t^>h *,< "¦ \i 11; fev" /.'i f^ J < >. . ^- , V . ".'.,/ \ ^ .. vS .R ." "?V^' , I, , ''', /%" ''*'¦••''':'..•? .-' f ' fv \ V'i". U *'»'., i '/ f « .'^M- ' ' ' mA *. 'I •>' J' • >ri '* ' y '¦''¦ • 1 'm /-."¦¦,:,<• 5|] %% .¦ If » g#» 'ff% t ¦ 6 SOME PAPERS ILLUSTRATIVE OF TRACT FOR THE TIMES, No. 90, &c. WITH AN APPENDIX AND NOTES, CONTENTS. 1. Testimony to Mr. Newman's View of the Yearnings of the Age, from Sermons (1830) by Rev. J. Miller, late Fell, of Wore. Coll. and Bampton Lecturer. 2. Remarks on Mr. Newman's Letter, from the Morning Post. 3. Rev. W. B. Barter's Letter on the Tracts for the Times, their effects, and the spirit of their opponents, from the Conservative Journal.APPENDIX. 1. The Sixth Article of Religion, with the Church's Comment. 2. Quotations from Chillingworth, Bishop Marsh, Stc. OXFORD: W. GRAHAM, HIGH STREET, J. G. F. AND J. RIVINGTON, LONDON. 1841. N ¦O I r,MAflA,N SOME PAPERS ILLU6TKATIVE OF TRACT FOR THE TIMES, No. 90, &c. From the Moening Post op March 24th. To the Editor. Sir, Every little that may help towards forming a dispassionate judgment on the subject of the Tracts for the Times has its value at the present moment of excite ment, and perhaps the very simple facts which follow, may be worth considering with such a view. In the preface to a volume of sermons, published in the year 1830, by a member of the University of Oxford, an opinion was expressed that " there must be many earnest and reflecting Christians at that time little satisfied with the complexion and appearances of rehgion in this king dom." And, among other classes specified as likely to feel uneasiness, it was asked — " Must there not be considerable numbers who shrink from the too probable effects (the fruits already ripening, as it appears to them) of a religious restlessness, and feverishness of speculation in divine things, of such a sort as seems not only tending to root out, but bent on rooting out, the very notion of all visible and outward bonds of unity among us; which little less than mocks at discipline and Church authority ; nor only that, but which — in any way of natural consequence — can only be expected to un- settle or impair the personal faith of thousands, by leaving it no manner of distinct standard to which to make appeal, and under which to seek and find an honest shelter in the hour of storm and tempest ? * * * s * * " What, again, must be their fear and opinion, to whom it seems as plain as any such thing well can be, that almost every sect and party, in this same all-important province of religion, is doing (as it were) its adversary's work ? Now, Calvinism (e. g.) is by a natural re-action, and under a new form of that so frequent turn in men's opinions — the meeting of extremes — enlisting numbers in the ranks of Arianism, or Socinianism. Again, how the outrageousness of an enthusiasm derived from broodings over dark unaccomplished prophecy * * * or the blind spirit of unjust and undiscriminating condemnation, derived from no authority but that of an habitual unre flecting prejudice, is taking the most likely course to cause a rally and diversion in favour of Popery, in many minds that can be least spared from the communion of our Church — I mean, in dispositions of a more devotional, and at the same time a more dutiful, complexion — reflecting, meek, patient — minds, therefore, which can never follow such a fiery zeal to all its lengths, yet do not seem to find that settled anchorage of faith and hope which they desire in fellowship with some communion of their brethren, except it shall be bound with cords o{ virtual infallibility?'' I beg it may be observed that this preface bears date April 22, 1830, and that the date of the earliest Oxford Tract is September 9, 1833, nearly three years and a half later. Keeping these facts in mind (for it is to the facts of the case that I wish to draw attention,) let the foregoing pas sage be compared with language in Mr. Newman's Letter to Dr. Jelf, of the 13th inst. " The age," he says, " is moving towards something (deeper and truer than satisfied the last century,) and, most unhappily, the one religious community among us which has of late years been practi cally in possession of this something is the Church of Rome. She alone, amid all the errors and evils of her practical system, has given free scope to the feelings of awe, mystery, tenderness, reverence, devotedness, and other feelings which may be especially called Catholic. The question, then, is, -whether we shall give them up to the Roman Church or claim them for ourselves, as we well may, by reverting to that older system, which has of late years, indeed, been superseded, but which has been and is quite congenial (to say the least,) I should rather say proper and natural, and even necessary, to our Church. But, if we do give them up, then we must give up the men who cherish them. We must consent either to give up the men or to admit their principles." Now, I say, (continues Mr. Newman,) I speak of what especially comes under my eye, when I express my con viction that this is a very serious question at this time. It is not a theoretical question at all — I may be wrong in my conviction — I may be wrong in the mode I adopt to meet it ; but still the Tract (No. 90) is grounded on the belief that the Articles need not be so closed as the received method of teaching closes them, and ought not to be for the sake of many persons. If we will close them, we run the risk of subjecting persons whom we should least like to lose or distress to the temptation of joining the Church of Rome, or to the necessity of withdrawing from the Church as established, or to the miseiy of subscribing with doubt and hesitation. And, as to myself, I was led especially to exert myself with reference to this difficulty from having had it earnestly set before me by parties I revere to do all I could to keep members of our Church from straggling in the direction of Rome ; and as not being able to pursue the methods commonly adopted, and as being persuaded that the view of the Articles I have taken is true and honest, I was anxious to set it before them. I thought it would be useful to them without hurting any one else." Such is the simple evidence here submitted. In begging attention to it, let it be granted that it is but an atom out of a vast mass ; that there are wide differences between the views taken in the one extract and in the other ; that the interpretations of phenomena in the earlier (by no means powerftilly or happily expressed) may be deficient or wrong ; in short, let no special credit be claimed for that, of any sort whatever. But it is adduced here as tes timony to fact ; and surely, as a fact, it is impossible not to perceive, and unreasonable not to admit, that its des cription contains the germ (so to express it) of that bitter fruit described in the conclusion of Mr. Newman's state ment, distinctly seen in embryo at the date assigned, whe ther then rightly or wrongly accounted for. This last point is immaterial ; nay, it is but of secondary importance if (which is possible) the tone of some of the Oxford Tracts may have since contributed to hasten its growth. The material point to be acknowledged and digested is, that other causes must have sewn the seed of an uneasiness, affording room for fear of a specific apprehended issue, so plainly traceable and left on record more than three years before these Tracts had any existence. And probably no single cause had been, or since has been, more operative towards such unwelcome result than that advancing usur pation of the Puritanical or Calvinistic spirit in the Church of England, which always has assumed an infallibility of its own*, and always been intolerant of any comprehensive or Catholic construction of the Articles in particular ; in * " Of all the repulsive peculiarities of the holy discipline, as it exhibited itself in his (Archbishop Laud's) time, there was none, perhaps so re markable, as its coarse, hard-featured, resemblance to that very Popery, ¦which was the object of its professed abhorrence. The Presbyterian sys- other words, which has so doggedly contended for that par tial and MM-catholic closing of them, which Mr. Newman deprecates. At all events, it is demonstrable that there have long been those who have anticipated the precise results which Mr. Newman states to have ensued, and that among the almost identical dispositions specified in each of the foregoing extracts, from causes not only not con nected with the Oxford Tracts*, but utterly at variance with them. I am. Sir, your humble Servant, The Writer of the Preface referred to. torn was, in its original principles, as sternly and avowedly intolerant as the pontifical chair. ["Beware ' , lest out of cowardice ye tolerate what God would not have tolerated," said one of their preachers in his sermon be fore the Commons. " Take heed of toleration" said another, in his ser mon before the Lords ; "For God's sake, my Lords, let us not leave a Reformation, which may need a toleration^''\ It extended no hope of sal vation, beyond the pale of its own communion. It affected a dominion, paramount to all earthly magistracy. It proclaimed a war of extermination against heresy. It was ready to compass earth and sea for proselytes. Violence and terror were employed to establish its claim to infallibility. And if Popery had its Council of Trent, Calvinism had its Synod of Dort. If it abjured the idolatry of the mass, it may fairly be said to have found a substitute in the ordinance of preaching, &c. — Laud's Conference with Fisher, the Jesuit, p. 100." Le Bas' Life of Archbishop Laud, p. 367. I Bishop Marsh on the consequences of neglecting to give the Prayer Book with the Bible, p 25. * " Oxford Tracts, or rather " Tracts for the Times," their title and their right title, for the times called for them. People were wearied in tlie ways of the " various denominations ;" eiTor was preached at every step; and so soon as a man had become a VVesleyan, he was urgently provoked by the Baptist ; and so on ad infinitum, until he was prompted to ask who can be right ? and, moreover, what standard shall decide the right ? when once these questions took an earnest possession of the mind, it was clear that the private ipse dixits of intemperate preachers were at an end, and that we must seek the decision of a worthy and unimpassioned tribunal. We might have been in danger of prefeiTing Rome, or anything rather than the uneasy position in which we found ourselves. CATHOLICUS CHRISTIANUS." Morning Post. [For another important reason why the Tracts should not be designated the Oxford Tracts, see Mr. Barter's Letter below.] From the Morning Post of March 24th. Mr. Newman has perhaps not written so cautiously as he might have written, and this he frankly and dutifully expresses : Who can be wise, amazed, temperate and furious, Loyal and neutral, in a moment ? No man. but Mr. Newman, in conjunction with others, has, under Providence, accomplished a mighty work for the Church. It no longer slumbers nor sleeps. The sober dignity and authoritative teaching of the Church are now again zeal ously maintained. The Church system and its inestimable value is far more generally understood and more dutifully and effectually appreciated than it was some years ago. For these advantages, which we cannot think likely to lead to schism, but quite the contrary, we must be content to pay the price of some misconstruction and some temporary disturbance. The hurricane at Oxford occasioned by Tract No. 90, and by what has been said of it by many eminent and valuable men, has been painful to behold, but we have good hope that the results upon the whole, and in various ways, will be found beneficial. The first of these results has been the Letter of Mr. Newman to Dr. Jelf. This appears to be regarded by the most competent judges as a masterly performance, and has given great satisfaction and comfort to those friends of strict Church principles, who had been offended or dis quieted by Tract No. 90*. We observe, however, (and we hope we may be pardoned if some indignation mingle with * The Tract is fortiiied with copious quotations from the Homilies, which the author truly says are especially authoritative where they bring out the sense of the Article. Now as to the literal Interpretation which the Declaration prefixed to the Articles especially enjoins, and which the wri ter of the tract presses, being seemingly not accordant with the opinions our regret at having to make the observation) that the publications which have been most forward to present to their readers, with aggravated comments, the views of those authorities who objected to the Tract, have been care ful not to present in the same way, the explanation which Mr. Newman has given. And yet with very little study — • for it is to be found in the second page of his Letter — they might have found the principal matter explained. The gentlemen of the University who misunderstood the Tract — perhaps not so much from any fault of theirs as from the modes of expression adopted by Mr. Newman — considered that the Tract maintained that the Articles of our Anglican Church did not condemn certain errors as they are taught authoritatively by the Church of Rome, but only certain absurd practices and opinions which intelligent Romanists repudiate. Mr. Newman answers that he is the writer of the Tract, and that this is not his opinion ; but, on the contrary, his opinion is that the Articles of our Church do contain a condemnation of the authoritative teaching of the Church of Rome. The argument of Mr. Newman, as he explains it, ap pears to be, that the Articles of our Church are not directed against the decrees of the Council of Trent, be- of the framers of the Articles in king Edward's reign, one cannot but think that if the Translators of our Bible, and the Bishops of the Savoy Conference, in other word.s, the Divines whose works are now being re published in the Anglo-Catholic Library, if these Divines, then, differed in some of the points now under discussion from the framers of the Arti cles and yet, though having full power to do so, did not attempt to alter the wording of the Articles, at either the Hampton Court or Savoy Confer ences, not thinking that the Text of the Articles was at all inconsistent with the catholic view they took of them — If this be the case, one cannot see how the writer of the tract can be accused of inconsistency when he holds that interpretation of them held by these great Divines of our Church, and taught by the Clergy of the Church till within the last century. P.S. This view is confirmed by the following passage from the second edition of the Tract : " We have no duties toward the framers (of the Articles) ; nor do we receive the Articles from their original framers, but from several succes sive convocations after their time ; in the last instance, from that of JG62." p. 80. Sec also sect. .3, p. 80. Id. 10 cause they were written before those decrees existed. That other senses short of the present authoritative teaching of the Church of Rome may fulfil the letter of those decrees and may now be held in that Church, and that it is useful to see by what extent of reformation in the Church of Rome it may be brought into agreement with our Church. The Letter to Dr. Jelf says at page 17 : — " Nothing more then is maintained in the Tract than that Rome is capable of a reformation ; its corrupt system indeed cannot be reformed ; it can only be destroyed, and that destruction is its reformation. I do not think that there is anything very erroneous or very blameable in such a belief; and it seems to be a very satisfactory omen in its favour, that at the Council of Trent such protests as are quoted in the Tract, were entered against so many of the very errors and corruptions which our Articles and Homilies also condemn. I do not think it is any great excess of charity towards the largest portion of Christen dom to rejoice to detect such points of agreement between them and us, as a joint protest against some of their greatest corruptions, though they in practice cherish them, though they still differ from us in other points be.sides. That I have not always consistently kept to this view in all that I have written, I am well aware, yet I have made very partial deviations from it." So, then, it appears that while shallow and violent per sons have been exclaiming that Mr. Newman and his fellow-labourers were trying to lead Church of England folks to Romanism, the truth is they have been labouring to prevent that, and, on the other hand, so to satisfy the members of the Romish Church of the corruptions in the present authoritative teaching of that Church, that they may be induced to approach more and more nearly to our Anglican doctrine and discipline. n From the Conservative Journal of March 20th. It is we feel unnecessary for us to do more than call the attention of our readers to the following admirable letter, with which we have been honoured : — To the Editor of the Conservative Journal. Sir, Believing that the Authors of the Tracts for the Times, are the authors also of an increasing reverence for our Church, as a Divine institution, and, believing that in times of danger they have made known to us the real strength of her position, and the only legitimate means by which she may be defended, I am not surprised that un learned and unstable men should have attacked them in the worst spirit of religious controversy. Such opponents, however, might safely be disregarded, and permitted with out a comment, to persevere in their violent and contradic tory accusations. But, it seems to me, that any among us who feel gratitude to these men for their exertions in our sacred cause, would do well to state their reasons for this feeling of firmness and moderation, when the same charges are advanced by men of piety and acknowledged talent. I have read with much pleasure your remarks on Lord Morpeth's speech ; what you have said on the hostility manifested by some Members of our Church to the Book of Common Prayer, touches a chord to which my feelings so completely respond, that I cannot but hope that you will not decline giving to the few remarks which I shall make the benefit of your extensive circulation. With regard to the attack which his lordship has thought fit to make on the University of Oxford, if he considers the mat ter impartially, he must be convinced that the University of Oxford is not more answerable for the publication of the 12 Tracts for the Times, than for the abl^ speeches which he delivers in the House of Commons. It would be a hard measure to call that venerable seat of learning to account for every production of those who have had the benefit of its instructions. As to the tendency of the doctrines ad vanced in the Tracts for the Times to Popery, his lordship would see immediately, if he gave any attention to the matter, that even those who professed precisely the same principles in their day, are among the most able defenders of our Church, against the errors and encroachments of that superstition, and the names of many such may be found in the list of those who, in the time of James the Second, periled their liberties and lives, by putting them selves in the first rank of its opponents. But I am not surprised that Lord Morpeth has fallen into this mistake ; the same error has been committed by men of high talent and station in our Church, who have also gone further than he, and have ventured to enter into controversy with these men, without fully comprehending the nature of the principles which they have attempted to beat down. The most popular charges which are brought of late against writers of the Tracts for the Times are these : A desire to set up a new system of Doctrine in our Church, and to put aside the principles of the Protestant Reformation. I will say as few words as possible on each of these subjects. The first of these charges is an attempt to set up a new system of Christian Doctrine in this country, as if the men who write in these publications were now, for the first time, disclosing a system hitherto unheard of, and, in fact, the offspring of their own imaginations. Now, the truth is, they have never endeavoured to recommend a single opinion or doctrine of their own ; they have attempted to turn the attention of their brethren solely to the pure creed of the primitive Church of Christ. To their innocence in 13 this respect, their enemies themselves bear witness, the most able of whom* has allowed (as every one must who does not shut his eyes to the truth) that the doctrines they ad vocate, are the doctrines of primitive Christianity — so much for the novelty of their creed. Then as to their setting aside the principles of the Protestant Reformation, or disarming them as it has been said, of their poignancy and efficacy, on account of which, every sincere friend of that reformation has been called upon openly to declare his dissent from these doctrines — The following I consider a satisfactory answer : — The principle of the Protestant Reformation is a wide term, almost as wide as that of the Protestant religion, it may mean any thing or nothing ; but the true, the avowed principle of the Protestant reformation in the English Church, was nothing else but to restore the doctrine of the primitive Church of Christ, purified from Romish corrup tions ; this was the only principle of reformation professed by Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, and the principle is the all-prevailing one of the Tracts for the Times, so that were the real friends of the Protestant Reformation to declare their dissent from these doctrines, they would make a des perate and very unwise attack upon themselves and their own tenets. But, it may be asked if the writers of the virtues of the Tracts for the Times are pure in doctrine and blameless and harmless, why is so loud a voice raised against them ? Why are grave men in authority, perio dicals of conflicting religious opinions, newspapers without number, unwearied in their attacks ? Some with more polished weapons, others stipitibus sudibusque prceustis, of vulgar and coarse abuse ? A plain answer is this, because these men have put themselves forward as defenders of the * The author of the History of Enthusiasm. [For a refutation of his work see several articles in the British Maga zine, 1810, by (f>i\6Ka\osl\ 14 fortress of the Church of England— the Book of Common Prayer ; it is for this book, and not for these men that I fear, let them be trampled under foot, let them be accused of favouring errors which their soul abhors, was not their Master crucified for aiming at the government of a petty province, when he had refused all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them ? To suffer under false accusation is a severe trial, but they may support it with christian patience, and great will be their reward in heaven. But this I know, that, if they are beaten down, their adversaries will have gained no victory while the Book of Common Prayer remains unmu- tilated. In that book the principles of the primitive church must circulate widely through the land. The con gregations of the Church of England must still address their God in the words and in the spirit of the primitive Church of Christ. In those prayers, in the forms of Baptism, of Burial, and the rites of Confirmation, of Ordaining Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, they must find the main doctrines of the Tracts for the Times, set forth in as plain terms as the wisdom of man could devise ; and in the Catechism, in which, (if they act honestly) they are bound to instruct their children, they will find not a word to favour the modern gloss on the doctrine of justification by faith, but the whole in perfect harmony with that doctrine as held by the primitive Church of Christ. Would that all who loved this sacred deposit read the history of former times, and judged by the perils it has escaped of its present danger. When Laud was beheaded there would have been no triumph to independent principles had not, on the same day, the use of the Book of Common Prayer ceased throughout the land ; then, indeed, it gained a short-lived victory. Let us consider for a moment the state of the Church of England when these tracts where first published. 15 Intlependent principles had for a long time silently gained ground within its pale. The Liturgy, and especially the church services, were in many instances mutilated according to the caprice of those who, though independent in principle, had become inconsistent ministers of the Church of England. The Catechism was frequently dis carded from schools superintended by the clergy of our church as unfit for the instruction of children in the doc trines of Christianity. Curtailments in the morning and evening service of our church, and alterations in our creeds, were spoken of with as much freedom as men would discuss alterations in the shape of a garment, in order to meet the varying fashion of the present hour. Publications, in which the tenets of Calvin and John Knox could only be sincerely maintained (for the authors professed their creed and were not of our communion), had crept into the families of many pious churchmen, and, if they had done nothing worse, had lessened their rever ence for the real and characteristic doctrines of the church of England. Tracts were circulated by thousands to pro pagate a modern system of Christianity, from which all mention of the sacrament of baptism was excluded, as a subject, not of sufficient importance to demand attention, and although such things were done avowedly under the sanction and by the aid of ministers of our church, no authoritative voice was lifted up to check the evil. In the mean time Popery was numbering her converts by thousands in our land ; and, notwithstanding the ex amples of America and Scotland, in which the increase was proportionably greater — it was attributed to the want of lively reformation principles, with the same truth as some mediciners of the present day attribute the bad health of their patients to not imbibing a sufficient quan tity of their noxious specifics. Nor was this all the danger; the clergy of the church of England were un- 16 armed, the dissenters claimed the victory, when opposed on principles falsely termed evangelical; and claimed it with justice, and the right cause was on the point of being overborne by the number and violence of its assailants. The Book of Common Prayer stood alone in the midst of the troubled waters. It stood a beautiful fortress of the olden time, but as it was constructed, as if in perfect con tempt of the rules of modern art, its mutilation or destruc tion was contemplated as an easy task, to be contemplated at leisure, whenever its enemies might agree on the style of building they would wish to raise in its stead. It was at this juncture that God raised up pions and learned men in its defence, and the firmness of the rock, on which they built their outwork, may be known by the foam of the waters which have dashed against it, and the violence of their recoil. So far, then, from exhorting my younger brethren of the clergy not to meet these men fairly in argument, advice which has emanated indeed from a very high and liberal quarter, so far from advising them a dogged adherence to their own opinions, I would call on them to inquire dili gently whether these men are employed in vindicating the doctrines of Scripture and of primitive Christianity ; and if they find it to be so, I would advise them to defend not these men, who are subject to error, but the faith they possess, which was delivered to the saints, and is treasured in the Holy Catholic Church. Above all I would exhort them not to meddle with those who are given to change. If one of Raphael's tablets were in your possession (I would ask them) how would you act ? would you venture to retouch or to repaint it ? would it not rather be your care, if it were possible, to cleanse it from all stains, to bring out beauties which had been obscured by the effect of time, and to restore every tint of the glorious original ; and will you treat the sacred deposit of catholic truth 17 Committed to your charge with less reverence ? God forbid ! Oh guard it from those who would not hesitate to daub the sacred relic with the course colouring of modern art — suffer not Geneva cloaks to be substituted for its graceful and flowing drapery, take your side with the Church of the Martyrs ; and if their memory is assailed with the grossest ribaldry, who cannot be disturbed in their place of rest, is it not plain that the same spirit is at work* which opposed that holy army 1700 years ago ; and that it should be met on our part as it was on theirs, with the same entire devotion to the cause of primitive Christianity. WILLIAM BRUDENELL BARTER, Rector of Highclere and Burghclere, Hants. P. S. I write against the spirit in which the Tracts for the Times are opposed ; I do not agree with all the opinions advanced in those writings, especially on the subject of sin after baptism, and reserve in communicating- religious knowledge. Divines, however, who prefer the authority of the pious and eloquent Mr. Cecil to that of ¦* [" It cannot surely escape our observations," says LfiBas, " there is at this day, a spirit on the wing, which is ready to combine itself with Popuiy, — or with Dissent, in all its manifold varieties ; — with any society, iu short, or with any interest, which may be supposed to contain, within itself, the seeds of discontent or disaffection. It is a spirit which is ready to be come all things to all men. To the Konconformist, it will become as a nonconformist: to the Romanist, it will become as a Romanist. To the weak, it will become as weak ; and will use the accents of candour and of moderation. To the daring, it will show itself full of hardihood and strength ; and will speak openly of the things which pertain to anarchy and demolition. Its secret object is, to banish all fear of God, and all reverence to the powers that be. But, nevertheless, it can take the form of an angel of light ; and burn, like a seraph, when pointing to the glories of that period, which is to witne.