Some

il'W

,\i>Am.

1 If

SOME

DOCUMENTS,

&e. &c.

CONNECTED WITH

TRACT FOR THE TIMES,
N°. XC.
CONTENTS.
1. The Resolution of the Hcbdoma^j^Board.
2. The Rev. Mr. Newman's Letter to the Vice-Chancellor.
3. Letter of Oxoniensis Catholicus to the Editor of The Timet.
4. Letter to the Editor of the Morning Post from Discipulus
Ecclesise Anglicanse.
6. The object of the Tracts for the Times, from the Morning
Post. 6. Remarks on the late Revival of Catholic Principles, from
The Times Newspaper.

OXFORD :
W. GRAHAM, HiaH-STREET.
1841.

Sot-

OXFORD ! PRINTED BV J. MUNDAY, JPN, (JUBIN-ITRBBT,

SOME DOCUMENTS, &c. &c.

At a Meeting of the Vice-Chancellor, Heads of
Houses, and Proctors, in the Delegates' Room,
March 15th, 1841 :—
Considering that it is enjoined in the Statutes of
this University (Tit. III. Sect. % Tit. IX. Sect. II,
§. 3, Sect. V, §. S) that every Student shall be in
structed and examined in the Thirty-nine Articles,
and shall subscribe to them ; considering also that a
Tract has recently appeared, dated from Oxford, and
entitled " Remarks on certain Passages in the
Thirty-nine Articles", being No. 90 of the Tracts
for the Times, a series of anonymous publications
purporting to be written by Members of the Univer
sity, but which are in no way sanctioned by the
University itself ;
Resolved, That modes of interpretation such as
are suggested in the said Tract, evading rather than
explaining the sense of the Thirty-nine Articles, and
reconciling subscription to them with the adoption of
errors, which they were designed to counteract, defeat

the object, and are inconsistent with the due observ
ance, of the above-mentioned Statutes.
P. WYNTER, Vice-Chancellor.

LETTER FROM THE REV MR. NEWMAN.
Mr. Vice-Chancellor, — I write this respect
fully to inform you, that I am the author, and have
the sole responsibility, of the Tract on which the
hebdomadal board has just now expressed an opinion,
and that I have not given my name hitherto, under
the belief that it was desired that I should not. I
hope it will not surprise you if I say, that my opinion
remains unchanged of the truth and honesty of the
principle maintained in the Tract, and of the necessity
of putting it forth. At the same time, I am prompted
by my feelings to add my deep consciousness that
every thing I attempt might be done in a better
spirit, and in a better way ; and, while I am sincerely
sorry for the trouble and anxiety I have given to the
Members of the Board, I beg to return my thanks to
them for an act which, even though founded on mis
apprehension, may be made as profitable to myself as
it is religiously and charitably intended.
I say all this with great sincerity.
And am,
Mr. Vice-Chancellor, Your obedient Servant,
JOHN HENRY NEWMAN.
Oriel College, March l6th.

(From The Times of March 17th, 1841.)
TO THE EDITOR.
Sir, — I hope you will not consider it inconsistent
with your excellent rule of avoiding theological con
troversy in your columns to insert this brief letter.
A statement has just been put out by the Board of
Heads of Houses and Proctors, condemnatory of No.
90 of Tracts for the Times, and it is not impossible
that some persons may, from misapprehension, re
present this as an " University censure" of the pro
duction in question. Your readers should therefore
be informed, that this Board consists indeed of indi
viduals who from their age and station are worthy of
every deference, but who are in no way authorized
by the Statutes on such a subject to represent the
University. I remain. Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
OXONIENSIS CATHOLICUS.
Oxford, Tuesday Morning, March l6th.

(From the Morning Post of March 17.)
TO THE EDITOR.
Sir, — I quite agree wath your correspondent, in
your publication of this morning, that the whole
question respecting the recent Tract, No. 90, which
has caused such a sensation, is one of matter of fact
only. Nothing can put in a clearer light the gross

and cruel injustice of the cry which has been raised
against it than this very circumstance. For how
stands the affair ? Certain learned and pious indi
viduals are pertinaciously charged with holding opi
nions inconsistent with the Articles of the Church of
England. Two courses are open to them, either to
leave the charge unrefuted or to rebut it. For some
time they adopted the former alternative, and, as
every one knows, on that very account the press,
under the control of the low Church and Radical
party, teemed wdth every species of libel and misre
presentation against them. They think fit, therefore,
to follow the opposite plan ; and in an elaborate, and
as I am convinced unanswerable, pamphlet, demon
strate not only that the Articles are not contrary to,
but in conformity with, their opinions, which they
distinguish by the epithet of " Catholic and primi
tive," but also do not apply even to the Decrees of
the Council of Trent, seeing (which I thought every
one knew before) that the Articles were fixed and
promulgated before these Decrees were made. So
that because they prove more than they are required
to do in their defence, and show iu the most convinc
ing manner that no tenet of theirs is forbidden or in
any way interfered with by the Church of England,
their adversaries suddenly turn round upon them
and declare that they explain away the Articles, when
no explanation of any kind was attempted, and charge
them with wishing to subvert the Church of England
and change her profession of faith, when they are

giving the most potent and satisfactory reasons why
«o man holding their opinions can possibly leave that
Church, or even in any particular dissent from it.
Yours, &c.
DISCIPULUS ECCLESI^ ANGLICANS,
AND M.A. OF OXFORD.
Athenaeum, March 17th.

(The following arrtcles, hearing on the general principles of
the Tracts, it has been thought desirable to reprint.)
(From the Morning Post of March 18th, 1841.)
The principle of the Editors of the Tracts for the
Times seems to have been to allow of the occasional
promulgation of merely individual views and specu
lations, for the sake of the greater force and natural
ness which pervades the unrestricted expression of
individual thoughts. The Tracts do not profess to
lay down a system. Their object is to awaken
thought — to suggest investigation — to combat modern
prejudice with the learning of ancient times — to exalt
the views of Churchmen — to exhibit the Church of
England in another aspect than that of its negative
character of mere Protestantism, and to assert its
positive character of the Anglo-Catholic Church.
We believe that upon the whole the Tracts for the
Times have had great success in the achievement of
these objects, and have therefore done great good.

(From The Times of March 4th, 1841.)
Whatever may be the merits or the faults of the
gentlemen at Oxford, to whom Lord Morpeth and
Mr. O'Connell alluded, it is notoriously false to say
that any one of them ever thought of " disclaiming"
any single doctrine of the Church to which he
belongs : the whole aim and object of their teaching
is to recommend certain doctrines as identical with
those of the Liturgy, Canons, and Articles of the
Church of England. They prefer indeed to rescue
from Popery the appellation of Catholic, which has
ever been the inheritance of all Apostolic Churches,
and they are not overzealous for the denomination of
Protestant, -which occurs nowhere in the Prayer
Book, which expresses no positive belief, and which
is the common property of all who are separated from
Rome, however widely differing among themselves.
But we think it will be difficult for any man to show
that in this respect, or any other, their doctrine or
practice (whether erroneous or not) contradicts any
oaths which they have sworn : and we wish all who
speak ill of them were equally blameless in this
respect. We have said so much as this, not because we
desire to identify ourselves with the opinions of the
gentlemen in question (who, after all, as Sir Robert
Inglis truly said, are not the University of Oxford)
but partly because we were formerly led, on the very
authority quoted by Lord Morpeth, to speak of them
in terms of harshness which we now regret ; and

9

partly because it appears to ush unjust and unmanly
to single out absent and unrepresented men for an
attack in the House of Commons, without any pre
vious notice.

(From Tlie Times of March 6th.)
Several Journals have laboured very persever-
ingly for some time past to connect The Times with
what they are pleased to call " Puseyism" ; and the
fact of our having on Thursday last expressed a feel
ing of regret that we had formerly spoken in terms
of unmerited harshness of the Authors of the Oxford
Tracts, is declared to be " ominous", by a contem
porary, whose qualifications for deciding upon ques
tions relating to the doctrine of the Church of Eng
land are tolerably notorious.
Whenever we may be led (as must sometimes
happen to all journalists) to place too much confi
dence in plausible ex parte statements to the preju
dice of any individual or body of men, we shall always
be ready, upon all fitting opportunities, to express
regret for halving so done. But it is not to be sup
posed that we, therefore, assume for the future an
attitude of partisanship on behalf of those individuals,
or hold ourselves in any degree responsible for what
they may do or say. Fair play and no favour is all
that any man engaged in controversy can reasonably
desire j and it is all that we shall ever undertake to
give.

10
It is not our vocation to intermeddle in theological
controversies ; the delicacy and difficulty of handling
them well, the reverence due to the subjects of which
they treat, the amount of leisure and research neces
sary to be bestowed upon them (not to allude to any
higher considerations) are sufficient to repel us from
the attempt. And even if we entertained no doubt
as to our qualifications for such a function, we should
be deterred by a recollection of the unavoidable mix
ture of matter which finds its way into the columns
of every newspaper. Considering the turmoil of
political affairs with which we have to do, we think
it best in every way to leave the discussion of strictly
religious questions to the authorized teachers of reli
gion, endeavouring only to keep the general principles
and practical duties of religion always in view.
With respect to that school of theology in the
English Church, of which so much has been said,
we take its actual position to be this. It originated
in a feeling of alarm at certain legislative measures
which were passed, or known to be in contemplation,
during the three first years of Lord Grey's ministry ;
and more especially at the persecutions and privations
of the parochial Clergy in Ireland, consequent on the
refusal to pay tithes ; the increasing power and pre
tensions of Popery in Ireland, and Protestant dissent
in England, and the disposition manifested by many
of tbe clergy and laity to call for important alterations
in the Prayer Book. Of this, a letter recently pub
lished by the Hon and Rev. Arthur Perceval, in the

11
Irish Ecclesiastical Gazette, furnishes conclusive evi
dence. Under the influence of these feelings, Mr.
Perceval himself, and several others (including, with
the remarkable exception of Dr. Pusey, all who have
since become eminent among the Oxford divines)
met, in the summer of 1833, at the house of the late
Rev. Hugh James Rose, then Domestic Chaplain to
the Archbishop of Canterbury. After discussing the
state and prospects of the Church, they came to the
agreement, that the only way of counteracting the
danger by which the Church seemed to be menaced,
was by recalling the minds of Churchmen to the dis
tinctive principles of the Liturgy, Canons, and Arti
cles ; from which there was thought to have been a
very general departure. They agreed in considering
these distinctive principles to be the same which are
now branded with the name of " Pusejasm" ; and
these, as the principles distinguishing the doctrine of
the Church of England from all modern innovations,
whether Popish or Protestant, and identifying it with
the primitive faith of the universal Church, they de
termined diligently to recommend and teach. They
believed that by so doing they were only discharging
(with the zeal necessary in difficult timeg) an obliga
tion imposed upon them by their ordination vows.
Upon this resolution they acted, and in carrying it
out (whether right or wrong) they certainly met
with extraordinary success. Their teaching has now
sunk deeply into the heart of the Church of England •
it has acquired not merely a numerical, but a moral

12
power and influence, which must henceforth make it
impossible for any statesman to despise or overlook,
and highly indiscreet for any political party unne
cessarily to alienate, this element in the constitution
of society. The younger Clergy are said to be very
generally of this school ; it has no want of advocates
among their seniors ; it has penetrated into both
Houses of Parliament ; and we are confidently in
formed (we suppose, therefore, upon some foundation)
that it has met with countenance from the Bishops
themselves. It has completely succeeded in awakening
in the Church that vital spirit of re-action, the neces
sity for which called it into existence. We hear
nothing now of a demand for the admission of
Dissenters into the Universities, of proposals to
abolish subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles, or
of contemplated changes in the Liturgy ; or, if we
do still hear of them, the manner in which they are
received, as contrasted with their popularity in 1833,
illustrates the completeness of the victory still more
forcibly. The means by which these striking effects have
been produced are not less remarkable than the effects
themselves. The doctrines of the school in question
(whether good or bad) have not been recommended
by any stimulating excitements — any appeals to the
passions or the affections rather than to the conscience
and the reason. We have had no camp-meetings,
or field-preachings, like those of Whitfield and
Wesley; no platform-speeches, no Exeter-hall agi-

13

tation; no advertised and placarded sermons by
popular pulpit orators. Neither is it true that the
University lecture-room has been the theatre of these
triumphs. Of the gentlemen whose names have come
before the public as leading men in the school, two
only, Mr. Sewell, and Dr. Pusey, are in any way
connected with the instruction of youth ; and Dr.
Pusey has only a very limited class of Students in
Hebrew. It is through the press alone, and by the
influence of their hves, that these gentlemen have
endeavoured to disseminate their opinions beyond the
sphere of their immediate duty.
And what is the character of their writings, and
of their lives ? No "man, however widely differing
from them, can open any of their publications, with
out perceiving that they write with learning, ability,
calmness, seriousness, command of temper, a strong
sense of responsibility, forbearance, and courtesy of
language towards their adversaries. No man can
know any thing of their lives, without being aware
that they act cotisistently -with their professions ; that
they are more than usually strict, circumspect, self-
denying, and (as far as man can judge by outward
demeanour) pious. The most respectable of their '
opponents in controversy, especially the Master of
the Temple and the present Bishop of Chichester,
have borne free and generous testimony to their merits
in these respects. Such antagonists never, even for
a moment, expressed or felt the smallest doubt, that
the men with whom they had to deal were sincerely

14
attached to the Church of England, firmly per
suaded that their doctrine was identical with hers,
and utterly incapable of deliberately violating their
oaths. No calumny, we are satisfied, was ever more un
merited than this, which casts upon men who are
peculiarly zealous for ecclesiastical authority (and who
are maligned for being so) the imputation of disre
garding it in practice. They were not " Puseyites"
who contended for the abolition of subscription to the
Thirty-nine Articles in our Universities. They were
not " Puseyites" who, in 1833, made the press teem
with pamphlets in favour of changes in the Prayer
Book. They are not " Puseyites" who, having sworn
to obey the Rubric, depart from it as often as they
think proper in the celebration of Divine Service.
They are not " Puseyites" who alter or leave out such
expressions as do not suit their notions in the offices
of burial and baptism. But men who do these things,
together with the organs of that political party which
has abetted all the attacks of dissent upon the Church
of England, accuse men who do them not of unfaith
fulness to the Church ; and politicians whose whole
official life has been devoted to the advancement of
Popery in the United Kingdom, cry out " No Popery"
with the loudest, if an Oxford Clergyman dares to
suggest that the Church of Rome, though corrupt,
may possibly not be Antichrist,* or ventures to breathe
* See Review of Todd's Donellan Lectures, Brit. Crit.
Oct. 1840.

15

a prayer for the restoration of Christian unity through
out the world.

% For further information on the subject, among other
Works, the reader is referred to the Arrtcles in the Quarterly
Review on " Memorials of Oxford" (Jan. 1838)—" Oxford
Theology" (March, 1839)— Mr, Newman's Letter to Dr.
Faussett— Professor Pusey's Letter to the Lord Bishop of
Oxford — Professor Keble's Sermon on Tradition — Archdeacon
Manning's Sermon on the Rule of Faith — Dodsworth's Lec
tures on the Church — Mr. Oakeley's Preface to his Whitehall
Sermons — Dr. Hook's five Sermons — Letters of a Reformed
Cathohc — Rev. T. K. Arnold's Reply to Mr. Baptist Noel's
Pamphlet (Brit. Mag. March, April, 1840)— Mr, Palmer's
Treatise on the Church (Reviewed British Critic, July,
1838)— Bishop Jebh's Tract for All Times— the Correspond
ence between Professor Sewell and Dr, Miller, of Armagh,
in the Irish Ecclesiastical Journal — and for an exposition and
defence of the doctrine of " Reserve in the Communication of
Religious Knowledge'', to the present Bishop of Winchester's
Work on the Ministerial Character of Christ— Chapter on die
" Gradual Teaching of the Church", pp. 179-229, especially
p. 221. Ed, 1824. &c, &c. &c.

OXFORD : PRINTBD BY 3. MUNDAY, JUN,, QUEEN-STREHT.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08561 6879