection, that we do not put
forward " the celibacy of the clergy" among " the chief
grounds of difference between ourselves and the Church of
Rome," and that " Monasticism and celibacy are counselled
and recommended in some passages." At the same time it is
admitted that these passages cannot be altogether adduced as
speaking our sentiments, inasmuch as " several of" us " are
married clergymen."*
And, first, I may state to your lordship, that no where in
the Tracts have there been put forth any recommendations
whether of celibacy in general, or that of the Clergy in par
ticular. It has not been inculcated, nor even been named
in the Tracts ; and what has been elsewhere said by any
who have written in the Tracts, has been dropped incidental
ly ; there has been nothing of systematic promotion of this
state. Then, also, when mentioned, it has been with refer
ence to specific cases, to provide for especial needs,} such
as where St. Paul says, "on account of the present distress ;"
or as a way more excellent in itself, as one of the triumphs of
Faith, not as being generally expedient or desirable, even
among the clergy. And herein, at once a distinction is made
between the teaching of these writers and that of the Church
of Rome, which absolutely requires it of her priests; and it
appears also how far they are from advocating views in a
proselytizing or party spirit.
* Essays, p. 291, 2.
t The passages quoted are Brit. Mag. vol. ix. p. 366. " You must have dis
sent or monachism in a Christian country: so make your choice." lb. p.
368. " Great towns will never be evangelized merely by the parochial sys
tem ; the^j are beyond the sphere of the parish priest, burdened as he is with the
endearments and anxieties of a family." Froude's Remains, t. i. p. 322. " It
has lately come into my head that the present state of things in England makes
an opening for reviving the monastic system." He continued ; " I think of
putting the view forward under the title of ' Project for reviving religion in
great towns.' Certainly colleges of unmarried priests, (v/ho might of course
retire to a living, when they could, and liked,) would be the cheapest possible
way of providing for the spiritual wants of a large population."

141
With regard to the subject itself, I may perhaps the less
scruple to speak, as belonging to that class, who, it is admit
ted, from the circumstances of their own life, cannot be dis
posed either to underrate the blessings of marriage, or unduly
to exalt the celibate. I own then, my lord, I cannot read
such passages, as, " There be eunuchs, which have made
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake ; he
that is able to receive it, let him receive it." " Verily, I say
unto you that there is no man who has left father, or mother,
or wife, or children, for My Name's sake, but he shall receive
manifold more in this present life, and in the world to come
life everlasting." " He that standeth steadfast in his heart,
having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and
hath so decreed in his heart, that he will keep his virgin, doeth
well ; so then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well ; but
he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better." I cannot
read these and others without acknowledging, that, though
marriage is not permitted only, but " honorable," yea, our
Lord honored the marriage rite by His presence and by His
beginning of miracles, and has consecrated it into a mystery
and an image of the Church's union with Him, still " a more
excellent way" is pointed out to " those, to whom it is given."
Marriage has not only safety, but honor. Changed as its cha
racter is by the fall, in that it now gives birth to a tainted off
spring, yet that men might not despise it, and thence make
a snare to themselves, God has restored it to a portion of the
dignity which it had from His institution in Paradise, dignified
it in the Patriarchs, set forth an example of it in " Abraham
His friend," and in the pure blessings of Isaac, made its mutual
love a similitude of that which He bears to His Church, and
of her reverence to Him, her Head and Saviour ; hallowed it
yet more, in that His Son was born of the seed of David, ac
cording to the flesh, though not after the flesh, and His Ever-
Virgin Mother was betrothed, when He " abhorred not the
Virgin's womb," and He appointed that mothers should be
" saved by the Childbearing ;" He takes us by the hand
and hallows our union by the blessing of His Church ; so
that what man might have feared to approach, is, when " en-

142
terprised reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the
fear of God," a continual image and representation of things
holy and Divine.
But it is the very character of the Faith, that, while it en
nobles the use of God's permitted blessing, it points out to
those who can receive it, a higher way, by foregoing them.
Thus, it declares " every creature of God is good, and noth
ing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving," and it
consecrates it to our use " by the word of God and by Pray
er," yet it shows "a more excellent way" by fasting, which
" He who seeth in secret, shall reward openly :" it teaches
that " our lands are in our own power," yet it promises " mani
fold more to those who forsake houses and lands for His
Name's sake and the Gospel's:" it teaches to "lie down in
peace and sleep in Him, who maketh us to dwell in safety,"
yet those who are able, it invites to be like their Lord, and
"watch unto prayer," to "prevent the nights watches," or
even to "spend the night in prayer to God :" it teaches to
" use this world without abusing it," yet is St. Paul's exam
ple higher, who lived " crucified with his Saviour to the
world and the world to him :" it sheds a grace and beauty
around life's innocent enjoyments, and teaches us a Chris
tian mirthfulness, yet it points, as the higher and nobler, to
" take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in
persecutions, in distresses, for Christ's sake,* in St. Paul's
eight-fold " perils ;" " in weariness and painfulness, in hunger
and thirst, in cold and nakedness ;"} it invests with a sacred
awe " magistrates and those who are in authority," yet bids
those " who would be chief among" us, " to be as the ser
vants of all ;" it sanctifies marriage, but it places above it
those who forego wives for His sake.
But what has this, my lord, in common with Rome and
Romanism 1 The preference of celibacy, as the higher state,
is Scriptural, and as being such, is Primitive. The corrup
tion of Rome was not its preference, but its tyrannical and en
snaring and avaricious enforcement; it was in forcing (in the
» 2 Cor. xii. 10. t 2 Cor. xi. 26, 27.

143
middle ages) the Clergy to separate from their wives, and,
against the law of God, " putting those asunder, whom God
had joined ;" and this for her own aggrandizement, to make
the Clergy more dependent upon herself; it was in con
niving with the pride of parents, and entangling the reluc
tant daughters of the great with vows of celibacy, in order
to obtain their dowry for her convents ; it is in enforcing a
rigid rule of singleness upon all her clergy, and drawing
them into it before they know their own strength or weak
ness ; it is in preferring the risk of their salvation to the risk
of her own power, and casting them ruthlessly into tempta
tion, without regard to the weak, rather than abandon a rule,
which binds them all, though with an iron band, to herself.
And thus that corrupt Church has, in the minds of the un-
distinguishing, cast a reproach over that which Scripture
points out as the more excellent, and tainted it with her pride,
and avarice, and lust of power.
But why should men thus in their haste leap over to the
contrary side, and exercise a tyranny over men's consciences
in the opposite way 1 Why thus decry and revile as Popish
what is Primitive 1 Why should not celibacy be used by
those to whom it is given, to bind men's affections the more
firmly to their Lord, instead of to Rome ? Scripture says,*
" He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong unto
the Lord, how he may please the Lord ; but he that is mar
ried careth for the things of the world, how he may please
his wife." Why then cut off the aspirings of those more ar
dent minds,twho hope thus to wait upon their Lord without
distraction "? Why not be thankful for our own blessings,
without grudging to those who have foregone them for their
Lord's sake, the blessing annexed to self-denial, that they
might " give themselves," the rather, " wholly to these
things," and to the service of their Lord ] Why not con
tent ourselves to be among those who have
" Love's supporting force
To cheat the toil and cheer the way ;"
* I Cor. vii. 32, 33.

144
without envying others " in their lonely course,
(Lonely not forlorn.")—*
Why, as Rome has tried, and in vain, to stretch out the limbs
of her clergy to one uniform standard, should people among
us use the other half of the ancient tyrant's cruelty, and set
ting up a lower standard, amputate all which exceeds it 1
This forced mediocrity of attainment is unsafe as it is cruel ;
it provides no vent for those, who can find no rest in the or
dinary and even paths of life ; it drives such into Romanism,
or makes them founders of fresh schisms among ourselves.
A more generous course, which would have interposed, when
necessary, the guidance of authority, and led but not inhi
bited, might have made Wesley and Whitfield useful members
of the Church, instead of leaving them to plunge thousands
into schism, and to train off into a delusive doctrine many of
the best members of our Church. I am not advocating celiba
cy, my lord, as the general rule of the Church, nor imposing
upon others " a yoke, which I touch not with one of my
fingers :" nor have any of us so done. But surely there is
room for all ; and while the peaceful duties of the country-
pastor, can often be even better discharged, perhaps, by a
married priest, " ruling} well his own house, and having his
children in subjection in all gravity,"} a pattern of domestic
charities, there are surely duties enough in the Church, where
celibacy may have its proper place, and where there is much
room for the exhibition of the sterner grace of self-denial,
foregoing all the highest earthly joys, which cheer us on our
pilgrimage, passing alone and isolated through the world, and
visibly living only for his Master's work, and to gather in his
Master's scattered sheep. If the degraded population of
many of our great« towns are to be iecovered from tbe state
of heathenism in which they are sunk, it must be by such
preaching of the cross, wherein it shall be forced upon man's
dull senses, that they who preach it have forsaken all, to take
* Christian Year, Feast of St. John the Evangelist.
t Marriage Service. t 1 Tim. iii. 4.

145
it up, and bear it after their Lord. They must, like St. Paul,
" bear about in their bodies the marks of the Lord Jesus," the
prints of His nails, and the piercing of His side. The
preacher of repentance did not go forth " in soft clothing,"
or " living delicately," or encompassed with thejoys of life ;
and if we, as we much need, are to have men " in the spirit
and power of Elias, before the great and terrible day of the
Lord," the very circumstances of their lives must correspond
with, and declare the earnestness of their message, and that
they have left all to bear it. There is need and room for
soldiers of all sorts in the Lord's " willing army ;" why cut
off any one kind 1 why require that all His warriors should
"cumber themselves with the concerns of this life 1" why
should not some undertake a harder, so that it be, which in
the Church of Rome it is not, a " willing service V Why
again should the daughters of our land be in a manner forced
into marriage, as in the former days of Romanism they were
into celibacy, and the days of the Old Testament be brought
back upon us, and our maidens marry, in order to " take
away their reproach among men," now that He who was
looked for is come, and they can serve Him, not by beco
ming mothers of the holy line whereof He was born, but by
ministering to His members in a sanctified virgin-estate ]
Why should we not also, instead of our desultory visiting-
societies, have our Sceurs de la Charlie, whose spotless and
religious purity might be their passport amid the scenes of
misery and loathsomeness, carrying that awe about them,
which even sin feels towards undefiledness, and impressing
a healthful sense of shame upon guilt by their very presence 1
Why should marriage alone have its duties among the daugh
ters of our great, and the single estate be condemned to an
unwilling listlessness, or, left to seek undirected, and unau
thorized, and unsanctified, ways of usefulness of its own "
Here also, again, our Church, my lord, preserves her
equable moderation, not enforcing celibacy with the Roman
ist, nor despising it with the world, nor dishonoring it with
the Ultra-Protestant, as having no acceptableness nor excel
lency, but holding it forth is the result of a " gift" of Gods
19

146
to be observed and retained by those upon whom He has be
stowed it, as being His gift, but not, of necessity, to be impo
sed upon or required of any. Only in this, as in other actions
of life, she would not have us act as altogether our own
masters, but as having to give account of tbe gifts which we
have received ; she does not recommend her Clergy to marry,
but only holds it "lawful" for them " as for all other Chris
tian men ;" nor regards it as a matter of course, (as is the
case now-a-days,) but as a matter of earnest consideration ;
to be done or abstained from, " at their own discretion, as
they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness."*
Such, my lord, are all the topics, which an anxious, though
not, I must think, an enlightened jealousy for the purity of our
Church, has collected together, whereon to found its warning
against what it, from its point of view, must consider as an
approximation to Romanism. There has indeed been not a
little carelessness in these charges, even among those who ap
pear to have taken most pains,} partly from a natural inabili
ty to understand a system, which was new to them, partly
from an impatience not unnatural, at being disturbed in the
quiet possession of one, which had become extensively popu
lar, which they had accustomed themselves to consider as a
proof of the greater spirituality and enlightenment of the pre
sent age, and to contrast with the darkness of early times.
They had, too, been wont to declaim in a popular way against
Popery, without giving themselves much pains to understand
its true character, or whether their own ground were ten-able
against it ; their disappointment at the abandonment of any
such positions is much the same as was felt by the Romanists
at Courayer's defence of our orders ; it takes out of their
hands a convenient weapon, and they feel that they must
look out for another, or at least their grasp of this seems less
secure than before. Then, also, they do not understand the
relation which our Church really holds to that of Rome ;
there seems to lurk at the bottom some suspicion that we set
up a new Church at the Reformation, instead of merely
purifying our ancient one ; that we separated ourselves from
- Art. xxxii. t Essays on the Church.

147
Rome, instead of simply denying the undue authority of her
bishop over us ; that we "went out from" her, and are res
ponsible for so doing ; that we must have reasons, to show why
we do not return to her. Not holding the doctrine of Apos
tolical succession, they do not realize to themselves our posi
tion as an independent Church, that even independently of
the question of our relative purity, we have no more occasion
to go over to them than they to us ; that individuals among
us are bound to remain in the Church, through whose minis
try they have been made members of Christ. They have not
been accustomed to apply the argument to dissent, much less
can they to Romanism, which comes with so much more
of system ; nay, they have in many cases disabled themselves
from so doing, by acting on a contrary principle towards other
Churches ; they have not been taught that affectionateness
to their own Mother, which should instinctively hold them by
her side ; they have not learned to regard their Bishops as
the representatives of the Apostles, and to cleave to them as
the centres of unity; and so they must needs have some
strong, hard arguments, to satisfy themselves. Any diminu
tion of these unsettles them, as having built on no solid founda
tion, except a general and sometimes exaggerated notion of
the corruptions which Rome has actually and formally sanc
tioned. Hence one who cannot see that Rome is the Anti
christ, seems to them to betray them into its hands.
And not only so, but even the very selection of certain to
pics for our controversy with Rome, has been thought to in
volve the abandonment of the rest. It so happened that the
same writer, in two distinct places recommended to take prac
tical grounds, leaving abstract arguments, or subjects which
(as Transubstantiation) cannot be discussed without pain.
Two independent opponents fell in, the one with the one es
say in which seven such subjects were named, the other, wri
ting against the Tracts, had not read this Tract, though ex
pressly " on the controversy with Rome," but another in
which four only were selected for illustration ; both, however,
came to the same conclusion, that because only four or se
ven happened to be put forward, therefore on all other points

148
we hold with Rome. The argument certainly proves too
much, unless seven and four are the same; and it is some
what characteristic of this hasty proceeding, that one of the
Tracts* of the first year took up the same fourteen points, up
on which Bishop Hall insists in " The Old Religion," as
" some of our irreconcilable differences with Rome as she is,"
and having so done, adds, "I might add other points in
which also I protest against the Church of Rome, but I think
it enough to make my confession in Hall's order, and so leave
it." On the same ground, any concession that Rome is a true
Church, is to them equivalent to saying that we should re
turn under her shadow, forgetting what Bishop Hall states
as the common sentiment of Divines, though in his days also
it brought much declamation against him from Ultra-Protes
tants. " That which Rome holds with us, makes it a Church :
that which it obtrudes upon us, makes it heretical ; the truth
of principles makes it one, the error and impiety of additions
makes it irreconcilable, &c. Look on the face therefore of
the Roman Church, she is our's, she is God's. Look on her
back, she is quite contrary, Antichristian : More plainly,
Rome doth both hold the foundation, and desiroy it ; she
holds it directly, destroys it by consequent ; in that she holds
U she is a true Church, howsoever impured ; in that she des
troys it, (what semblance soever she makes,) she is a Church
of malignants. If she did not altogether hold it, she should be
either no Church, or devilish, but now that she professes to
hold those things directly which by inferences she closely
overthrows, she is a truly visible Church, but an unsound
one."} When the time of trial shall come, it will be seen which
principles most favor Rome, the Catholic or the Ultra-Pro
testant.} We have seen those in our own Church, who ha-
*No. 38. p. 11. The passage is given in the Appendix, No. 14.
t Advertisment prefixed to the Reconciler: An Epistle pacificatory of the
seeming differences of opinion concerning the trueness and visibility of the
Roman Church.
t In Scotland no member of the Church has fallen offto Romanism or any of
the heresies which have distracted it ; in Edinburgh alone, the Romanists
boast of 100 converts from Presbyterianism yearly.

149
ving held extreme Ultra-Protestant notions, have become con
verts to Rome, of whom she has much boasted. "Excuse
me," says Archbishop Bramhall,* " for telling the truth
plainly ; many who have had their education among Secta
ries and non-conformists, have apostated to Rome, but few or
no tight Episcopal Divines. Hot water freezelh the soonest."
" Unthinking people," says Bishop Sanderson,} . . . . " are
carried away with mere noise and pretences, and hope these
will secure them against the fears of Popery, who talk with
most passion and with least understanding against it ; where
as no persons do really give them greater advantages than
these do. For, where they meet only with intemperate rail
ings, and gross "misunderstandings of the state of the contro
versies between them and us, (which commonly go together,)
the most subtle priests let such alone to spend their rage and
fnry ; and when the heat is over, they will calmly endeavor
to let them see how grossly they have been deceived in some
things, and so will more easily make them believe, they are
as much deceived in all the rest. And thus the East and
West may meet at last, and the most furious antagonists may
become some of the easiest converts. This I do really fear
will be the case of many thousands among us, who now pass
for the most zealous Protestants ; if ever, which God forbid,
that religion should come to be uppermost in England. It is,
therefore, of mighty consequence for preventing the return
of Popery, that men rightly understand what it is. For,
when they are as much afraid of an innocent ceremony as of
real idolatry, and think they can worship images and adore
the Host on the same grounds that they may use the sign of
the Cross, or kneel at the Communion, when they are
brought to see their mistake in one case, they will suspect
themselves deceived in the other also. . . . When they find un
doubted practices of the Ancient Church condemned as Popish
and Antichristian by their teachers, they must conclude Popery
io be of much greater antiquity than really it is ; and when they
can trace it so very near the Apostle's times, they will soon believe
* Vindication of Grotius, Disc. 3. quoted Catena. Tracts, lxxiv. p. 14.
t Unreasonableness of Separation, Pref. quoted ib. p. 25.

150
it settled by the Apostles themselves. For it will be very hard
to persuade any considering men, that the Christian Church
should degenerate so soon, so unanimously, so universally, as
it must do, if Episcopal government, and the use of some sig
nificant ceremonies, were any parts of that apostacy."
I have now, I trust, said enough, my lord, to allay in some
degree the strange alarms, which seem to have almost scared
people "from their propriety." In this alarm it is not strange
that their fears should have been increased by the compli
ments bestowed by Romanists upon what we have put forth
as the Anglican system. In some Romanists, this may have
been sincere, for if they can find Romanism in antiquity, as
easily of course may they find it in the Anglican system,
which wishes to be a faithful representative of antiquity ; or
if Ultra-Protestants think what we are persuaded is the sys
tem of our Church an approximation to Romanism, so may
the Romanists, as contrasted with Ultra-Protestantism ; and
those who accuse us of a Romanist tendency, are, of course,
animating them to more vigorous efforts against our Church,
by holding out these delusive prospects of co-operation within
her own camp. These may be sincere, for not many years
past, when on the establishment of the new university at
Bonn, a place of worship was set apart for the Lutherans,
some Romanists expressed to an eminent Lutheran theolo
gian, their joy, that they were returning to the bosom of the
true Church. The ground of this hope was, that they had
regular, though not daily, service, which they had not before.
The Romanist regards all Church-order as belonging to him,
disorder to those not in communion with his Church ; and
so, any increase of order seems to him a return to his
Church; as, in truth, a Church which has daily service, and
weekly Communions, has something in common with his
Church, which a body that neglects these has not ; but only
so far in common, as she agrees with antiquity ; for our
Church, if she realize her weekly communions, has a privi
lege which, in that of Rome, the laity have not, nor a daily
service in a language which they understand.
But though some, especially the Romanist laity, may be

151
really misled, charity cannot suppose that those who are
versed in the controversy between their Church and our's?
are sincere in their congratulations on this revival of Catho
lic truth, which had slept among us. They know too well
who are their true foes ; they even, now and then,* let some
signs of annoyance escape them, in the very midst of their
assumed ease and joy, like the Spartan boy, whose entrails
the stolen fox was gnawing ; they feel that their own game
is being spoiled ; they had hoped to come upon us unpre
pared, or armed with Ultra-Protestant«weapons, which had
never been proved in any real conflict ; and they are morti
fied at seeing us donning the ancient armor, which has stood
proof against them in many a conflict, and which they have
never been able to pierce. They had hoped, by aid of what
is really ancient in their system, to bring back among us
their own modern corruptions ; by aid of what is Catholic,
to introduce what is peculiar to Rome : they are annoyed at
finding the posts pre-occupied, that members of our Church
are conscious of her position, that she possesses stored up for
her children every thing which they could hold out as an in
ducement to them to fall away to Rome. And so they have
resorted to the corrupt policy which they practised of old
against our Church, and would make men suspicious of the
truth, as independent of their corruptions, knowing that if
the truth be removed, men must fall sooner or later to their
errors. If they can but bring our people out of the straight
path, they doubt not that they must fall into their nets -t if
they but set them against the pure truth, they must receive it
drugged with other ingredients. Rome has enough of truth
to prevail every where, except against Catholic truth itself ;
it has been gaining upon the bodies which have severed them
selves from our Church ; it knows well what are weak de
fences and what are strong ; it would draw us out of our
strong-holds, and taunt us to abandon them and make us
suspicious of them, as if they belonged to her. " It} is a
* In the Dublin Review.
+ Crosthwaite, Sermons on the Christian Ministry and the Establishment

152
matter of history, that some of the first and most active pro
moters of Puritanism, and afterwards of Non-conformity,
were Roman Catholic priests, who received orders, t r pre
tended to receive orders in our Church, that in the disguise
of friends they might more effectually disturb and smile it.
These men did not dare to broach the peculiar tenets of their
Church, but they endeavored to disunite and decompose the
fabric of our unity by infusing doubts and scruples ; by de
crying the Ecclesiastical discipline of our Church as an in
fringement of Christian liberty ; by objecting to our Liturgy
and Cathedral service as formal and popish ; by making their
hearers to join in more spiritual and exciting devotions ; and
thus they gradually paved the way for actual separation and
dissent, and for all the calamities which fell upon our coun
try, and from which we have never yet recovered. There is
also positive proof, that for a very considerable period, Je
suits were regularly educated on the continent, and sent over
to these countries to enter into the ministry, not only of our
Church, but of every sect in the nation." — Rome is un
changed ; only her task has become easier, since she then
had to set people against what were the acknowledged tenets
of the Church, and to stir up men's minds to disaffection
against their Church ; now our Church is divided against
herself, and a large portion of her sons and ministers have
unlearnt in some respects the teaching of their Church, and
are ready to disown it. But the line taken by Rome is the
same. As her emissaries then declaimed against the use of
the cross, " the service of the Church," " the communion
table placed altar-ways," as Popish, so now would she cre
ate a suspicion against those who vindicate the ancient
meaning of that service, and who speak of the " altar"
or the " cross," as if such belonged to her ; and they who
have much in their mouths the craftiness and subtlety of
of Christianity, p. 124. In the Appendix, Note B. p. 143 sqq. is much cu
rious evidence carefully brought together on the part which disguised Ro
manists took in preaching up Puritanism, and declaiming against the Church
as Popish.

153
Rome, are simple enough to suppose that she would thus
lay open her own movements, and set people on their guard
against those who were preparing the way for her. No, my
lord ! those who are really doing her work, she allows to
work on in peace ; and by aid of the daily press, labors to
spread their opinions, and to identify them with the system of
our Church ; so shall she, she well knows, gain an easy
victory ! She can afford to have Rome evil spoken of, if but
the true Anglican system be disparaged also. It is but the
exchange of the fable, the wolf-cubs for the shepherd-dogs.
" It* was again replied, yourselves have preached so much
against Rome and his holiness, that Rome and her Roman
ists will be little the better for that change ; but it was an
swered, you shall have mass sufficient for 100,000 in a short
space, and the governors never the wiser." Let Rome but
undermine the credit of the English doctrines as papistical,
and she would have no difficulty in erecting her own upon
the ruins. For the mind yearns toward the truth, and can
not wander about for ever, not knowing where to rest the
sole of its foot ; if she misses a " sure resting-place," she
will afterwards take up with whatever seems least likely to
betray her footing ; if she miss of truth in its purest and most
awful form, she will afterwards be too glad to embrace it,
amid whatever corruptions she may find it.
But we feel confident that it will not be so among us ; the
cloud of suspicion that now lowers about us will, with a little
patience, disperse ; it is a good omen that we are attacked by
the same who are joined in an unnatural union against our
Church, Romanist and Dissenter and Latitudinarian ; and if
to these are, for the present, added many well-meaning mem
bers of our own Church, yet this had its origin in some natu
ral misconception only, and will subside of itself, when they
see our meaning more fully. Their prejudice lies not against
the truths which we hold, but against certain consequences
thought to be derived from them, or a negative way, in which
they were in the last century held by many ; or they see not
how to reconcile them with other truths which are indisputa
ble, or with tenets which they have been taught to think so ;
* Romanist Consultations, in letter of Archbishop Bramhall, ib. p. 156.
20

154
or they fear their effects on holiness of life; or they know
not how to distinguish them from Romish corruptions of
them ; or they may be deterred by what of human infirmity
may have cleaved to our statements. These and the like
take time to remove.
But their fears will subside, and that the sooner, I doubt
not, for the very extravagance of this temporary panic ; and
they who have been the most alarmed at the picture which
periodicals have drawn of the principles put forward by u»
in the name of our Church, will embrace them the most
fully when they learn their real character. They fear not
our principles or practices, but principles or praclices which
we also should fear as well as they, and which have been
given out for our's ; they dread not the effec's of our prin
ciples, but effects which they have been led to associate
with them, and which we should deprecate as truly ; and
when they see that veneration for antiquity can be combined
with thankfulness for the purity of our own Church ;* that
our views on Justification lead men of themselves to cast
them on their Redeemer, justifying them freely, and keep
ing them justified by His Spirit, forgiving them freely, and
crowning freely His own gifts in them ; that our statement
of sin after Baptism lead them the rather to His fulness of
mercy, and amid acts of self-abasement, or self-chastening,
or charity, to look not to these acts but to Him, to seek for
their peace at His hand, whether directly or through the Or
dinances of the Church, not from themselves, or from their
works ; that our views on the Sacraments tend to humble
the Priest,} while they exalt the Priestly Office, and teach
men not to rest on any opus operatum, but to guard and keep
themselves the more diligently, because God has deigned so
* See Index to Appendix, v. Anglo-Catholics, and Tract No. 86.
t The confessions of the Priests in the Ancient Liturgies, previous to the
celebration of Divine Offices, imply very deep humiliation. It is only the
corruptions of the Church of Rome, which tend to infuse spiritual pride into
the priesthood ; the true doctrine humbles him. The following is the begin
ning of a confession in the Euchologion, to be said by the Priest for himself
in the Baptismal service. (Assem. Cod. Lit. t. ii. p. 133, 4 )
" O compassionate and merciful God, who searchest the heart a'nd reins,
and Alone knowest the secrets of men, there is nothing hidden from Thee,

165
to sanctify them ; that the doctrine of the Apostolical suc
cession tends to order and submissiveness within, and pro
motes charity and compassion for those without ; — they will,
we doubt not, examine the teaching of their Church more
dispassionately than hitherto, and find it, in the main outline,
to be what we have declared it.
Already an earnest of this has been given ; and the almost
electric rapidity with which thnse principles are confessedly
passing from one breast to another, from one end of England
to ihe other, the sympathy which they find in the sister or
daughter Churches of Scotland and America, might well
make men suspect that there is more than human agency at
work ; this indeed has been acknowledged ; and they who
have not seen God's hand in it have attributed it to Satan ;•
yet will they too in time, we trust, see its fruits to be good,
and acknowledge that Satan is not " divided against himself;"
and now also they attribute to him, we hope, not the actual
workings, but rather those which they apprehend. A note
has been struck (I may speak, my lord, on this subject, as not
speaking boastfully, since it was not I who thought of striking
it,) which has vibrated through every part of the frame of
our Church, attesting at once the unity of the body, which
so responded, and I hat itself had been attuned to it by a high
er unseen Hand. They who struck the note were but as the
bow in the hand of Him, who blends into harmony men's
discordant wills, and out of their varying affections brings
forth one concordant whole. Others have essayed to do it
before and as faithfully, and under circumstances which
seemed more favorable, yet none answered ; " they piped,
but all things are naked and open to Thine eyes. Thou who knowest all of
me, cast me not away, nor turn Thy face from me, but overlook my offences
at this hour, Th m th.it overlooksst the sins of men on repentance. Wash
away the fihh of my body and the defilement of my soul, and sanctify me
wholly and entirely with Thy invisible power and spiritual right hand, lest
announcing freedom to others, and imparting it through the faith of Thy un
speakable love for men, I myself should be a castaway, as the servant of sin.
Nay, O Lord, who only art good and compassionate, let me not be turned
away ashamed, but send forth to me power from on high, and strengthen me
to this ministry."
* Essays, p. 278, sqq.

156
but none danced ; they mourned, but none wept :" and now
that some of the doctrines had seemed to be gradually ex
piring, and those who had handed them down amid a forget
ful generation, were drawing toward the close of their labors,
the closed ear has been unsealed, and the sleeping sympathy
been awakened ; showing in both cases whose it is to " wa
ken* the ear to hear as the learned ;" perhaps as the pre
lude of a time, when more than hitherto, " the eyes} of
the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall
be unstopped." For all things seem to be drawing one
way. The simultaneous tendency towards a more Church-
feeling among ourselves, among bodies separated from us, or
again in Germany and Denmark feeling after it, (although in
the absence of a Church-system which has been preserved
to us, not knowing where to find it,) the increased energy of
Romanism itself, (at least in France and America, where it
exists in its least corrupted form,) all point to some farther
coming of the Redeemer's kingdom, when what is done shall
be done in His Name, not in man's ; by His Church, and by
individuals as members of it, not in themselves. The watch
word for our re-union is that, wherein God had made us
one in Himself, His Church ; not as an establishment, or as
unestablished, — these are but accidents in her existence,
and to be dealt with according to the Apostolic rule,
" wherein any have been called, therein let him remain with
God," in England let us not seek to be unestablished, nor
in the United States to be established — not as an instrument
of temporal or spiritual power, but as a well-ordered society
invested with spiritual gifts, and having a spiritual existence,
and united with its Invisible Head, the channel of His graces
to us, and wherein we are in Him, wherein " God hath set,}
first, Apostles" (and as their successors, the Bishops,) " se
condarily prophets, thirdly teachers," " for the perfecting of
the saints for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the
body of Christ, till we all come, in the unity of the faith, and of
the knowledge of the Son of God unto, [one] perfect man unto
* Is. 1. 4. t lb. xxxv. 5. t 1 Cor. xii. 28.

157
the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ."* Disuni
on has been the bane of the Church, ever since suspicion and
separation fell upon the Eastern and Western Churches ; at
tempts outwardly to cement what has been so severed have
ever failed : so an inanimate body may be cemented, not a liv
ing and spiritual body : but now that men's spirits in different
countries seem to be drawn — not directly together or to com
pass unions of Churches by man's arrangement or human
wisdom, but to converge — towards One common Centre,
wherein all shall find themselves united ; when men severally
mourn over the decay in which the City of God lies, and
" pity} the dust thereof," then may we hope that " the hea
then shall fear the Name of the Lord, and all the kings of the
eanh His glory," then "the Lord shall build up Zion, He
shall appear in His glory ;" and our " night of heaviness"
shall be past, and " joy come" in the " dawning of the morn
ing" which the Chrisiian Church has so long " watched for."
When we feel the miseries of our disunion, and humble our
selves for our share of it, then may we hope that He " will
bind up the breaches," and the " One shepherd" will restore
the fences of our "one fold," when we have learned to long
for it.
To you, my lord, in whatever degree we might hope that
we were in this our portion of the Vineyard but the lowest
and meanest laborers towards this glorious restoration, we
owe much real thanks, as well for the fatherly encourage
ment which you have given us, as for the warning you have
conveyed to those especially, who have learned of us. It has
been a singular mercy of God to us hiiherto, that no extra
vagance has connected itself wiih the doctrines to which we
have claimed attention. Such had perhaps never been the
case at any former restoration of forgotten doctrine. It is a
familiar argument in such cases, that " the abuse is no argu
ment against the use," and the very frequency of the maxim
shows how closely the abuse attends upon the use. When
a system now very popular was commenced, it hatl often to
apologize for the extravagancies of those to whom it was a
* Eph. ii. 12. t Ps. cii. 13—16.

158
passage to dissent ; and even of late years, it has not been
unfrequent that even Ministers of this class have fallen off in
to schism : to us, they have been able at present to object
only what they deem a tendency towards Romanism, but have
not shown any case in which that tendency has been follow
ed out. And this, as we thankfully acknowledge it to have
been a great mercy of God, so has He doubtless in part there
by brought it about, that these doctrines have in the first in
stance mainly taken root in the University, which nurtured
ourselves. For the solid and real and self-denying training
and discipline which has made this University what it is, has
prepared the minds of those committed to her, to receive
simply and solidly and practically, the Catholic system, when
they became acquainted with it. Catholic truth is indeed so
intrinsically practical, that it is less exposed than any human
system, however apparently spiritual, to be received as a mere
theory. Even where it has been embraced without any con
sciousness of sacrifices involved, it has in well-prepared minds
gradually drawn toward the shore those whom it had inclosed
in its net; they contentedly found their liberty circumscribed ;
the submission to rightful authority characteristic of the true
Catholic system repressed to individual tendencies ; it wound
itself around them ; encircled them with its solemn rounds of
duties and devotions and abstinences, thwarting the natural
will, and sub.ltiing self, calming the passions and elevating
the affections ; not acting turbidly, but rather unloosing limb
by limb from their enthralments, and gently moulding and
fashioning them to perform the fuller measures of the duties
of the Gospel. It is of the very nature of Catholic truth to
merge self, and with it the extravagancies of self, in the sense
of being a member of Christ in the Communion of His glo
rious Saints ; to suppress thoughts, as if any were, doing
great thing';, by the sense of doing them under authority and
guidance. One has begun probably by one portion of the
system, another by another, as Providence guided his dispo
sition or his circumstances; yet as he took up, one by one,
increasing duties, he found himself but filling up voids in him
self ; his unevenness or inequalities softened ; inconsisten-

159
cies subdued, and himself by each such approximation, only
rendered less out of harmony with the system in which he
was placed; not thinking himself " some great one," but
rather "an unprofitable servant," who was slowly learning
to "do that which it was his duty to do."
But although such, by trie mercy of God, has been (he
course of things hitherto, and one may appeal with confidence
to the general character of our younger members, who
whether consciously or unconsciously have been absorbed
into the system, that this change has, as a whole, manifested*
itself in a subdued and chastened spirit, we cannot expect
that if the purifying obloquy, under which we now lie, should
be withdrawn, there will not be found those who will embrace
that system intellectually only, or take the shadow for the
substance, and so bring evil repute upon it. Satan has ever
sown tares among the wheat ; and the parable seems by its-
frequent fulfilment to have the nature of a prophecy, that it
should ever be so. If the Church be that great instrument
of blessing, which Scripture implies, and which we in our
Creeds profess, one must expect that Satan will in varying
ways endeavor to seduce men from realizing it, and to con
tinue their depreciation of it. It were too bold to hope that
the truths now anew recognized, will not be overcast by
some clouds, which the god of this world may be permitted
to interpose. Enough, if their general influence be to warm
and kindle. Even of Divine Grace it has been said, that
" like the sun, whom it does not soften, it hardens ;" much
more then of any form of Divine Truth.
It were then nothing, whereat to be dismayed, were Satan
allowed in some cases, to pervert these doctrines, and mis
lead into Popery some who had partially embraced them.
There was a Simon Magus among the first baptized Chris
tians ; the Anabaptists and the Socinians were a produce of
the reformation. We are conscious also, that the press is
but a rude way of disseminating truth ; it conveys it on the
whole, but unadapted to particular cases; and so it often hap
pens, as in the case of human medicines, that persons will
misapply them, those who need them will neglect them, others

160
use them wrongly, or employ them, while continuing in habits
of life, which neutralize them, or make them pernicious. In
a sounder state of the Church, where all the members of
our flocks would have spiritual advisers, and the advisers
themselves be more carefully trained, this evil would be much
mitigated; meanwhile, the system will bear the blame of
what it would provide against, would men but adopt it com
pletely. This is said only for fear "offences should come," and
some be scandalized at them ; for the present, the influence
of these truihs has been rather exercised in the contrary and
their rightful direction ; furnishing a resting-place from Ro
manism to some who were wandering thither, and recovering
others from it to the bosom of our English branch of the
Church : meanwhile we commit cheerfully our way unto
Him who has thus far prospered His truth ; trusting, not in
the Church system, but in Him who ordered it ; not in the
force of truth only, but in Him who is the Truth ; not in the
Church, but in Him who is " its Saviour," and " Who gave
Himself for it, that He might cleanse it by the washing of
water in the word, and present it to Himself a glorious
Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but
that it might be holy and without blemish." That your lord
ship's endeavors for the good of that portion of the Church
committed unto you, may be prospered, is our daily prayer:
to obey your godly admonitions, and to follow your guidance,
is our earnest desire. May He, who has called you to this
high office, make it hereafter your crown and joy, and requite
you, as well for your labors and anxieties, as for your kind
ness to those who labor under you in the Vineyard.
With true respect for your sacred character, and (if it be
not too bold) affectionate acknowledgment of your lordship's
unvarying kindness,
I have the honor to remain,
Your Lordship's faithful Servant,
E. B. PUSEY.
Christ Church,
Feast of St. Matthias, 1839.

APPENDIX

EITRACTS

FROM THE

TRACTS FOR THE TIMES,
THE
LYRA APOSTOLTCA, AND
OTHER PUBLICATIONS j
SHOWING THAT
TO OPPOSE ULTRA-PROTESTANTISM IS NOT
TO FAVOR POPERY,

EXTRACTS,

EXTRACTS FROM THE TRACTS FOR THE TIMES.
1. " It is certain that the Bishops and Clergy in England and Ire.
land remained the same as before the separation ; and that it was
these, with the aid of the civil power, who delivered the Church of
those kingdoms from the yoke of papal tyranny and usurpation;
while at the same time they gradually removed from the minds of
the people various superstitious opinions and practices which had
grown up during the middle ages." — No. 15, p. 4.
2. " That there is not a word in Scripture about our duty to obey
the Pope, is quite clear. The Papists, indeed, sav that he is the suc
cessor of St. Peter; and that, therefore, he is the head of all Bish
ops, because St. Peter bore rule over the other Apostles. But
though the Bishops of Rome" were often called the successors of St.
Peter in the early Church, yet every other Bishop had the same title.
And though it be true that St. Peter was the foremost of the Apos
tles, that does not prove that he had any dominion over them.
. . . And so Rome has ever had what is called the primacy of
the Christian Churches, but it has not, therefore, any right to inter
fere in their internal administration." — Ibid. p. 5.
3. " But it may be said, that we have really no valid orders, as
having received them from an heretical Church. .True, Rome may
be so considered now ; but she was not heretical in the primitive
ages." — Ibid. p. 10.
4. "It may be said, that we threw blame on Luther, and others
of the foreign Reformers, who did act without the authority of their
Bishops. But we reply, that it has always been agreeable to the
principles of the Church, that, if a Bishop taught and upheld what
was contrary to the orthodox faith, the Clergy and people were not
bound to submit, but were obliged to maintain the true religion." —
Ibid. p. 11.
5. " While they [the writer and others] consider that the revival
of this portion of truth is especially adapted to break up existing
parties in the Church, and to form instead a bond of union among all
who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity ; they believe that
nothing but these neglected doctrines, faithfully preached, will re
press That extension of Popery, for which the ever-multiplying divi
sions of the religious world are too clearly preparing the way." —
Advertisement to Vol. i. p. 5.

4 EXTRACTS FROM
6. " You have some misgivings, it seems, lest the doctrine I have
been advocating ' should lead to Popery.' I will not, by way of an
swer, say, that the question is not whether it will lead to Popery, but
whether it is in ihe Bible ; because it would bring the Bible and
Popery into one sentence, and seem to imply the possibility of a
' communion' between ' light and darkness.' No ; it is the very
enmity I feel against the Papistical corruptions of the Gospel, which
leads me to press upon you a doctrine of Scripture, which we are
sinfully surrendering, and the Church of Rome has faithfully retained.
"How comes it that a system so unscriptural as the Popish makes
converts 1 Because it has in it an element of truth and comfort
amid its falsehoods. And the true way of opposing it is not to give
up to them that element, which God's providence has preserved to
us also, thus basely surrendering ' the inheritance of our fathers,' but
to claim it as our own." — No. 20, p. 1.
7. " Truly, when one surveys the grandeur of their system, a sigh
arises in the thoughtful mind, to think that we should be separate
from them ; Ciim talis sis, utinam noster esses ! — But, alas ! an
union is impossible.* Their communion is infected with hetero
doxy ¦; we are bound to flee it as a pestilence. They have estab
lished a lie in the place of God's truth; and, by their claim of immu
tability in doctrine, cannot undo the sin they have committed.
They cannot repent. Popery must be destroyed ; it cannot be re
formed."— Ibid. p. 3.
8. " He has wonderfully preserved our Church as a true branch
of the Church Universal, yet withal preserved it free from doctrinal
heresy. It is Catholic and Apostolic, yet not Papistical. . . . De
pend upon it, to insist on the doctrine of the visible Church is not to
favor the Papists, it is to do them the most serious injury. It is to
deprive them of their only strength."— Ibid. p. 4.
9. " — Though it may please God that we should suffer for a
while — as we suffered, together with good King Charles, at the hands
of the dissenters ; as we suffered in the days of bloody Queen
Mary, at the hands of the Roman Catholics ; as we suffered during
the first three hundred years after Christ, at the hands of the Hea
thens and the Jews, yet — eventually, triumph will await us." —
No. 23, p. 3.
10. "As to the manner of the presence of the body and blood of
our Lohd in the Blessed Sacrament, we that are Protestant and Re
formed, according to the ancient Catholic Church, do not search into
the manner of it with perplexing inquiries. . . . Had the
Romish maintainers of Transubstantiation done the same, they would
not have determined and decreed, and then imposed as an article of
faith absolutely necessary to salvation, a manner of presence, newly
by them invented, under pain of the most direful curse; and there
would have been in the Church less wrangling, and more peace and
* Vid. Inf. Extract 50.

TRACTS FOR THE TIMES. 5
unity than now is." — No. 27, p. 2. — Bishop Cosin on Transubstan
tiation. 11. " It is vain that they bring Scripture to defend this their stu
pendous doctrine [transubstantiation] ; and it is not true, what they
so often and so confidently affirm, that the Universal Church hath
always constantly owned it, being it was not so much as heard
of in the Chursh for many ages, and hath been but lately approved
by the Pope's authority in the Councils of Lateran and Trent." —
Ibid. p. 16.
12. " The history of the Papists is this. Many centuries ago,
strange and corrupt notions and practices prevailed in many of the
Churches in Europe. Among others, people thought the Pope or
Bishop of Rome was gifted with authority from Heaven to control all
the branches of the Ctiurch on earth, and that his word was to be of
more weight than even the Holy Scriptures themselves. But about
three hundred years ago, the Bishops of the Church of England saw
these errors in their true light." — No. 30, p. 5.
13. "Clericus. Say more definitely what the charge against me is.
Laicus. That your religious system, which I have heard some
persons style the Apostolical, and which I so name by way of desig
nation, is like that against which our forefathers protested at the Re
formation. C. I will admit it, i. e., if I may reverse your statement, and say
that the Popish system resembles it. Indeed, how could it be other
wise, seeing that all corruptions of the truth must be like the truth
which they corrupt, else they would not persuade mankind to take
them instead of it V'—No. 38, p. 1.
14. "Be assured of this — no party will be more opposed to our
doctrine, if it ever prospers and makes noise, than the Roman party.
This has been proved before now. In the seventeenth century,
the theology of the divines of the English Church was substantially
the same as ours js ; and it experienced the full hostility of the
Papacy. It was the true Via Media ; Rome sought to block up
that way, as fiercely as the Puritans. History tells us this. In a
few words, then, before we separate, I will state some of my
irreconcileable differences with Rome as she is ; and in stating her
errors, 1 will closely follow the order observed by Bishop Hall in
his treatise on The Old Rel,igion,whose Protestantism is unquestion-
I consider that it is unscriptural to say with the Church of Rome
that ' we are justified by inherent righteousness.'
That it is unscriptural that ' the good works of a man justified do
truly merit eternal life.' '
That the doctrine of transubstantiation, as not being revealed, but
a theory of man's devising, is profane and impious.
That the denial of the cup to the laity, is a bold and unwarranted
encroachment on their privileges as Christ's people.
That the sacrifice of masses, as ft has been practised in the Roman

6 EXTRACTS FROM
Church, is without foundation in Scripture or antiquity, and there
fore blasphemous and dangerous.
That the honor paid to images is very full of peril, in the case of
the uneducated, that is, of the great part of Christians.
That indulgences, as in use, are a gross and monstrous invention
of later times.
That the received doctrine of purgatory is at variance with Scrip.
ture, cruel to the better sort of Christians, and administering deceit
ful comfort to the irreligious.
That the practice of celebrating divine service in an unknown
tongue is a great corruption.
That forced confession is an unauthorised and dangerous practice.
That the direct invocation of saints is a dangerous practice, a3
tending to give, often actually giving, to creatures the honor and re
liance due to the Creator alone.
That there are not seven sacraments.
That the Roman doctrine of Tradition is unscriptural.
That the claim of the Pope to be universal bishop is against
Scripture and antiquity.
I might add other points in which also I protest against the Church
of Rome, but I think it enough to make my confession in Hall's
order, and so leave it." — Ibid. p. 11.
15. " Rome has to confess her Papal corruptions, and her cruelty
towards those who refuse to accept them." — No. 8, p. 4.
16. " The Church has in a measure forgotten its own principles,
as declared in the sixteenth century ; nay, under stranger circum
stances, as far as I know, than have attended -any of the errors and
corruptions of the Papists. Grievous as are their declensions from
primitive usage, I never heard in any case of their practice directly
contradicting their services ; whereas we go on lamenting once a
year the absence of discipline in our Church, yet do not even dream
of taking any one step towards its restoration." — No. 41, p. 1.
17. " Do you not suppose that there are multitudes both among
clergy and laity at the present day, who disparage not indeed
Christ's merits, but the sacraments he has appointed ? and if so, is
not their error so far the same in kind as that of the Romish Church —
the preferring Abana and Pharpar to the waters of Jordan ? . . Hap.
pily we are not as yet so corrupted as at the era of the Reforma
tion ; . . . . yet is not the mode of viewing the subject I refer to a
growing one, and how does it differ from the presumption of the
Papists ? In both cases the power of Christ's sacraments is denied ;
in the one case by the unbelief of restlessness and fear, in the other
by the unbelief of piofaneness." — Ibid. p. 2.
18. " Our Reformers in the sixteenth century did not touch the
existing documents of doctrine; there was no occasion ; they kept
the creeds as they were ; but they added protests against the cor
ruptions of faith, worship, and discipline, which had grown up round
them."— Ibid. p. 3.

TRACTS FOR THE TIMES. 7
19. "While Dissenters are exclusive on the one hand, Papists
are so on the other. The council of Trent converted certain theo
logical opinions into (what they maintained to be) Catholic verities.
This was wrongt whoever did it ; but it is some comfort to find, that
the body that thus became uncatholic, was not the Church Catholic
itself."— No. 61, p. 3.
20. " This case [departure from antiquity] had been instanced
even before Vincentius's time, in the history of the Arians. In our
own day it is fulfilled in the case of the Church of Rome, which in
deed has not erred vitally, as the Arians did, nor has infected with
its errors the whole Church, yet has to answer for very serious cor
ruptions, which it has not merely attempted, but managed to estab-
lish in a great part of the Churches of Christendom. Here then
apply Vincentius's test — Antiquity ; and the Church of Rome is con
victed of unsoundness, as fully as those other sects among us which
have already been submitted to the trial." — Records of the Church,
No. XXIV., p. 3.
21. " How miserably contrasted are we with the One Holy Apos-
tolic Church of old, which ' serving with one consent,' spoke a ' pure
language !' And now that Rome has added, and we have omitted
in the catalogue of sacred doctrines, what is left to us but to turn
our eyes sorrowfully and reverently to those ancient times, and, with
Bishop Ken, make it our profession to live and ' die in the faith of
the Catholic Church before the division of the East and West?' " —
Ibid. No. XXV., p. 11.
22. " The following are selected by way of specimen of those
practical grievances to which Christians are subjected in the Roman
communion : — 1. The denial of the cup to the laity. 2. The neces
sity of the priest's intention to the validity of the sacraments. 3.
The necessity of confession. 4. The unwarranted anathemas of
the Roman Church. 5. Purgatory. 6. Invocation of saints. 7.
Images. "—No. 71, p. 9, et seq.
23. " We cannot consent to confine ourselves to a mere reference
to the text of the Tridentine decrees, as Romanists would have us,
apart from the teaching of their doctors, and the practice of the
Church, which are surely the legitimate comment upon them. . . . The
conduct of the Catholics during the troubles of Arianism affords us
a parallel case. They interpreted the language of the Creeds by
the professed opinions of their framers. They would not allow er
ror to be introduced into the Church by an artifice. . . . Apply this
to the case of Romanism. We are not indeed allowed to take at ran
dom the accidental doctrine or practice of this or that age, as an ex-
planation of the decrees of the Latin Church ; but when we see
clearly that certain of these decrees have a natural tendency to pro.
duce certain evils, when we see those evils actually existing far and
wide in that Church, in different nations and ages, existing especially
where the system is allowed to act most freely — under such circum
stances surely it is not unfair to consider our case parallel to that of

8 EXTRACTS FROM
the Catholics during the ascendancy of Arianism — and to apprehend
that, did we express our assent to the creed of Pope Pius, we should
find ourselves bound hand and foot — to the corruptions of those who
profess it." — Ibid. p. 15, et seq.
24. "Should it be inquired whether this admission of incomplete
ness in our own system does not lead to projects of change and~ re
form, on the part of individuals, it must be answered plainly in the
negative. Such an admission has but reference to the question of
abstract perfection ; as a practical matter, it will be our wisdom as
individuals to enjoy what God's good providence has left us, lest, striv
ing to obtain more, we lose what we still possess." — Ibid. p. 35.
25. " One great unfairness practised by Roman controversialists
has been to adduce, in behalf of their own peculiarities, doctrines or
customs of the primitive Church, which resembling them in appear.
ance are really of a different character. Thus because the early
Fathers spoke of the Holy Communion in such reverent and glowing
terms, as became those who understood its real nature and virtue,
they have tried to make it appear that they believed in their own
theory of transubstantiation. Whereas they spoke of it as a com.
memorative sacrifice, they have thence taken occasion to make it a
real and proper sacrifice. The doctrine of ecclesiastical penances
they have converted into the theory of satisfactions to Almighty
God for sins committed. The existence of Apostolical tradition in
the early Church, in behalf of the doctrines of the Trinity, Incarna
tion, and the like, has been made a pretence for introducing so-called
Apostolical traditions concerning various unfounded opinions in faith
and practice." — No. 72, p. 1.
26. " Of course there is no reason why the Church might not, in
the use of her discretion, limit as well as select the portions of the
inspired volume which were to be introduced into her devotions ;
but there were serious reasons why she should not defraud her chil
dren of ' their portion of meat in due season ;' and it would seem
as if the eleventh, or at least the twelfth century, a time fertile in
other false steps in religion, must be charged also, as far as concerns
Rome and its more intimate dependencies, with the partial removal
of the light of the written word from the sanctuary." — No. 75,
p. 7..
27. " Haymo's edition, which was introduced into the Roman
Church by Nicholas III. a. d. 1278, is memorable for another and
still more serious fault. Graver and sounder matter being excluded,
apocryphal legends of saints were used to stimulate and occupy the
popular mind ; and a way was made for the use of those invocations
to the Virgin and other saints, which heretofore were unknown in
public worship. The addresses to the Blessed Mary in the Breviary,
as it is at present constituted, are such as the following : the Ave
Mary, before commencing every office through the day, and at the
end of compline ; at the end of Lauds and Vespers, an Antiphon in.
vocatory of the Virgin ; the Officium B. Marias in the Sabbath or

TRACTS FOR THE TIMES. 9
Saturday, and sundry other offices, containing hymns and antiphons
in her honor. These portions of the Breviary carry with them their
own plain condemnation, in the judgment of an English Christian ;
no condemnation of the general structure and matter of the Brevia
ry itself will have any tendency to reconcile him to them, &c 
These usages [Invocations] certainly now do but sanction and en
courage that direct worship of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints,
which is the great political offence of the Latin Church." — Ibid.
p. 9.28. " They [the Invocations] are here given in order to show
clearly, as a simple inspection of them will suffice to do, the utter
contrariety between the Roman system, as actually existing, and
our own ; which, however similar in certain respects, are in others
so at variance as to make any attempt to reconcile them together
in their present state perfectly nugatory. Till Rome moves towards
us, it is quite impossible that we should move towards Rome ; how
ever closely we may approximate to her in particular doctrines, prin
ciples, or views." — Ibid. p. 23.
29. " And further still, as regards the doctrine of purgatorial suf-
fering, there have been for many ages in the Roman Church gross
corruptions of its own doctrine, untenable as that doctrine is even
by itself. The decree of the Council of Trent acknowledges the
fact. Now we believe that those corruptions still continue ; that Rome
has never really set herself in earnest to eradicate them. The pic
tures of Purgatory so commonly seen in countries in communion
with Rome, the existence of Purgatorian societies, the means of sub
sistence accruing to the clergy from belief in it, afford a strange
contrast to the simple wording and apparent innocence of the decree
by which it is made an article of faith. It is the contras* between
poison in its lifeless seed, and the same developed, thriving, and rank-
ly luxuriant in the actual plant." — No. 79, p. 3.
30. [As to the tendency to substitute the Virgin as the object of
religious worship.] "The great Catholic doctrine of the Trinity being
so strongly established among them [the Romanists] by entering into
all their devotional forms and creeds, that it could not be shaken ;
human depravity has sought out an opening for itself under another
shape. It is by this means the natural heart lowers the object of
its worship to its own frailty." — No. 80, p. 80.
31 " The Romish Church corrupted and marred the Apostolic
doctrine in two ways— first, by the error of Transubstantiation, se-
condly, by that of Purgatory ; and in both there occurs that pecu-
liar corruption of the administrators of the Romish Church, that
they countenance so much more of profitable error than in their
abstract system they acknowledge."— No. 81, On the Eucharistic
Sacrifice, p. 7.
32. " These false notions in themselves aggrandized the character
of 'the priesthood : and, as such, it was part of the unhappy policy

10 EXTRACTS FROM
of Rome to countenance them ; and while (to take the mildest view)
she narrowly observed the erroneous tendencies, which were almost
unavoidably mixed up in the minds of individuals with the reformed
doctrine, she had no sense for her own. She thought no deeds
cruel, which would remove the motes that threatened to darken her
sister's eye, but perceived not the beam in her own. While repress
ing, even by the shedding of blood, the slightest approximation to
the reformed doctrine, she rebuked not errors which entrenched on
the authority of our Lord." — Ibid. p. 8.
33. " The language of the Council (of Trent) on the Sacrifice is
in itself capable of a good interpretation, were it not that terms em-
ployed in it must be explained with reference to that Church's ac
knowledged doctrines of Transubstantiation and Purgatory. And
THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRIFICE CANNOT BE THE SAME, WHERE TRAN
SUBSTANTIATION IS HELD, AND WHERE IT IS NOT."  Ibid. p. 47.

EXTRACTS FROM "LYRA APOSTOLICA.
34. " Once, as I brooded o'er my guilty state,
A fever seized me, duties to devise
To buy me interest in my Saviour's eyes ;
Not that His love I would extenuate,
But scourge and penance, and perverse self-hate,
Or gift of cost, served by an artifice
" To quell my restless thoughts, &c. . . .
Thus as I tossed, He said : ' Even holiest deeds
Shroud not the soul from God, nor soothe its needs,' " &c.
Lyra Apostolica, (Ed. 2.) 9.
35. "I will not say with these, that bread and wine
Have vanished at the consecration prayer," &c.
Ibid. 33.
36. " Ah Saviour, Lord ! with Thee my heart
Angel nor Saint shall share ;
To Thee 'tis known, for man Thou art,
To soothe each tumult there." — Ibid. 51.
37. "They are at rest :
We may not stir tbe heaven of their repose
By rude invoking voice, or prayer addrest
In waywardness to those,
Who in the mountain grots of Eden lie," &c. — Ibid. 52.
38. " Mark how each Creed stands in that Test reveal'd,
Romish and. Swiss and Lutheran novelties !
As in the light of Sponsor's magic shield,
Falsehood lets fall her poisoned cup and flies,
Rome's, seven-headed monster sees and dies !" — Ibid. 97
39- " O Lord and Christ, Thy Churches of the South
So shudder, when they see

LYRA APOSTOLICA. 11
The two-edged sword sharp-issuing from Thy mouth,
As to fall back from Thee,
And seek to charms of man, or saints above,
To aid them against Thee, Thou Fount of grace and love !
But I before Thine awful eyes will go,
And firmly fix me there,
In my full shame ; &c.—Ibid. 105.
40. " The flood-gates on me open wide,
And headlong rushes in the turbulent tide
Of lusts and heresies ! a motley troop they come ;
And old imperial Rome
Looks up, and lifts again, half-dead
Her seven-horned head ;" &c. — Ibid. 111.
41. « How shall I name thee, Light of the wide West,
Or heinous error-seat ?
O Mother erst, close tracing Jesus' feet !
Do not thy titles glow
In those stern judgment fires, which shall complete
Earth s strife with Heaven, and ope the eternal woe V
Ibid. 170.
42. « O Mother Church of Rome ! why has thy heart
Beat so untruly towards thy northern child 1
Why give a gift, nor give it undefiled,
Drugging thy blessing with a stepdame's art ? &c.
. . . And now thou sendest foes
Bred from thy womb, lost Church ! to mock the throes
Of thy free child, thou cruel-natured Rome!" — Ibid. 171.
43. " O that thy creed were sound !
For thou dost soothe the heart, thou Church of Rome,
By thy unwearied watch and varied round
Of service, in thy Saviour's holy home." — Ibid. 172

EXTRACTS FROM THE WRITINGS OF DR. PTJSEY.
44. " In different ways man would forestall the sentence of his
judge ; the Romanist by the sacrament of penance ; a modern class
of divines by the appropriation of the merits and righteousness of
our blessed Redeemer ; the Methodists by sensible experience ; our
own, with the ancient Church, preserves a reverent silence, not
cutting off hope, and yet not nurturing an untimely confidence, or
a presumptuous security." — Pusey on Baptism, p. xiv.
44. (b) " Lastly, I would beseech those, for whom these tracts
are mainly intended, our younger laborers in the Lord's vineyard,
for their own sakes, as well as of those of whose souls they must
give account, neither here, nor in any other portion of these tracts,
to be deterred by any vague fear of an approximation (as they may
6

12 EXTRACTS FROM
be led to think) to any doctrines or practices of the corrupt Church
of Rome ; not to allow themselves to fall in with any of those
charges, which ignorant men are wont to make, of ' the early
corruptions of Christianity, ' and which are the bulwark of Socinian
ism, and of every other heresy. Since the Swiss reformers set aside
primitive antiquity, and took a new model of their own, Antiquity,
if tried by the standard of Zuinglianisin or Calvinism, must, of
course, appear to approximate to the modern Church of Rome ; for
that Church has retained, in a corrupted form, doctrines' and rites,
which the Swiss reformation rejected., Hence, the Lutheran (see
p. 104,) the Bohemian (p. 233,) and our own Church, have, by the
admirers of that reformation, ever been looked upon as Papistical ;
as they, in their turn, have, by the k' extreme reformation of the
Socinians' (p. 198-9), been held, and rightly, to have stopped short
of the results of their own principles, and have been represented,
though wrongly, as retainers of Alexandrian ' corruptions of Christ
ianity.' Hooker's defence of our Church is but one instance of this
tvide difference between ours and the Zuinglian reformation. Our
Church (blessed be God,) never took Luther, or Calvin, or any
modern name for its, teacher or its model, but primitive antiquity :
and by the Holy Scripture alone, and the universal consent of Primi
tive Antiquity, as the depository of its doctrines, and tbe witness of
its teaching, would she be judged.* In these principles of our dear
mother, the Church of England, have we been trained, and in these
old ways would we humbly tread." — Ibid. p. xvii.
45. " We cannot sufficiently admire the lovingkindness of Al
mighty God, who allowed the seeds indeed of Reformation to be
sown among us by Wickliffe ; yet then, notwithstanding the power
ful human aid which he had, and his great popularity, caused them
to lie, as it were, in the earth, until those which were less sound
should, by length of time, decay; and again, that He placed so
many impediments in the way of our final Reformation (for what
man does rapidly he does rashly,) and held back our steps by the
arbitrariness of Henry ; and, when we were again going down the
stream of the times too readily, checked us at once by the unex
pected death of Edward, and proved us by the fire of the Marian
persecution, and took away, by a martyr's death, those in whom we
most trusted ; and then finally employed a number of laborers, in
the restoration of His Temple, of whom none should yet be so con
spicuous, that the edifice should seem to be his design, or that he
should be tempted to restore the decayed parts according to any
theory of his own, but rather that all things should be made ' ac
cording to the pattern which He had shown us in the Church pri
mitive.' Had our reform taken place at first, we had been Wick-
liffeites ; under Edward, we had been a branch of the Reformed
* There are some brief but valuable notices of the peculiarity of the Church
of England in the late Bishop Jebb's Pastoral Instructions, and some striking
quotations from ancient divines, domestic and foreign, who have remarked it, as
an excellence ; so also in Bp. Bull's Apologia pro Harmonia, sect. 1. § 4. ed.
Burton.

DR. PUSEY'S WRITINGS. 13
ZuingMian or the Calvinist Church ; now we bear no human name ;
we look to no human founder ; we have no one reformer to set up as
an idol ; we are neither of Paul nor of Apollos ; nor have we any
human maxims or theories as the basis of our system ; but we have
been led back at once to the distant fountains, where the waters of
life, fresh from their source, flowed most purely."— Ibid, pp.105,106.
46. "In this, as in many other cases, we must distinguish be
tween the practical corruptions of the Church of Rome and her the
oretical errors. For it often happens that she leads her members into
error, and countenances corruption in them, -when her statements in
themselves are not very unsound ; teaching us how much evil what
seems a little departure from the truth may create." — Ibid. p. 192.
47. "In justice then to ourselves, as well as to the Romanists,
we must bear in mind that the unhappy and fatal canons of the
Council of Trent were directed, in part, against actual error, such
as had mixed itself with- the then, as well as with former, attempts
at reformation. And we should do well to recollect that, though
bound to thank God for all those, through whom the light of the
Gospel shone more clearly, we always were regarded by them as a
distinct and peculiar Church, and are not to identify ourselves with
them."— Ibid. p. 194.
48. " Alexandria, the bulwark of the faith in the Holy Trinity,
and North Africa, of the unmeritedness of God's free grace, a
desolation ! Rome, once characterized for steady practical ad
herence to sound doctrine, a seat of Anti-Christ. Geneva, once pro
posed as tbe model of all reformed Churches, and of influence well
nigh unbounded, and yet immediately the food of Socinianism, and
now a prey to the heresy which came forth, but was for the time
ejected also from its bosom." — Ibid. p. 201.
49. " We can see how a person's whole views of Sanctification
by the Holy Ghost will be affected by Hoadly's low notions of the
Lord's Supper ; or how the error of Transubstantiation has modified
other true doctrine, so as to cast into the shade the one oblation
once offered upon the Cross ; or how the addition of the single
practice of ' soliciting the saints to pray for men' has in the Romish
Church obscured the primary articles of Justification and of the In
tercession of our Blessed Lord."— Ibid. 2nd ed. p. 6.
50. " Having adopted the fiction of a letter from the Pope to
certain members of your Church, as being his emissaries, it became
necessary, by disguise or omission, or perversion, to conceal what
ever would have disturbed the unity of the, drama. For instance,
you play not unfrequently upon the words which one of these
writers addresses to the Church of Rome — ' Cum talis sis, utinam
noster esses !' and who would not echo the wish . . . that she, as our
selves have been, might be restored to her primeval purity, when she
was once the guardian of Christian truth ; that God would < break
the yoke of her burden, the staff on her shoulder, and the rod of her

14 EXTRACTS FROM
oppressor V Taken then in their obvious sense, the words are the
expression of every Christian heart. Your fiction, however, required
that they should express a desire for union with Rome as she is ;
and in this sense accordingly you quote them. The very next words
of the writer contradict this. He proceeds (and to prevent the pos
sibility of a mistake, he has printed these words in capitals): ' But,
alas ! an union is impossible.' Honesty required the insertion of
those words ; but they would have spoiled the jest, and so they are
omitted. "-Pusey's earnest Remonstrance to the author of the Pope's
letter (vide Vol. Hi. of ihe Tracts,) p. 8.
51. " The ground taken by the Church of Rome is that all her
present traditions are to be received, as of equal validity with the
written word, because she holds them : our ground, that they are not
to be so received, because they cannot be proved to be apostolic, and
some are corrupt and vainly invented. Our controversy then withRome
is not an a priori question on the value of tradition in itself. . . . but
is one purely historical, that the Romanist traditions not being such,
but on the contrary repugnant to Scripture, are not to be received. ...
Nor does our accepting the traditions of the Universal Church in their
day, involve our accepting those of the particular Church of Rome,
after so many centuries of corruption, in the present." — Ibid. p. 13.
52. " One not versed in history will be liable perpetually to con
found the earlier truth, or unobjectionable custom, with the later
corruption, especially if he has no very clear idea of Christian theo-
logy."— Ibid. p. 18.
54. " Now to this prayer (for the dead, in the first prayer-book,)
neither Calvin nor Bucer objected that it was Papistical. On the con-
trary, Calvin says in his letter to the Protector, (Epp. p. 39. fol.) ' I
hear that in the celebration of the Supper there is repeated a prayer
for the departed, and I well know that this cannot be construed into
an approbation of the Papistical Purgatory.' " — Ibid. p. 20.
54. " We never have, nor do we wish for any alteration in the
liturgy of our Church ; we bless God that our lot has fallen in her
bosom, — that he has preserved in her the essentials of primitive doc
trine and a liturgy so holy ; and, although I cannot but think its first
form preferable, alteration is out of the question : there cannot be
real alteration without a schism ; and as we claim to have our
own consciences respected, so, even if we had the power of change,
would we respect the consciences of others. . . . The whole course of
the Tracts has, as you know, and yourself reproach us with, been
against innovation." — Ibid. p. 28.
55. " You know that these authors had written also against
Popery, and republished older writings against it : their very tracts
are known by the name of ' Tracts against Popery and Dissent ;'
although, when they were commenced, dissent was every where a
pressing evil,Popery had scarcely begun to bestir itself." — Ibid.p.32.
56. " No one clergyman in or near Oxford has done any one thing
as ' being justified by primitive antiquity;' but . . . whatever has

DR. PUSEY'S WRITINGS lr,
been done, has been done in obedience to the rubrics, or to carry
them out into practice. ... In no one church or chapel has any
' needless bowing' been introduced : clergymen, indeed, here always
bow at the name of our Blessed Lord, wherever it occurs. . . In the
cathedral the dean and canons have from time immemorial, on leav
ing the choir, bowed to the altar. No cross has been added to the
surplice; only one clergyman, who was at the time at Oxford, but
not connected with any parish church, thinking this to be enjoined
by the rubric prefixed to the Morning Prayers, ' wore in the train of
his ministration such ornaments as were in this Church of England,
by authority of Parliament, in the second year of the reign of King
Edward VI.' The scarf had then, it is said, two small black crosses,
one at each end. . . Whether the dress were that of Edward VI.
I cannot say ; it is enough for the principle that it was adopted as
being sanctioned by the Church ; and besides, one instance does
hot imply a system. Of ' unusual attitudes of devotion,' I know of
none." — Pusey's Letter to Townsend (British Mag. vol. xii. p. 368.)
57. " Now let me first recapitulate what it is which has been
thus blazoned about and exaggerated : — one clergyman has worn a
cross on his scarf in compliance, as he thought, with our rubric;
two clergymen have in new congregations knelt towards the East,
in conformity with the ancient, and recent, and still existing practice
of our Church ; two have used a table, where the rubric implies that
the elements must be placed somewhere, but says not how. Strong
party-spirit has taken up these reports, not for their own sake (else
why do they pass unnoticed irregular innovations in the mode of
administering the Communion or Baptism ?) but because it was easier
so to cast a slur upon a body of men, and through them, upon sound
principles, than to refute them." — Ibid. p. 642.
58. " From the time that the Church of Rome began to forsake
the principles of the Church Catholic, and grasp after human means,
she began also to take evil means for good ends, and incurring the
apostolic curse on those who ' do evil that good may come,' took at
last evil means for evil ends. She, the Apostolic Church of the
West, consecrated by Apostolic blood, showed herself rather the
descendant of them who slew the Apostles, and ' thought that they
did God service,' stained herself with the blood of the saints, that
on her might come all the righteous blood which was shed within her;
even of the very Apostles, who had shed blood for her. There is
not an enormity which has been practised against people or kings by
miscreants in the nanop of God, but the divines of that unhappy
Church have abetted or justified."— Pusey's Sermon on the Fifth of
November, p. 29.
59. " The principle of the Romish Church was expediency ; it
was a plotting, scheming, worldy spirit, having at first God's glory
for its end, but seeking it by secular means, and at last, in punish
ment, left to seek its own glory, and to set itself up in the place of
God."— Ibid. p. 31.

16 EXTRACTS FROM
60. " It is not, God knoweth, in any spirit of boast against these
branches, some of which were grafted in before us, but still en
couragement and warning, that I would notice, that herein also our
Church followed the principles of the Church Catholic, and with her
had been portioned. She alone of all the relormed Churches was
purified in the fire, and purged in the blood of martyrs, and had the
evidence of affliction that she was a beloved child, and no bastard."
— Ibid. p. 32.

EXTRACTS FROM THE WRITINGS OF MR. NEWMAN.
61. " Various notions have led theological writers to implicate this
celebrated Church [the Alexandrian] in the charge of heresy. . . . .
The Romanists have thought .... to exalt the Apostolical purity of
their own Church by the contrast of unfaithfulness in its early rival ;
and (what is of greater importance) to insinuate the necessity of an
infallible authority, by exaggerating the errors and contrarieties of the
ante-Nicene fathers, and the fact of its existence by throwing us
upon the decisions of the latter councils for the unequivocal state
ment of orthodox doctrine." — Newman on Arianism, p. 44.
62. " We agree with the Romanist in appealing to antiquity as
our great teacher, but we deny that his doctrines are to be found in
antiquity ; and we maintain that his professed tradition is not really
such, that it is a tradition of men, that it stops short-of the Apostles,
that the history of its introduction is known. On both accounts
then his doctrines are innovations ; because they run counter to the
doctrine of antiquity, and because they rest upon what is historically
an upstart tradition." — Newman on Romanism, p. 47, 48.
63. " How hopeless then to contend with Romanists, as if they
practically agreed with us as to the foundation of faith, however much
they pretend it! Ours is antiquity, theirs the existing Church. Its in
fallibility is their first principle ; belief in it is a deep prejudice, quite
beyond the reach of any thing external. It is quite clear that the
combined testimonies of all the Fathers, supposing such a case,
would not have a feather's weight against the decision of a Pope in
Council." — Ibid. p. 86.
64. " We must take and deal with things as they are, not as they
pretend to be. If we are induced to believe the professions of Rome,
and make advances towards her as if a sister or mother Church,
which in theory she is, we shall find too late that we are in the arms
of a pitiless and unnatural relation, who will but triumph in the arts
which have inveigled us within her reach. No ; dismissing the dreams
which tbe romance of early Church history, and the high doctrines
of Catholicism will raise in the inexperienced mind, let us be sure
that she is our enemy, and will do us a mischief if she can. For in
truth she is a Church beside herself, abounding in noble gifts and right.
ful titles, but unable to use them religiously ; crafty, obstinate, wilful,
malicious, cruel, unnatural, as madmen are, or rather, she may be

MR. NEWMAN'S WRITINGS. 17
said (o resemble a demoniac  ruled within by an inexorable
spirit."— Ibid. p. 102, 103.
65. "My next instnnce shall be the Roman doctrine of Purgatory.
All Protestants are sufficiently alive to the seriousness of this error.
Now I think it may be shown that its existence is owing to a like
indulgence of human reason, and of private judgment upon Scrip
ture, in default of Catholic tradition." — Ibid. p. 212.
66. " Whether we be right or wrong, our theory of religion has a
meaning, and that really distinct from Romanism- They maintain
that faith depends upon the Church ; we, that the Church is built upon
the faith. By Church Catholic we mean the Church Universal ; they
those branches of it which are in communion with Rome. x\gain,
they understand by the faith, whatever the Church at any time
declares to be faith; we, what it has actually so declared from the
beginning. Both they and we anathematize those who deny the
faith ; but. they extend the condemnation to all who question any
decree of the Roman Church; we apply it to those only who deny
any article of the original Apostolic creed." — Ibid. p. 259.
67. " The Thirty-nine Articles then are instruments of teaching,
of Catholic teaching, being, as far as they go, heads, .as it were, of
important chapters in revealed truth. And it is as thus viewing
them that we put them before the young. They are quite consistent
with the prerogative accorded, as we have seen, by antiquity to the
Apostolic creed, quite distinct from the tyranriical enforcement of
the Tridentine articles on the part of Rome." — Ibid. p. 290.
68. " This statement (' that Holy Scripture containeth all things
necessary to salvation,' Art. VI.) is very plain and clear except in
one point, viz. who is to be the judge what is and what is not con.
tained in Scripture. Our Church is silent on this point — very em
phatically so. This is worth observing ; in truth she does not ad
mit, strictly speaking, of any judge at all, in the sense in which
Romanists and Protestants contend for one; and in this point, as in
others, holds a middle course between extreme theories. Romanism,
as we all know, maintains the existence of a judge of controversies ;
nay, an infallible one, that is, the Church Catholic. Again the mul
titude of Protestants consider every man his own judge ; they hold
that every man may or must read Scripture for himself; and judge
about its meaning, and make up his mind for himself. We neither
hold that the Catholic Church is an infallible judge of Scripture,, nor
that each individual may judge for himself; but that the Church has
authority, and that individuals may judge for themselves outride the
range of that authority. The Church is not & judge of the sense of
Scripture in the common sense of the word, but a witness — a keeper
and witness of Catholic tradition. She bears witness to a fact that
such and such a doctrine, or such a sense of Scripture, has ever been
received, and came from the Apostles." — Ibid. p. 327, et seq.
69. " Nor let any one be startled at all this discordance of
opinion among our divines, in their mode of proving one of the

18 EXTRACTS FROM
greal principles of Protestantism [Scripture the rule of faith, 1 as if it
reflected upon the wisdom or soundness of the principle itself. Above
all, let not Romanists venture to take advantage of it, lest we retort
upon them the vacillations, absurdities, intrigues, and jealousies
displayed in the deliberations of divines attendant on their general
councils." — Ibid. p. 346.
70. " If this line of argument can be maintained, there will be
this especial force in it as addressed to Romanists. They are accus
tomed to taunt us with inconsistency, as if we used the tradition
of the Church only when and as fir as we could not avoid it 
We do not discard the tradition of the Fathers ; we accept it ; we
accept it entirely ; we accept its witness concerning itself and
against itself. It witnesses its own inferiority to Scripture." — ii!>.p.349.
71. " Nothing I think is plainer from these extracts [some quoted
from the Fathers] than that the authors of them looked upon Scrip
ture as the public standard of proof, the tribunal of appeal in contro
versy." — Ibid. p. 399.
72. " Time went on, and he [Satan] devised a second idol of the
true Christ, and it remained in the Temple of God for many a year.
The age was rude and fierce. Satan took the darker side of the
Gospel .... The religion of the world was then a fearful religion.
Superstitions abounded, and cruelties. The noble firmness, the
graceful austerity of the true Christian, were superseded by forbid.
ding spectres, harsh of eye and haughty of brow; and these were
the patterns or the tyrants of a beguiled people." — Newman's Ser
mons, vol. i. p. 359.
73. " Satan could not hinder, he could but corrupt the kingdom
promised to the saints. He could but seduce them to trust in an arm
of flesh. He could but sow the seeds of decay among them by allur-
ing them to bow down to ' Ashtareth the goddess of the Zidonians,
and Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites,' and to make a king
over them like the nations, ' when the Lord was their king.' Had
it not been for this falling away in divers times and places, surely
Christendom would not be in its present miserable state of disunion
and weakness." — Newman's Sermons, vol. ii. p. 282.
74. " There have been ages of the world, in which men have
thought too much of angels, and paid them excessive honor ;
honored them so perversely as to forget the supreme worship due to
'Almighty God. This is the sin of a dark age." — Ibid. p. 400.
75. "It is too evident how grievously the church of Rome has
erred in this part of Christian duty [zeal]. Let her doctrines be as
pure as her defenders maintain, still she has indisputably made the
church an instrument of worldly politics by a 'zeal not according to
knowledge.' Let us grant that her doctrine was not fatally cor
rupted till the sixteenth century; nevertheless, from the eleventh at
least she has made Christ's kingdom of this world. I will not in-

MR. NEWMAN'S WRITINGS. 19
quire whether she committed the. additional most miserable sin of
rebellion against Cajsar ; though from what we see around us at this
day there is great reason to fear that from the beginning of her
power she has been tainted with it." — Ibid. p. 436.
76. " He will but observe that, if Popery be a perversion or cor
ruption of the truth, as we believe, it must, by the mere force of the
terms, be like that truth which it counterfeits ; and, therefore, the
fact of a resemblance, as far as it is borne out, is no proof of any
essential approximation in his opinions" to Popery as such. Rather,
it would be a serious argument against their primitive character, if
to superficial observers they bore no likeness to it. Ultra-Protest
antism could never have been silently corrupted into Popery." —
Ibid. vol. iii. Advertisement.
77. " A great part of the Christian world, as is well known,
believes that after this life the souls of Christians ordinarily go into
a prison called Purgatory, where they are kept in fire or other tor
ment, till, their sins being burned away, they are at length fitted for
that glorious kingdom into which nothing defiled can enter. Now,
if there were any good reason for this belief, we should certainly
have a very sad and depressing prospect before us. . . But, in
fact, Christ has mercifully interposed expressly to assure us that
our friends are better provided for than this doctrine would make it
appear. He assures us that they ' rest from their labors, and their
works do follow them.' " — Ibid. p. 408.
78. " It is ' Jesus Christ, before our eyes evidently set forth,
crucified among us.' Not before our bodily eyes ; so far, every
thing remains at the end of that heavenly communion as it did at
the beginning. What was bread remains bread, and what was wine
remains wine. We need no carnal, earthly, visible miracle to con
vince us of the presence of the Lord incarnate." — Zfo'tZ.vol.iv.p.167.
79. " While we think thus of the invisible Church, we are re
strained by many reasons from such invocations of her separate mem-
hers as are unhappily so common in other Christian countries. First,
because the practice was not primitive, but an addition, which the
world had poured into the Church ; next, because we are told to
pray to GoD.only, and invocation may be easily corrupted into prayer,
and then becomes idolatrous. And further, it must be considered
that though the Church is represented in Seripture as a channel of
God's gifts to us, yet it is only as a body, and sacramentally, not
as an agent, nor in her members one by one. St. Paul does not say
that we are brought near to this saint or that saint, but to all together ;
to the spirits of just men made perfect." — lbifl. p. 207.
80. " Hence the charge, not unfounded as regards Romanism,
that it views, or tends to view, the influences of grace, not as the
operations of a living God, but as a something to bargain about, and
buy, and traffic with, as if religion were, not an approach to things
above us, but a commerce with our equals concerning things we can
master." — Newman on Justification, p. 316.

20 EXTRACTS FROM
81. " The view of justification taken by Romanists and by a
school of divines among ourselves, tends to fix the mind on self, not
on Christ ; whereas that which I have advocated as Scriptural and
Catholic, buries itself in the vision of apresenr, an in-dwelling God."
,—Ibid. p. 220.
82. " So much space has been given to Bucer's doctrine, because
he is in a small degree connected with our own Reformation ; and such
as his has been the current doctrine of the English Church. Our
divines, though of very, different schools, have, with few exceptions,
agreed in this, that justification is gained by obedience in the shape
of faith ; that is an obedience which confesses it is not sufficient,
and trusts solely in Christ's merits for acceptance — not the Roman,
that the obedience justifies without a continual imputation of Christ's
merits; nor the Protestant, that the imputation justifies distinct
from obedience." — Ibid. p. 420.
83. " The Council of Trent did, as regards Roman errors, what,
for all we know, though God forbid, some future Synod of the
English Church may do as regards Protestant errors, take them into
her system, make them forms of communion, bind upon her hitherto
favored sons their grievous chain ; and what that unhappy Council
actually did for Rome, that does every one in his place and accord
ing to his power, who by declaiming against and denouncing those
who dare to treat the Protestant errors as unestablished, gives a
helping hand towards their establishment." — Newton's Letter to
Faussett, p. 15.
84. " Who defends such things as these [worship of the Blessed
Virgin] ? who says the Church of Rome was free from them
before Trent? . . . Why are the Tracts to be censured for stating
a plain historical fact, that the Roman Church did not, till Trent,
embody in her Creed the mass of her present tenets, while they do
not deny, but expressly acknowledge her great corruptions before
that era ; while they give the history of Transubstantiation prior to
Trent, (Nos. 27. 28.) of the breviary worship of the Blessed Virgin
prior to Trent, (No. 79.) while they formally draw up points in
which they feel agreement with Romanism to be hopeless, (Nos. 38.
71.) and while they declare, (in large letters to draw attention) that,
while Rome is what it is, ' union' with it ' is impossible' (No.
20.)? All that can be said against them is, that in discussing the
Roman tenets, they use guarded language ; and this I will say, that
the more we have personal experience of the arduous controversy
in question, the more shall we understand the absolute necessity, if
we are to make any way, of weighing our words and keeping from
declamation." — Ibid. p. 18.
85. " It is idolatry |o bow down to any emblem or symbol as di
vine which God Himself has not appointed ; and since he has not
appointed the worship of images, such worship is idolatrous 
It is impossibe for any religious man, having a crucifix, not to treat
it with reverence . . . but ... I more than doubt whether a crucifix,
carved to represent life, as such memorials commonly are, be not

PROUDE'S REMAINS. SI
too true to be reverent, and too distressing for familiar contemplation.
... So much I know, that the use of the crucifix is in this place no
badge of persons whose mode of thinking you would condemn. —
How many crucifixes could be counted up in Oxford I know not ;
but you will find them in the possession of those who are no special
frjends or followers of Mr. Froude, and perhaps cordial admirers,
except of course on this one point, of the tenor of your publication."
—Ibid. p. 25. In a Note  " I know or have heard of the names
of four persons altogether ; one of the four I have forgotten, and
another I cannot be sure I heard."
86. " O that we had the courage and the generous faith to aim at
perfection, to demand the attention, to claim the submission of the
world ! Thousands of hungry souls in all classes of life stand
around us ; we do not give them what they want, the image of a
true Christian people, living in that Apostolic awe and strictness
which carries with it an evidence that they are the Church of Christ.
This is the way to withstand and repel the Romanists ; not by cries
of alarm, and rumor of plots, and disputes, and denunciations, but
by living up to the Creeds, the Services, the Ordinances, the usages
of our oivn Church, without fear of consequences, without fear of
being called Papists : to let matters take their course freely, and to
trust to God's good Providence for the issue." — Ibid. p. 98.

EXTRACTS FROM FROUDE'S REMAINS.
87. " The Romanists [are not schismatics in England and Catho
lics abroad, but they] are wretched Tridentines every where." —
Froude's Remains, vol. i. p. 434.
88. " I never could be a Romanist ; I never could think all those
things in Pope Pius' Creed necessary to salvation." — Ibid.
89. " We found, to our horror, that the doctrine of the infallibility
of the Church made the acts of each successive Council obligatory
for ever ; that what had been once decided could not be meddled
with again : in fact, that they were committed finally and irrevoca
bly, and could not advance one step to meet us, even though the
Church of England should again become what it was in Laud's time,
or indeed what it may have been up to the atrocious Council [of
Trent ;] for M.  admitted that many things, e. g. the doctrine
of mass, which were fixed then, had been indeterminate before. So
much for the Council of Trent, for which Christendom has to thank
Luther and the Reformers  I own it has altogether changed
my notions of the Roman Catholics, and made me wish for a total
overthrow of their system." — Ibid. pp. 307, 308.
90. "I remember you told me that I should come back a belter
Englishman than I went away; better satisfied not only that our
Church is nearest in theory right, but also that practically, in spite
of its abuses, it works better ; and to own the truth, your prophecy
is already nearly realized. Certainly I have as yet only seen the
surface of things ; but what I have seen does not come up to my

22 EXTRACTS FROM
notions of propriety. These Catholic countries seem in an especial
manner rarex"" ™ji> a\;fic:av iv aimm [ to hold the truth in unright-
eousness.] And the priesthood are themselves so sensible of
the hollow basis upon which their power rests, that they dare not
resist the most atrocious encroachments of the State upon their
privileges. ... I have seen priests laughing when at the Confession
al ; and indeed it is plain that unless they habitually made light of
very gross immorality, three-fourths of the population [of Naples]
would be excommunicated. . . . The Church of England has fall
en low, and will probably be worse before it is better ; but let the
Whigs do their worst, they cannot sink us so deep as these people
have allowed themselves to fall while retaining all the superficials of
a religious country." — Ibid. p. 293, 294.
91. "Since I have been out here, I have got a worse notion of
the Roman Catholics than I had. I really do think them idolaters,
though I cannot be quite confident of my information as it affects
the character of the priests. . . What I mean by calling these peo
ple idolaters is, that I believe they look upon the Saints and Virgin
as good-natured people that will try to get them let off easier than
the Bible declares, and that, as they don't intend to comply with the
conditions on which God promises to answer prayers, they pray to
them as a come-off. But this is a generalization for whicii I have
not sufficient data." — Ibid, vide Preface, p. xiii.

EXTRACTS FROM THE WRITINGS OF MR. KEBLE.
92. " The deep and sincere dread with which Hooker regarded
the errors and aggressions of Rome is apparent in every part of his
writings ; and so much the move instructive will it prove, should we
find him of his own accord embracing those Catholic opinions and
practices which some in their zeal for Popery may have too lightly
parted with, but which, as Rome alone could not give them, so nei
ther should we allow her indirectly to take them away." — From the
Preface to Hooker, p. iv.
93. "King James II., it is well known, ascribed to Hooker, more
than to any other writer, his own ill-starred conversion to Romanism :
against which, nevertheless, if he had thought a little more impar.
tially, he might have perceived that Hooker's works every where
inculcate that which is the only sufficient antidote, respect for the
true Church of the Fathers, as subsidiary to Scripture and a witness
of its true meaning." — Ibid. p. cv.
94. " The Freedom of the Anglican Church may be vindicated
against the exorbitant claims of Rome, and yet no disparagement
ensue of the authority inherent in the Catholic Apostolical Church."
— From the Sermon on Primitive Tradition, p. 6.
35. " We are naturally, if not reasonably, jealous of the word
Tradition, associated as it is in our minds with the undue claims and
pernicious errors of Rome." — Ibid. p. 20.
96. " The genuine Canons of the Primitive Councils, and the

MR. KEBLE'S WRITINGS. 23
genuine fragments of the Primitive Liturgies, arc reducible into a
small space ; even although we go so low clown in both as the
division of the Eastern and Western Churches, including the six
first councils general, and excluding image-worship, and similar
corruptions by authority." — Ibid. p. 40.
97. " The reverence of the Latin Church for tradition, being ap-
plied unscrupulously, and without the necessary check from Scrip
ture, to opinions and practices of a date comparatively recent, has
led a large portion of Christendom to disuse and contempt, not of
Scripture only, but of that real and sure tradition, which they ought
to have religiously depended upon." — Ibid. p. 45.
98. " Had this rule (the exclusion of novelty,) been faithfully
kept, it would have preserved the Church just as effectually from
Transubstantiation on the one hand, as from the denial of Christ's
real Presence on the other hand. The two errors in the original are
but Rationalism in different forms ; — endeavors to explain away,
and bring nearer to the human intellect, that which had been left
thoroughly mysterious both by Scripture and Tradition. "-Ibid. p. 47.
99. " Many men .. have argued against an imaginary case, instead
of addressing themselves to the realities of Church History : and
have thus given an advantage to Romanists on one side, and Ration
alists on the other, of which neither party has been slow to avail
itself. Such is not the way of the English Church : she does not so
violently sever the different parts of the constitution of the Kingdom
of heaven : but acknowledging Scripture as her written charter, and
Tradition as the common law whereby both the validity and practical
meaning of that charter is ascertained, venerates both as inseparable
members of one great providential system : without confounding
their provinces, or opposing them to each other, in the manner of
modern Rome, Why should it be thought a thing incredible, that
persons should be found among her members and ministers, desirous
to follow, as God shall give them grace, in so plain, so reasonable,
so moderate, so safe a way ? Because they call attention to the fact,
that ' Primitive Tradition is recognized in Holy Scripture,' as being,
at that time, of paramount authority; why should they be presently
suspected of having a system of their own-in reserve,— a theory, like
some parts of Romanism, still independent of Holy Scripture, and to
be supported by modern traditions ?" — Ibid. p. 74.
100. " Because the Romanists make bold with the word Tradition
on very different matters from this — mere instructions of a part of the
present Church, in no wise able to stand the test of Vincentius,
even supposing them uncontradicted in Scripture :— are we therefore
to throw aside or depreciate a Tradition, established as we see the
Nicene Creed is V'—lbid. p. 147.
101. "Of course, if so it had pleased Almighty God, the Scriptures
might have been all clear of themselves ; or their meaning might
have been clearly revealed to individuals, at a certain stage of their
progress in the Christian life ; or there might be somewhere in the
present Church an unerring court of appeal to fix their interpretation.

24

INDEX.

Men may go on imagining the advantages of such a dispensation,
until they have persuaded themselves that things are really so
ordered. But theories of that kind, after all that can be said in their
favor, must they not incur the censure of true wisdom, as partaking
of ' that idle and not very innocent employment of forming imagi
nary models of a new world, and schemes of governing it ?' How
much better humbly to acquiesce in God's dispensations as we find
them ! How much more dutiful, with all seriousness to use our pri
vilege of belonging to a Church, which, on the one hand, refers us to
Scripture as the standard and treasure of all necessary doctrine, on
the other hand, 'ties her doctors, as much as the Council of Trent
does, to expound Scripture according to the consent of the ancient
Fathers.'"*— Ibid. p. 149.
* Bp. Taylor's Works, x. 322.

INDEX.

Additions, Roman, 21. 62
Anathemas, 10. 22. 83
Angel worship, 36. 74
Anglo-Catholics, contented, 24.44b. 54.
101 ; not innovators in discipline, 56.
77 ; highly favored in their Reform
ation, 45 ; persecuted, 9. 45. 60 ; op
posed to Romanism, 5. 6. 55. 93 ;
successful in opposition, 86 ; always
accounted Papistical by those who
went further, 44b
Catholic doctrines and practices not
derived from Rome, 92
Confession, forced, 14. 22
Corruptions, Roman, S. 12. 13. 15. 16.
18. 20. 23. 26. 29. 31. 32. 38. 42. 43.
51. 52. 73. 75. 76
Corrupt state of Italian Churches, 90
Council of Trent, 23. 67. 83. 87. 89
Councils, General, 69
Dark ages, 26. 72. 74
Denial of Cup, 14. 22
Fathers subsidiary to Scripture, 93
Idolaters, Italian Romanists, 91
Idolatry, 85
Image worship, 14. 22
Indulgences, 14
Infallibility, 12. 61. 63. 68. 89. 101
Intention in Sacraments, 22
Invocation of Saints, 14. 22. 27. 37.
49. 79
Justification, 14. 81. 82
Legends, 27

Masses, usage of, 14. 25. 33
Mediators, human, 39
Merits, 14. 34. 80
Penance, 25. 34. 44
Perversions, Roman, 23. 25. 46. 76
Popery, incurable, 7 ; a falling off, 73;
pestilential, 7 ; malicious and cruel,
15. 64 ; rebellious, 75 ; tyrannical,
1. 67. 72; an insanity, 64 ; an evil
spirit, ibid. ; heretical. 3. 7. 8. 20 ;
exclusive, 19 ; an apology for Lu
ther, 4 ; caused by Luther, 89 ; irre
concilably different from us, 7. 14.
28. 50. 66. 8i. 88 ; unscriptural, 6 ;
presumptuous, 17 ; persecuting, 9.
32. 58 ; political, 58. 59. 75 ; ration
alizes, 98 ; an Antichrist, 38.40.41.
48. 72
Prayer for the dead in Christ, 53
Purgatorv, 14. 22. 29. 31. 65. 77
Rome, its strength, 8 ; a demoniac, 64 ;
its claims exorbitant, 94
Saint worship, 30. 36. 84
Scripture, 70. 71
Supremacy, Roman, 2. 12. 14
Superstitions, Roman, 1. 72
Traditions, 25. 51. 62. 70. 95. S6. 97.
99. 100
Transubstantiation, 10. 11. 14. 25. 31.
33. 35. 49. 78. 84. 98
Unknown tongue, Service in, 14