Qz^rX

er

THE ENGLISH CHURCH NOT IN SCHISM;

OE, A

FEW WORDS

THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE,

AND THE

PROGRESS OF ANTICHRIST.

REV. WILLIAM BEUDENELL BARTEE, M.A.
RECTOR OF BURGHCLERE AND HIGHCLERE,
AND LATE FELLOW OF ORTEL COLLEGE, OXFORD.

LONDON:
FRANCIS & .JOHN RIVINGTON,
ST. Paul's church yard, and Waterloo place ;
JAMES BURNS, PORTMAN STREET :
& ,T. H. PARKER, OXFORD.
1845.

erratum.
Page 47, line 20, /or uneducated rmd neglected

FEW WORDS,
8fc.

When the Apostle of the Gentiles gave this advice
to his disciples, " let your moderation be known unto
all men," he well knew the power and authority
which the possession of this quality would confer on
those whose duty it was to defend the truth at all
hazards, and against all opponents. Too many
among us, in their controversies with the Romanists,
have set at nought this inspired counsel. They
have not been contented with exposing the mani
fold corruptions of the Church of Rome ; they have
not been satisfied with proving that she has no
claim on our allegiance ; but they have exhibited
melancholy proofs of an unbridled temper — they
have joined with, the irreverent and unbelieving in
bringing false and railing accusations against her,
and they have directed their attacks with inve
terate hostility against her existence as a Church
of Christ. These violent measures have naturally
caused an extreme reaction in minds of a very dif
ferent character ; so that many are tempted to con
sider Rome as the true and only centre of Christian
a2

unity. They are induced to believe every Church not
in communion with her to be in schism ; in other
words, that the authority of the Pope in things
spiritual is supreme ; and that every Church which
does not acknowledge it, is, by this act of rebellion,
a member cut off from the body of Christ.
I am convinced that the supremacy of the Pope,
as it is asserted by the Church of Rome, is an inven
tion of man ; that it does not carry out or bring
to perfection any scriptural or apostolic principle,
but is rather the development of aggressive and
encroaching power. I feel, however, in the present
circumstances of our Church, that I should be acting
with partiality, if, at the same time, I did not protest
equally against the sectarian or so-called Evangelical
system, which would unite schismatics, heretics, and
infidels together, for one common purpose; would
assail the Catholic Church itself, under the pretence
of holy zeal against Romanist corruptions, and
would conduct the war on principles which, if fairly
carried out, must lead to universal infidelity.
This part of my subject, however, I shall place
last in order, though I look upon it as by no means of
inferior importance. I shall first endeavour to show
that the power which the Pope now assumes has no
sufficient grounds to rest on, either in Scripture or
primitive tradition.
It would argue ignorance of all that men of the
highest talents and learning have written on this
subject, if I believed that I could put the question

in a new light; but much has been said on this
matter too diffusely to be generally useful ; and
still more in that unfair and uncandid spirit of
controversy which scruples not to pervert the truth.
I believe, therefore, that I shall not enter on
ground that is already fully occupied, when I humbly
endeavour to place within the reach of every sin
cere and faithful member of our Church a plain
and concise manual on this, which is in reality the
one great point at issue between the Roman Catholic
and all other Christian Churches.
The scriptural authority on which the Romanists
rest the supremacy of St. Peter and his successors
are these texts : — " And I say unto thee, That thou
art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the king
dom of heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt bind on
earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever
thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven'."
And "Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more
than these? Feed my lambs ^" On these texts, to
gether with the promise, " Lo, I am with you alway,
even unto the end of the world V' the Roman Ca
tholic relies mainly, if not entirely, when he claims,
on the authority of Scripture, a supreme power for
St. Peter and his successors over the whole Church
of Christ, throughout the world and for ever. Now,
I contend, with regard to these texts, that they do
' MaU. xvi. 18, 19. ^ John xxi. 15. ' Matt, xxviii. 20.

6

not confer such a power on St. Peter and his succes
sors ; that other interpretations may be given ; and
that we have good reason, at least, to inquire whether
the apostles thus understood them. For instance,
we may suppose that the words, "Thou art Peter,
and upon this rock I will build my Church," were
fulfilled at the day of Pentecost, when Peter came
forward as the spokesman of the apostles, and con
verted three thousand souls at once to the Christian
faith. The words, " I will give unto thee the keys
of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou
shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven : and
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed
in heaven ; " may also be considered as conveying in
stronger terms to St. Peter the promise given to
him, in common with the other apostles, when our
Saviour said, " Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth
shall be bound in heaven : and whatsoever ye shall
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven ^" Or we
may believe that after his resurrection He gave the
other apostles the same power, when He said,
" Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto
them ; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are re
tained \" Then, with regard to the words, "Lovest
thou me more than these?" we may suppose that
they were a kind rebuke to Peter, who had before
asserted so boldly his devotion to our Lord, and yet
had denied Him with an oath ; or it might be sup-
])osed that St. Peter would love Him most, because
' Matt, xviii. 18. ' John xx. 23.

Christ had forgiven him most ; and the words, " Feed
my lambs," may be understood as meaning no more
than to tell St. Peter the manner in which he should
show his love to his Master who had forgiven him.
I suggest this explanation of these texts, not contend
ing that it sets forth their right and only meaning,
but that they are more probable interpretations, and
that there is nothing in the texts themselves which
proves the Roman interpretation to be true.
On the other hand, some have thought that the
assumption of supreme power by St. Peter and his
successors was virtually forbidden by our Saviour,
when He told the apostles that the greatest among
them should be the least, and that they were all
brethren. But these texts do not surely bear upon
the subject at all ; they can be regarded in no other
light than as general recommendations of humility,
as the ground of all Christian virtue and excellence.
Our Saviour showed us plainly an example of what
He meant, when He to whom all power is given in
heaven and in earth washed his disciples' feet; in
this respect, therefore, St. Peter might have acted
according to his Lord's precept and example, and
yet have taken to himself supreme power over his
brethren. The question is, did he take it to himself?
I answer, he did not. There is no sufficient evidence
in Scripture or in primitive tradition to prove that he
did. First, the word of God shows plainly that he
did not assume this power. When deacons were
first ordained in the Church, " the twelve called the

multitude of the disciples unto them*^;" the apostles
prayed, the apostles laid their hands on them. There
is no sign whatever of St. Peter's having taken a pro
minent part in this solemn act of the Church. When
it was necessary that the opinion of the Church
should be known on the question of circumcising
the Gentiles, after much disputing, St. Peter spoke ;
but St. James summed up the matter in a more
authoritative manner than was ever used by St. Peter,
when he said, " My sentence is '^ ; " or, as St. Chry
sostom interprets it, " I authoritatively say;" speak
ing in the name of the whole Church. Is not this
very inconsistent with the supposition that St. Peter
was invested with supreme power? The pleasure
of the Church is thus signified, " and they wrote
letters ^" It seems so far from any being first, it
was the evident intention of the apostles that none
should be considered as having any pretension to
the primacy. When they spoke, " one," as St.
Chrysostom says, " was selected as spokesman, be
cause all could not speak ; but when they A^Tote let
ters, they did it in their united capacity : in these
letters they use the word " we V' they write, " it
seemed good to us assembled with one accord';"
" it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us I"
Again, " When the apostles which were at Jeru
salem heard that Samaria had received the word of
" Acts vi. 2. ' lb. XV. 19. " lb. xv. 23.
" lb. XV. 24. ' lb. XV. 25. i lb. xv. 28.

9

God, they sent unto them Peter and John^" St.
Peter does not take upon himself the authority of
sending, but is sent by the Church.
The testimony of St. Paul also is most strong against
St. Peter's supremacy : when he was converted, he
said that " he conferred not with flesh and blood ^"
Would he have thus spoken when he knew that there
was a supreme power in the Church with which he
might have conferred ? After three years he went up
to see St. Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
On another occasion he went first to St. James ; but
in his letter to the Galatians, in which he mentions
the former circumstance, he asserts his equality with
St. Peter when he says, " For he that wrought effec
tually in Peter to the apostleship of the circum
cision, the same was mighty in me towards the Gen
tiles '." The equality of the other apostles with him
he implies when he speaks of the three chief in this
order, " James, Cephas, and John, who seem to be
pillars'';" and his own entire independence when he
writes, " But when Peter was come to Antioch, I
withstood him to the face, because he was to be
blamed' ;" and when he spake unto St. Peter before
the whole assembly, and rebuked him. St. Paul
also, in another place, calls himself " not a whit be
hind the very chiefest apostles \" Would he have
thus spoken if one apostle had been the chief? He
' Acts viii. 14. " Gal. i. 16. ' lb. ii. 8.
' lb. ii. 9. ' lb. ii. 11. « 2 Cor. xi. 5.

10

issues his commands in this manner, " and so I or
dain in all the churches I" Had St. Peter used
these words, what a stress would the Romanists have
laid on them ! Again, it is remarkable, that when
St. Paul is enforcing the duty of unity on the Corin
thians, he never alludes to the authority of St. Peter
as its centre ; that St. Peter, in his own epistles,
never mentions it ; that he writes to the elders as an
elder, exhorting them not to take oversight of their
flock, " as being lords over God's heritage""." When
also St. John is directed by the Spirit of God to
write to the seven Churches which were in Asia, he
says of one of them, " Thou hast tried them which
say that they are apostles, and are not";" but he
speaks to the angel of each of them as if he was an
independent bishop, and had no one to whom he
should answer for his conduct but God Himself.
Putting all this together, seeing that all mention
of St. Peter's supreme power is omitted in the Scrip
tures ; that he is treated as being, equally with the
other apostles, under the authority of the Church ;
that he is opposed and over-ruled ; it does appear to
me that there is not a word in the Bible which can
be construed so as to enforce our obedience to the
Pope, but that the general teaching of Scripture is
inconsistent with the assumption of supreme power
or authority by St. Peter's successors iu the bishopric
of the Church of Rome.
Now, let us see what light the primitive tradition
' 1 Cor. vii. 17. '" 1 Pet. v. 3. " Rev. ii. 2.

11

of the Church Catholic throws on this matter; an
authority on which the authenticity of the Scriptures
mainly rests, and which, on a subject of Church go
vernment especially, is conclusive. Do we find that
the supreme authority of the Popes as successors to
St. Peter was acknowledged by the earliest bishops,
and submitted to with deference by the earliest
Churches ? If this can be shown to be the case, the
Romanist will have established his cause ; for he will
then have given us the same reason for believing in
the Pope's supremacy that we have for receiving the
Scriptures as the writings of those whose names they
bear ; but I believe that a candid and impartial in
vestigation of the subject will plainly show that no
such power was established or thought of in the
primitive Church of Christ.
The first authentic writings we have, next in order
to the Scriptures, are the Catholic epistles of the
apostolical fathers, St. Clement, St. Ignatius, St.
Polycarp, and St. Barnabas, being, with the Holy
Scriptures of the New Testament, a complete collec
tion of the most primitive antiquity for about one
hundred and fifty years after Christ. One of these
epistles was written by Clement, bishop of Rome, to
the Corinthians ; on this account we are told by the
Romanist of the present day, " We see this pontiff
every where exercising his pontifical jurisdiction, and
no one ever attempting to call in question his autho
rity as head of the Catholic Church."
What a sweeping conclusion from such premises !

12

I shall not enter into any discussion as to the reasons
why the bishop of Rome gave his advice to the
Corinthian Church. Whether Corinth was in his
province, whether at that time she had any bishop
of her own or not, is immaterial ; it is a sufficient
answer to the Romanist, that St. Ignatius, who was
bishop of Antioch, wrote with equal authority to
five Churches, and St. Polycarp, who was bishop of
Smyrna, to the Philippians. Indeed, while the as
sumption of the power of directing and advising by
St. Clement is no proof whatever of the supreme
authority of Rome, the exercise of the same power
by St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp is an unanswerable
argument against it ; for, according to the reason
ing of the Romanists, we might say of St. Ignatius
with just five times the force, " We see this pontiff
every where exercising his pontifical jurisdiction, and
no one ever attempting to call in question his au
thority as head of the Catholic Church."
But there is evidence, in the Epistles of St. Cle
ment, St. Ignatius, and St. Polycarp, which is
valuable on the point at issue, as it shoM's not only
that the supreme authority in every Church is not
vested in the bishop of Rome, but that it is given
by Divine authority to the bishop and priesthood
of each apostolical communion. St. Clement, in
his Epistle, mentions the name of St. Peter but
once, and then as being, together with St. Paul,
one of the " pillars of the Church' :" he bestows on
' St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, p, 5.

13

the latter by far the highest meed of praise, saying
that he is " a most eminent pattern of patience to
all ages ;" " having taught the whole world righte
ousness ^" Never does a hint escape of his con
sidering himself to be in St. Peter's place, and pos
sessing, by that right, power over the Church.
And this is not because he writes on subjects
which do not call for the assertion of such authority,
if he had it, for his Epistle is written expressly
against those who excited strifes and divisions in
the Church of Corinth. He sets forth, it is true,
the pure doctrines of repentance, of faith, and obe
dience, in a manner as distant from that of the
popular, or so-called Evangelical teachers of the
present day, as the heavens are from the earth ; but
he tell us, also, who are placed in authority by
Christ, that all things may be done in order in his
Churches ; he tells us that priests are to minister to
God, that laymen are confined within their proper
bounds, and are not to trench upon the priest's
office ; he tells us that " Christ was sent by God,"
and " the apostles by Christ ^" that " the apostles
appointed the first fruits of their conversion to be
bishops and ministers to such as should afterwards
believe*;" he tells us, also, that the " apostles knew
by our Lord Jesus Christ, that there should con
tentions arise on account of the ministry, and there
fore having a perfect knowledge of this, they ap-
^ St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, p. 6.
' Ibid. p. 33. " Ibid.

14

pointed persons, and then gave directions, that when
they should die, other chosen and approved men
should succeed to their ministry ° ;" he tells us, also,
after the example of God's ordinances in the Jewish
Church, that our offerings are not to be made any
where, but at the appointed times and places, that
they who transgressed this command in the Jewish
Church, were punished by death, and that we, if we
transgress it, having a better knowledge of God, are
by so much exposed to the greater danger : he
speaks to those who are the leaders of divisions in
these terms, " do ye, therefore, who laid the first
foundation of this sedition, submit yourselves unto
the priests, and be instructed unto repentance,
bending the knees of your hearts *." Indeed, the
advice of St. Clement, the friend of St Paul, would,
if listened to in our day, put an end to both the
doctrine and practice of Evangelical and other schis
matics, both within and without our Church, and
bring them to " repentance on their knees ;" but
would not advance, one jot, the pretensions of the
bishop of Rome to supreme and absolute dominion.
St. Ignatius speaks in the same language with
St. Clement, both as to the doctrine and the dis
cipline of Christian Churches ; indeed, there is that
agreement between them on all vital subjects, which
we should expect to find in the writings of men who
had daily intercourse with the apostles, were ap-
^ St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, p. 35.
' Ibid. p. 15.

15

pointed by such authority, to keep that good thing
whicli was committed unto them, and did keep it by
the Holy Ghost which dwelt in them.
The advice that St. Ignatius gives to the Ephe
sians is this ; that in order to glorify Jesus Christ,
who had glorified them, " they should be perfectly
joined together in the same mind, and in the same
judgment, and speak the same thing, concerning every
thing ; that they should be subject to their bishop and
the presbytery, in order that they might be wholly
and thoroughly sanctified ' ;" he says that, " as Jesus
Christ is sent by the will of the Father, so the
bishops are appointed unto the utmost bounds of the
earth by the will of Jesus Christ ^ :" he says that if
the prayer of one or two prevail with God, " how
much more powerful shall that of the bishop and
the whole Church be ; he, therefore, that doth not
come together in the same place with it, is proud,
and hath already condemned himself^." To the
Magnesians he writes, " as the Lord did nothing
without the Father being united to Him, neither by
Himself, nor yet by his apostles, so neither do ye
any thing without your bishops and presbyters,
neither let any thing appear rational to yourselves
apart, but being come together into the same place,
have one common prayer, one supplication, one com
mon mind, one hope, in charity and in joy un
defiled '." ' St. Ignatius' Epistle to the Ephesians, p. 63.
= Ibid. p. 65. ' Ibid. p. 66.
' St. Ignatius' Epistle to the Magnesians, p. 80.

16

To the Trallians he vsTites, that as they are " sub
ject to their bishop, they live not after the manner
of men, but according to Jesus Christ ;" he tells
them to be " subject to their presbyters as to the
apostles of Jesus Christ, our hope ;" he tells them to
" reverence the deacons as Jesus Christ, the bishop
as the Father, the presbyters as the college of the
apostles," " without these," he says, " there is no
Church ^." He speaks of heretics as of those who
" confound together the doctrine of Jesus Christ
with their own poison, whilst they seem worthy of
belief: as men give a deadly potion mixed with sweet
wine, which he, who is ignorant of, does with the
treacherous pleasure, sweetly drink in his own death ^
Wherefore, guard yourselves against such persons,
and that you will do if you are not puffed uj?, but
continue inseparable from Jesus Christ our God, and
from your bishop, and from the commands of the
apostles." " He that is within the altar is pure;
but he that is without, that is, that does any thing
without the bishop and deacons, is not pure in his
conscience *."
To the Philadelphians he writes, " as many as
shall with repentance return into the unity of the
Church, even these shall also be the servants of God,
that they may live according to Jesus Christ. Be
not deceived, brethren, if any one follows him that
makes a schism in the Church, he shall not inherit
the kingdom of God. If any one walks after any
" St. Ignatius' Epistle to the Trallians, pp. 87, 88.
' Ibid. p. 89. * Ibid.

17

other opinion, he agrees not with the passion of
Christ. Wherefore let it be your endeavour to par
take all of the same holy Eucharist. For there is
but one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup
in the unity of his blood, one altar, as also there is
one bishop together with his presbytery, and the
deacons my fellow- servants, that so, whatever ye
do ye may do it according to the will of God ^"
He says that the Lord forgives all that repent, if
they return to the unity of God and to the counsel
of the bishop ; he tells them to love unity, and flee
divisions; he wi-ites all his epistles in the same
spirit. I shall make one extract more from his
Epistle to the Smyrneans, because it describes, as if
it were written yesterday, the errors of those evan
gelical schismatics who have left the Church in
Scotland, because they do not agree with the word
ing of her communion service ; " they abstain from
the Eucharist and from the public offices, because
they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our
Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins,
and which the Father of his goodness raised again
from the dead. And for this cause, contradicting
the gift of God, they die in their disputes; but
much better would it be for them to receive it, that
they might one day rise through it. It would there
fore become you to abstain from such persons, and
not to speak with them, neither in private, nor in
' St. Ignatius to the Pliiladelphians, p. lOG. B

18

public °." It is plain then, that the friend of St.
Paul, and the friend of St. John, enjoin a system of
catholic unity, perfectly irreconcilable with the evan
gelical plan of " agreeing to differ," which they would
have called, agreeing to be heretics. But in propor
tion as these friends of the apostles enter more fully
into the government and constitution of Christian
Churches, their silence as to the supreme power of
the successors of St. Peter to enforce unity, is a con
clusive argument that they never heard or thought
of it. St. Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Philippians,
speaks to them, as those, " among whom the blessed
Paul laboured '." He shows also that the opinion of
the primitive Church on the subject of antichrist,
agTeed precisely with the words of Scripture ; a
definition, which those who endeavour to affix that
name to the Church of Rome, would do well chari
tably to consider *. He says, " whoever does not
confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is
antichrist ''."
The epistles of St. Barnabas and St. Polycarp
contain no allusions whatever to the supremacy of
the bishop of Rome ; St. Polycarp himself went to
Rome to consult its bishop on a disputed point, but
he differed from him, and maintained and acted on
his own opinion, in perfect consistency with the

° St. Ignatius' Epistle to the Stnyrneans, p. 117.
' St. Polycarp' Epistle to the Philippians, p. 58.
" See Note A. ' C. 56.

19

teaching of St. Ignatius, that the bishops and priest
hood of each Church have, under God, a full and
irresponsible authority ; in perfect accordance with
the command of the Holy Spirit, when He bade St.
John write to the bishops of the seven Churches, as
the supreme powers in each Church, and responsible
to God alone for their apostacy. A great deal has
been said by the Romanists on this visit of St.
Polycarp to the bishop of Rome, who has been
praised for his moderation in not cutting off Smyrna
from the communion of the Church Catholic ; but this
is a begging of the whole question : had the bishojj
of Rome considered the difference between him and
St. Polycarp a sufficient reason for a division between
the two Churches of Rome and Smyrna, no doubt a
very early, and considering the weight and influence
of St. Polycarp, a wide division might have taken
place in the Christian Church ; but to talk of cutting
off Smyrna from the communion of the Church
Catholic is, I repeat, a begging of the whole question ;
it is investing the bishop of Rome with the supreme
power which he claimed in after ages, a power
unknown to the primitive Church of Christ. How
then has this claim originated ? How has it been
carried out ? The history is most plain.
When Churches increased mightily in number
and influence, it was necessary that there should
be one point of union, some one Church at which
bishops or deputies from other Churches should meet
to confer with the bishop of that Church and with
b2

20

each other, in order to preserve unity in doctrine and
discipline. For heresies multiplied as Churches mul
tiplied ; the enemy was ever active, ever at hand to
sow tares among the good seed.
After the destruction of .lerusalem, " the mother
of all the Churches," Rome was naturally the
Church fixed on, as being in rank, power, and
authority, the first ; whose " faith was spoken of
throughout the whole world." I am far from wish
ing to speak of the Church of Rome in less honour
able terms than those in which the Scriptures give
me warrant to speak of it, and the catholic doctors
and bishops of the primitive Church. I would speak
of her, as St. Irengeus did, I would call her "the
greatest and most ancient and most illustrious
Church, founded by the glorious apostles Peter and
Paul, receiving from them her doctrine, — which
was announced to all men, and M'liich," would I
could say it in the nineteenth century as truly as he
did in the third, " through the succession of her
bishops has come down to us." I have no objection
to assert, as he did, that at that time, " it was neces-
,sary that the faithful of all countries round about,
undique not ubiqiie,''' should meet " convenire ' " at
' The teaching of St. Irenseus on this point agrees with that of
Tertullian, who thus speaks to Christians of their advantages of
being near apostolic Churches, Churclies which were planted by
tlie apostles ; he says, " Is Achaia near to thee ? thou hast Corinth.
If thou art not far from Macedonia, thou hast Philippi, thou
liast the Thessalonians. If thou canst travel into Asia, thou hast

21

Rome, on account of "her superior power aud
authority ;" that the apostles Peter and Paul having
" instructed the Church, committed its administration
to bishops, who," in the time of Irengeus and to this
moment, " retain the authority which was thus com
mitted to them :" gladly would I see the Church
of Rome in the situation which she held in the
primitive times ; first of the Churches — a Church,
to which in many instances the disputes of other
Churches might be referred for arbitration ; the
central point of unity for the Christian world ; but
her attempts at encroachment have prevented this,
and the means she has taken to increase her power
have led to corruptions of doctrine, which, while she
retains them, must prevent her from assuming again
the position she held in the primitive Church of
Christ. It is remarkable that the Church of Rome first
began to magnify her own power, and afterwards that
of her bishop. Gradually did the prospect of uni
versal dominion open on her, and as it opened, she
began unduly to exalt the power of her bishop, and
to strain the words of Scripture to suit her purpose,
till at last she supported her system, as all other
erroneous systems of doctrine have been and will be
Ephesus; but if thou art near to Italy, thou hast Rome ; but the
Romanists translate the word ' convenire,' ' hold communion,' and
then declare that all Churches that do not hold communion with
Rome are excommunicate." Such an argument as this needs
only to be plainly stated, it carries with it its own refutation.

•7->

sujiported, by adopting a method of interpretation
unauthorized by the general teaching of Scripture and
the primitive tradition of the Church of Christ : for
let it be observed, that all which is said in honour
of the Church of Rome by St. Irenseus does not
advance one jot the claim of the bishop of Rome to
universal power as the successor of St. Peter, but
rather proves that the existence of such a claim was
unknown to him.
St. Irenaeus rests the dignity of the Church of
Rome on the fact, that she was " founded by the
apostles Peter and Paul, that she received from
them her doctrine ;" had he rested her authority on
the text of St. Matthew, chapter 16, verses 18
and 19, he would have said as the Romanists do
now, " we owe allegiance to the bishop of Rome,
because he has the primacy over the whole earth ;
because he is the successor of the blessed Peter, the
prince of the apostles, that he is the true vicar of
Christ, the head of the holy Church, and the father
and teacher of all Christians ; and that to him, in the
person of the blessed Peter, was committed by our
Lord .Jesus Christ the full power of feeding, govern
ing, and directing the whole Church ;" that the see
of Rome has its pre-eminence over other Churches,
" solely from the words of our Lord and Saviour in
the Gospel, ' Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will
build my Church :' " but this doctrine was plainly
unknown to St. Irenseus. It was equally unknown
to St. Cyprian, a bishop who ruled over the Church

23

of Carthage at a time when her enemies allow that
the bishops and priesthood of the Catholic Church
were in the fullest possession of power and autho
rity. The conduct of St. Cyprian towards Stephen,
bishop of Rome in the third century, is, in principle,
precisely analogous to that of St. Paul towards
St. Peter ; he consults with Stephen ; he calls him
his brother bishop, as being his equal ; he expresses
indignation at his conduct : as St. Paul took
to himself the authority of issuing his commands
to all the Churches, so St. Cyprian orders that
all causes be pleaded before him: did St. Paul
withstand St. Peter to the face? St. Cyprian
speaks of the bishop of Rome as having written
unwarily, unskilfully, with great pride and imperti
nence; he speaks highly of the Church of Rome,
and the necessity of a union with her in order to
preserve unity, but no one can possibly mistake him
on this point ; he quotes those very texts on which
the Romanists rest the supreme power of the pope ;
he says that "Christ gave this power to St. Peter
first, to manifest his regard to unity, that the other
apostles were in truth what St. Peter ivas, entitled to
an equal share with him of dignity and power I"
This doctrine is perfectly in accordance with the
teaching of the Holy Scriptures and of the apostolic
Fathers of the Church, but it is directly opposed to
' Epist. de Unitate, p. 97.

24

the assumption of supreme power by the successors
of St. Peter, as well as to encroachments by other
bishops. The decree of the Council of the whole Church
at Ephesus in the year 431, is also conclusive on
this point. The bishop of Antioch endeavoured to
subject the Churches in Cyprus to his dominion, and
to ordain their bishops. The great Council made
this decree : — " An innovation upon the rule of the
Church and the canons of the holy Fathers, such as
to affect the general liberties of Christendom, has
been reported to us by our venerable brother Rhe-
ginus, and his fellow bishops of Cyprus, Zeno, and
Evagrius. Wherefore, since public disorders call
for extraordinary remedies, as being more perilous,
and whereas it is against ancient usage that the
bishop of Antioch should ordain in Cyprus, as has
been proved to us in this Council, both in words
and writing by most orthodox men. We therefore
decree, that the prelates of the Cyprian Churches
shall be suffered without let or hindrance to conse
crate bishops by themselves; and, moreover, that
the same rule shall be observed also in other dioceses
and provinces every where, so that no bishop shall
interfere in another province, which has not from the
very first been under himself and his predecessors ;
and further, that if any one has so encroached and
tyrannized, he must relinquish his claim, that the
canons of thc Fathers be not infringed, nor the
priesthood be made an occasion and pretence for the

25

pride of earthly power, nor the least portion of that
freedom unawares be lost to us, which our Lord Jesus
Christ, who bought the world's freedom, vouchsafed
to us when He shed his OAvn blood. Wherefore it
has seemed good to this holy Ecumenical Council,
that the rights of every province should be preserved
inviolate, which have always belonged to it, according
to the usage which has ever obtained, each metropo
litan having full power to act according to all just
precedents in security. And should any rule be
adduced repugnant to this decree, it is hereby
repealed." And St. Austin held the same language in effect
towards the bishop of Rome. " When Pope Zosi-
mus and Celestine took upon them to receive appel
lants from the African Churches, and absolve those
whom they had condemned, St. Austin and all the
African Churches sharply remonstrated against this
as an irregular practice, violating the laws of unity,
and the settled rules of ecclesiastical commerce ;
which required, that no delinquent excommunicated
in one Church should be absolved in another, without
giving satisfaction to his own Church that censured
him. And therefore, to put a stop to this practice,
and check the exorbitant power which Roman
bishops assumed to themselves, they first made a
law in the Council of Milevis,. That no African
clerk should appeal to any Church beyond sea, under
pain of being excluded from communion in all the
African Churches. And then, afterwards meeting

.26

in a general synod, they despatched letters to the
bishop of Rome, to remind him how contrary this
practice was to the canons of Nice, which ordered,
that all controversies should be ended in the places
where they arose, before a council and the metro
politan '."
If enough has been said to show that the supre
macy of St. Peter and his successors was an autho
rity unacknowledged by the apostles and the primi
tive Church of Christ, it appears to me that I have
established my point. It is easy to select passages
from the Fathers which speak of the apostles St.
Paul and St. James in as high terms as St. Peter
is ever spoken of. St. Chrysostom compares St.
Paul to St. Peter, and calls St. Paul equal in honour
with him ; " for I will not," he says, " at present say
any thing more," as if he thought St. Paul indeed
the more honourable *. St. Jerome, the third and
most learned of the Latin Fathers at the beginning
of the fifth century, says of the apostles, •' the
strength of the Church is equally settled on them ^"
St. Isidore, bishop of Seville, a very high authority
in the seventh century, says, " the other apostles did
receive an equal share of honour and power, who
also being dispersed in the A\"hole world, did preach
the Gospel, and to A\'hoin departing, the bishops did

¦¦ Bingh. Antiq. 16, 1.
' Chrys. in Gal. i. 8. Vide Test, de Praescr. cap. 20.
' Hier. in Jovin, i. 11.

27

succeed who are constituted through the whole
world in the sees of the apostles*." With regard
to the power of the keys, St. Chrysostom says of
St. John, "He that hath the keys of heaven."
Theophylact, bishop of Acris in the eleventh cen
tury, who shows how long this opinion continued in
the Church, " Although it be spoken to Peter alone,
^I will give thee, yet it is given to all the apostles."
St. Jerome says, in express terms, "All the apostles
did receive the keys of heaven'." St. Chrysostom
calls St. John "a pillar of the Churches over the
world," and St. Paul, " an apostle of the world, who
had the care of the whole earth ; who undertook the
world, and governed the Churches ; on whom the
whole world did look, and on whose soul the care of
the Churches every where did hang, into whose
hands were delivered the earth and the sea, the
inhabited as well as the uninhabited parts of the
world ^" Nay, all that is advanced by Romanists of
this nature, appears to me to be outweighed by one
incidental remark of St. Chrysostom's on this sub
ject, when he doubts whether the Church was built
on St. Peter himself, or on his doctrine, a doubt
which he never would have expressed, had the
Church at that time held the Roman creed on this
subject, even in its embryo state ; but to argue the
point at all on such grounds, is to adopt the principle

" Isid. Hisp. de Off. ii. 5. ' Hier. in Jovin. i. 1-1.
" Chrys. in 1 Cor. ix. 2 ; in 2 Cor. xi. 28. Tom. v. or lix.

28

of the heretic and of the infidel ; it is a setting up
of individual opinion, of private judgment against
the teaching of the Catholic Church ; it is a counte
nancing of their principles who magnify the import
ance of certain texts, and interpret them so as to
contradict the general teaching of Scripture, or by
selected sentences from the Fathers attempt to
shake the authority of primitive tradition ; it is to
agree in principle with those irreverent and ribald
publications ^ which have lately been directed against
the doctrines and authority of ancient Christianity
itself, with all the cunning and falsehood of the
professedly infidel historian.
If, then, the Romanist cannot show that the
supreme authority of St. Peter and his successors
was generally acknowledged in the primitive Church
of Christ, it follows that the claims now advanced
by the Church of Rome, are not a development of
any one Catholic principle, but an attempt to inno
vate on the rules of the Church, to " infringe the
canons of the Fathers, to make the priesthood an
occasion and pretence for the pride of worldly
power." A desire is often expressed in our day, not so
° I allude especially to a work called " Ancient Christianity,"
in which the authority of the primitive Church of Christ is
attacked by an irreverent comment on the faults of individual
Fathers, just as the authority of the Bible is frequently impugned
by profane remarks on those errors of God's faithful servants
which are recorded in the Old Testament.

29

much for one common centre of unity, as for one
Church, to which we might look for the settling of
all disputes and differences of opinion ; this desire,
that a king might be set over us, Avas no doubt very
prevalent in ancient times, and contributed very
much to the exorbitant power of Rome ; but how
weak and insufficient to the end proposed, are the
contrivances of men in comparison with the ordi
nances of God !
Had no encroachment been made by the see of
Rome on the authority of other Churches, on the
liberty with which Christ had made them free,
every Church, as a distinct institution of Christ,
governed by her bishop, priest, and deacons, would
have been a separate treasury of the sacred deposit
committed to the keeping of each by the apostles
and their immediate successors. They would have
each held in their keeping the good thing committed
to their trust ; the faithful sayings, the apostolical
tradition, the Gospel doctrine ; in other words, the
Catholic faith which St. Paul preached and delivered
to others before many witnesses; they would have
had the power also to anathematise any other doc
trine, even if promulgated by "an angel from heaven ;"
for the voice of the universal Church would, under
such circumstances, have been the voice of the
apostles and the voice of Christ. What a firm atti
tude would a council of such Churches have assumed
in dealing with Romanist and sectarian errors; if,
on the one hand, any Church had taken to herself

30

supreme power, had maintained that the keys of
heaven were committed to her keeping; and not
only the keys of heaven, but the keys of a treasury
of the good works of the saints, Avhich she sold to
deluded purchasers for silver or gold. If, on the
other hand, a sect had sprung up which maintained
the modern gloss on the doctrine of justification by
faith ; that free-will is an empty name ; that our
eternal happiness or misery is already determined by
an immutable decree of God ; that justification may
exist separately from holiness ; that the former is
instantaneous, complete, and indefectible, and is to
tally unconnected with the sacraments, God's ap
pointed means of grace. If any sect had taught
that the holding these doctrines is the one thing
necessary, a test by Avhich a true Church is to be
tried ; and that all that is said to the contrary on
the constitution of Christian Churches by St. Cle
ment and St. Ignatius, the friends and disciples of
the apostles, are old Avives' fables ; or if any sect had
gone still further, and had maintained that the holding-
these monstrous doctrines, in common Avith all manner
of schismatics, was true Christian Catholicity. I say,
if both these systems of deceit and falsehood had been
made known to a primitiA^e council of the Church, a
vast majority of its members would have declared
that not a vestige of such doctrines was to be found
in their sacred deposit ; and AA'ould, Avith authority,
have pronounced judgment on those Avho held either
the one or the other. Why have Ave not such a

31

council now ? It is because the bishop of Rome has
not only interfered with other Churches than his
oAvn, but has exercised absolute dominion over them ;
he has deprived every other metropolitan of his rights,
and has destroyed the general liberties of Christendom,
and the bishops of our Church had a right to resist
this encroachment; that, as far as they are concerned,
" ancient usages might prevail," and the " privileges
of each Church might be preserved."
We are often asked by Romanists Avhy we ac-
knoAvledge the authority of the apostles, the Nicene
and the Athanasian Creeds, whilst we reject that of
Pope Pius ? Why Ave acknowledge the authority of
the four first, and reject that of the later councils?
The answer is plain. The councils whose authority
we reject were not universally received, and were
controlled in their decisions, more or less, by the
bishop of Rome, for whom it was at last openly
contended in the Council of Florence, 1438, that he
had authority to add to the articles of necessary
Christian faith ; the fullest practical exercise of
Avhich claim may be seen in the creed of Pope Pius.
" Deference for tradition Ave claim only in that pro
portion in which the existing records of the Church
afford reasonable ground for believing it to have
been from the beginning." We are asked Avhy the
council of Trent is not admitted to the right of an
ecumenical council, though composed of the greatest
number of bishops ever collected together, represent
ing the Churches of the East and of the West,

32

sitting at intervals during a period of eighteen years,
and under five successive popes. I answer, because
its decisions depended altogether on the decrees of
those popes ; that it did not represent the Churches
of the East and of the West, but was A'irtually a
cabinet council held at the Vatican ; as the history
of that council, with all its delays, will plainly show
to the careful inquirer.
To the support of this usurped power of the
Church of Rome all her corruptions in doctrine are
adapted ; to this fruitful source of error we might
trace her denial of the cup to the laity, her sale of
indulgences, her patronage of false miracles, and all
the other novelties with which she has OA^erlaid the
faith of the primitive Church ; but such an investi
gation Avould swell this little Avork too much, and is
at present beside my purpose. I shall mention one
only, the maintenance of which appears to me to
bring deep disgrace on every authority of the Roman
Church : I mean the belief in false miracles, Avhich
she encourages and converts into a source of gain
and poAver.
I have no felloAv-feeling with the man, who, pro
fessing- the fashionable religion of the day, reclines
on his couch of ease, and reading the painful journeys
of poor Roman Catholics to Loretto, laughs at the
humble pilgrim, Avhom Christian charity would teach
him to regard not only Avith pity and compassion,
but Avith hope and love. I lament only that Avhile
he treats Avith scorn mistaken piety and self-inflic-

33

tion, he has not the understanding to look into his
own heart and conduct ; that he sees not his own
want of all self-denial, even for the sake of Christ's
poor, who are with us in Christ's stead, and with
out which self-denial we cannot be his disciples.
I know the nature of the lie which he holds in
his right hand, of the evangelical publication which
he takes, instead of the Church, for his guide and
his counsellor; but at the same time I feel the
deepest abhorrence for their crime who thus give to
the enemies of Christ and his Church occasion to
blaspheme ; and under no possible circumstances
would I cast my lot amongst them.
Were an evangelical or rationalistic prelate ap
pointed by an unprincipled ministry to succeed our
venerated metropolitan, whose humility, whose pru
dence, whose sobriety, whose constancy in a strait
ened and most difficult path, the Church of England
will learn duly to appreciate when she is deprived of
his invaluable superintendence ; were our clergy
called upon to renounce their power of admitting
infants into a state of salvation by holy baptism;
were they called on to deny that they give the flesh
of the Son of God to their communicants in the
Eucharist, in direct opposition to the words of Christ
and the teaching of his Church from the beginning ;
were a lay commission to carry out what are now
called reformation principles, by taking to itself a
supremacy not only in the temporal, but in the spi
ritual affairs of our Church ; should such a commis-
c

34

sion carry out to its legitimate conclusions the
theories of Dr. Arnold and the Archbishop of Dublin ;
should it take on itself to consecrate as priests all
who might wish to undertake the office ; should
every evil which the most fearful anticipate befall
our Church from the combined power of sectarian
and infidel principles ; still if driven from her pale, I
should not become a Romanist. I could not place
myself in communion with a Church which justly
labours under the imputation of saying, " let us do
evil that good may come."
It gives me the greatest pain to be obliged to
speak thus of the Roman Church, which is in many
countries what our branch of the apostolic Church is
in our OAvn dominions, the only firm fortress which
really opposes the advance of antichrist; the only
barrier which resists the progress of infidelity. I speak
not against her, however, but against a part of her
system, contrived by man to support a power which
was never given from above. I speak not against
her as a Church of Christ ; God forbid that I should
ever be guilty of such insolence and impiety ; but
I speak against those frauds, the exposure of which
has in many instances destroyed her whole influence,
has shaken the faith of thousands, and has given
great cause to the enemies of God to blaspheme.
It is one thing to wish the additions removed which
disfigure a holy edifice, another to rejoice in break
ing down her carved work with axes and hammers.
It is one thing to perceive that a sister has yielded

35

to temptation, and lament her fall ; it is another to
join a spiteful and irreverent crew, blinded with
party feeling, and drunken with self-conceit, in
making songs upon her.
I now proceed to consider the error of those Pro
testants who assail the Church of Rome on a prin
ciple which, if fairly carried out to its legitimate
conclusions, would lead to universal infidelity; I
mean the principle of abiding by the decisions of
private judg-ment, in opposition to the teaching of
the primitive Church of Christ, when that teaching is
clearly ascertained. It matters not whether we pro
ceed to the interpretation of the Scriptures, con
fiding in our own superior acquirements, or in the
superior gift of the Holy Spirit ; for against whose
decisions do we lift our voice? Against those of
men who received the Holy Ghost from the hands
of the apostles ; whose advice, whose blessing was
coveted in the earliest ages of Christianity by all the
Churches of Christ throughout the world. Oh ! it
was not without reason that our Saviour said, "If
he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee
as an heathen ;" in other words, consider him as an
infidel ; for the principle of pride on which he acts,
the absence of all reverence for sacred authorities,
leads by a direct course to infidelity. He who re
jects the authority of the primitive Church of Christ
will, by a fair development of the same principle,
reject the authority of the Scriptures, whose authen
ticity rests on the testimony of that Church; and
c 2

36

having done away with all reverence for these two
joint witnesses of the truth, he will proceed to deny
the one great fact on which all depends, that Jesus
Christ is come in the flesh.
St. Paul traces the origin of all divisions in the
Church to the carnal mind, which is ever a proud
mind; St. Clement and St. Ignatius, to pride, to
being puffed up, to the not bending the knees of
our hearts, to the letting things appear rational to
ourselves apart. Our Saviour, who prayed so ear
nestly to his Father for the unity of his Church,
has declared that He Avill dwell only with the
humble spirit. Can we believe that He will abide
with those who will not hear his Church, when
directed and governed by the immediate successors
of his apostles? Can we think that He will dwell
with him Avho scorns the teaching of an holy martyr,
a friend of that beloved disciple who leaned on His
breast ?
Two biographies of distinguished men have lately
appeared, which show the working of this principle
in different minds, and under different circumstances.
I mean the lives of Dr. Arnold and Mr. Blanco
White ; the one most ably M'ritten by a highly
talented friend and pupil, the other by Mr. Blanco
White himself In the latter, the principle of adopt
ing the decisions of private judgment, in contempt
of the teaching of the primitive Church of Christ,
was carried out to its complete and legitimate re
sults ; in that of the former it was mercifully re-

37

strained by his station in the English Church, and
by the great but unacknowledged influence of her
teaching and example ; so that the one died without
a firm belief in his OAvn existence, or in the exist
ence of his God ; the other thanking God for bring
ing him by pain into the likeness of his Son, and
hoping, through the merits of his Saviour's sufferings
alone, to enter into glory. But, having said thus
much, in justice to the man and to the Christian, I
should be false to God's truth and honour, if I did
not say that the principle on which, in religious
matters, he acted through life, ' and professed to act,
was that of scorn for the Catholic doctrines of the
Church, and adherence to the dictates of his own
judgment in matters of faith ; a principle which, if
carried out fairly, as it was by Mr. Blanco White,
would have led to a similar life, and the same
Avretched end of his existence.
For let us fairly consider the qualifications of
Mr. Blanco White to carry out this principle ; let
us compare them Avith those of Archbishop Whately
and Dr. Arnold, two names which are best known
as those of men of talent and influence, who have
been the most uncompromising advocates of the
right of private judgment, and have expressed the
greatest contempt for the catholic principle which
inculcates deference to the teaching of primitive
tradition in matters, of faith. Dr. Whately tells us,
that all men possessed of sufficient learning and
information are justified in adopting this principle.

38

Where then could he find a man more duly qualified
than Mr. Blanco White?
Of the three, which would a philosopher have
chosen, in order to give the right of private judgment
the fairest trial ? He would have said, with reason,
I would not choose Dr. Arnold, for he is in the
habit of teaching children the Creeds and Catechism
of the English Church ; he reads her Liturgy, and
thus defers, in a certain degree, to the teaching of
ancient Christianity; it cannot be but that the
doctrine he so often repeats must have an influence
on such a candid mind as his.
And with regard to Archbishop Whately, the
very surprise which is expressed, that he who lays
his hands on the candidates for priesthood, and bids
them receive the Holy Spirit of God ; and in con
sequence of this laying on of his hands, tells them
that " whose soever sins" they " remit, they are
remitted unto them, and whose soever sins they
retain, they are retained ;" I say that the very sur
prise which is expressed, that a man who does these
things in virtue of his apostolical authority, should
scoff at the apostolic succession, is a proof that his
position is strangely at variance with his opinions,
that his must be a hard struggle, that he is not a
free man, nor a fit person to carry out the theory of
private judgment.
, Mr. Blanco White, who had all the qualifications
and none of the disadA^antages of the other two,
would surel) be his choice ; a man as talented, as well-

39

read in sacred and profane history, as well versed
in all the treasures of ancient and modern literature,
and totally free from all restraints, from all pre
judices. He enjoyed an income paid him by the
state, which was sufficient for all his wants, and en
tailed on him no business or duties of any kind to take
up his time, or embarrass the free exercise of his judg
ment. He spent many years of his life in the society
of the most learned and enlightened men, and had
access to every source of information which is attain
able in this age of advanced science. This man was
surely most fitted to carry out to its legitimate conclu
sions the theory of private judgment. It is true that he
went further than his friend who at the outset pro
fessed the same principles, but the question is, which
acted the most consistently? Are we to ascribe to
a difference in principle, or a difference in circum
stances, the fact, that the one died in the faith, the
other in the open profession of infidelity? if to a
difference in the circumstances of the two, I think
that I have shown sufficiently that the circum
stances of Mr. Blanco White were the most favour
able to the free development of his principles, and
consequently that those who adopt them will pro
bably be led more nearly to his end than to the
pious death of the Master of Rugby. There seems
to me indeed to be a sufficient similarity in the
progress of opinion in the minds of these two emi
nent men, to show that they acted throughout their
lives on the same principle.
The full investigation of this subject might give

40

invaluable warning to those, who by Dr. Arnold's
amiable character and devotional frame of mind,
might be induced to follow his steps. I shall at
present notice only a few of his characteristic opi
nions, which appear to me to betoken an identity of
principle with Mr. Blanco White. Dr. Arnold, it
is true, never rejected what he considered the direct
testimony of Scripture ; Mr. Blanco White did so
without a scruple. This, at the first sight, might be
supposed to mark a wide line of distinction between
the two ; but that line, on a little investigation, Avill
be found to be more apparent than real ; as there
are methods of injuring an individual which may be
more hurtful to him than undisguised attacks on
his person and property, so it is possible to acknow
ledge the authority of the word of God in so irre
verent a manner, and on such grounds, as to loosen its
poA^'er over the minds of men, and prepare them for its
entire rejection more effectually than by any open
demonstration of avowed hostility.
I will give an instance of what I mean. Dr.
Arnold is opposed to the doctrine of a priesthood in
the English Church, as " an institution unworthy of
enlightened approbation, and evidently founded on
false and evil principles." Hoav did he get over
the direct appointment of God, in the case of the
JeAvish priesthood ' ? He considered it as an ac
commodation to the notions and feelings of the age,
' Some persons tell us that all Christians are called priests
by St. Peter (1 Pet. ii. 5 — 9), and that we have therefore no
distinct priesthood in our Church, forgetting that the whole

41

to " the universal feeling of the east," that is, of
eastern idolaters. The self-denying commands of
our blessed Saviour, Mr. Blanco White considered
to be directly opposed to the modern enlightened
system of pohtical economy, and he at once struck
those passages out of the Scripture canon.
Now which is most irreverent in principle, to
ascribe the ordinance of God, the type of that mys
terious act of love which angels desire to look into,
to ascribe this ordinance of the Almighty to his
submission to the prejudice of eastern idolaters ; or
to reject the word of his Son, as being inconsistent
with the enhghtened philosophy of the age in which
Ave live ? This question I leave to the decision of
abler casuists than myself. The principle appears
to me to be the same in either case, whether the
ordinances of the most high God are rejected at
once, or are dressed in a garb of human motives,
lest when tried in the courts of human reason,
they should not be acquitted of absurdity. Indeed,
both are remarkable specimens of the workings of
the same principle, of that rationalizing spirit, which,
enthroning self upon the seat of judgment, com
placently accepts, or irreverently rejects, the various
parts of God's system, as they may or may not happen
to be completely intelligible to the carnal wisdom
which presumes to weigh them in its puny balance.
Jewish nation are addressed in the same terms. Exodus xix. 6,
Isaiah Ixi. 6 ; so that according to their reasoning there was no
priesthood in the Jewish Church.

42

Dr. Arnold has told us, and there is some simpli
city in the admission, that he Avould not object to a
Church, provided it were his OAvn Church; plainly
intimating that he had an objection to all Churches
which were not his own. Also at the outset of his
clerical life he objected to the Scripture canon ; and,
to the last, trusted in his own interpretation of the
Scriptures, just as he trusted to his own knowledge
of the meaning of Thucydides or Aristotle ; yet he
remained a priest of the Church in which he was
baptized. Mr. Blanco White however, more con
sistently, erased those portions of the Scripture
which displeased him, left the Roman Church, and
ours also ; and, at last, literally chose his own
Church, or rather his own profession of faith, to
which he was the only proselyte. The word of
God has told us that divisions will arise from the
carnal or proud mind, and the infinitesimal divi
sions which take place when the proud principle of
private judgment is fairly carried out, afford a melan
choly proof to the humble believer, that not one
word spoken by the Holy Spirit shall fall to the
ground, till all be fulfilled ^
' Conflicting opinions on points of faith have a strong practical
tendency to the abnegation of all religion, and of this Sir Robert
Peel has given us an awful proof, when he declared, that in con
sequence of such divisions, religious instruction was not included
in the plan which he brought forward for the education of youth
in the three universities which he proposed to establish in the
sister country ; so that he felt himself compelled to act, with re
gard to this great system of national education, precisely as he

43
Dr. Arnold was a friend of the Archbishop of
Dublin, but he never found any one Avith whom he
exactly coincided in opinion, except Chevalier Bun-
sen, at present the Prussian minister at the British
Court. Mr. Blanco White was also a friend of the
Archbishop, went with him to Ireland, and lived in
his palace; but at last he became too radical for
the Archbishop in his pubhcations, that is, carried too
far their mutual opinions. He then left Dublin,
and went to Liverpool, where he professed himself
at first perfectly satisfied with an Unitarian commu
nion; but, becoming too radical for the Unitarians,
he seems at last to have held communion with his
own heart only, and in his chamber, but not in
peace. Now, Evangelical Churchmen, and Evangelical
Dissenters, if any of you should read these pages, I
beseech you to consider for a moment what you
are doing. What will be the result, if you succeed in
making your country cast off all deference, all reve
rential feeling for apostolic doctrines and apostolic
institutions ? I mean those doctrines, and those in
stitutions, which the friends of the apostles clearly
held, and most anxiously defended. There can be no
compromise between you and these friends of the
would have done had Jesus Christ never come in the flesh. That
such a measure excited no general expression of feeling against
it, is a melancholy proof that the love of many has waxed cold,
and that the spirit of party is a far stronger cause of excitement
among us, than the love of our Redeemer.

44

apostles ; either you or they must be in soul-destroying
error. The few extracts which I have made from
their works in this little Tract must show you this.
Mr. Blanco White preferred his judgment to theirs ;
but he did it consistently, for when he acted thus
proudly, he did not, as you do, at the same time
profess lowliness of heart, but he struck out Chris
tian humility from his list of virtues. Oh ! consider
again, I say, what you are doing ! Whether you
are not at this moment prevented from running the
career of Mr. Blanco White, by the same influence
M'hich arrested Dr. Arnold's course, who in principle
was as thorough an Independent as any among you '.
Whether you are not, I say, prevented from running
his career by the unacknowledged influence of that
Church against which you are setting yourselves in
array. T know that such an example, however well
selected, proves little as to the natural development
of any principle, unless the same cause is found to
produce similar effects in other instances; then,
indeed, the presumption is very strong in its favour.
Let us, then, consider the effect of this principle of
' Chevalier Bunsen calls Dr. Arnold " the venerable apostle
of the free Church of the future." The Independents in this
country must smile when they hear this sounding title conferred
on a man who held no single principle with regard to Church
government, which the ministers of their congregations have not
always maintained ; and who owed the celebrity of his opinions
solely to the astonishing fact, that he could hold them as a priest
in the English Church.

45

adopting the decisions of private judgment in oppo
sition to the manifest doctrine and discipline of the
primitive Church of Christ, as it has affected the
faith and practice of Christian societies.
In the state of Geneva, surely, this principle
had the fairest trial. Calvin was called to that
state, on account of his high character and at
tainments, to settle the doctrine and disciphne
of her Church. For the Catholic faith he substi
tuted a creed which the pious Dr. Doddridge,
himself a Nonconformist, has declared to be the
most incredible of all incredible things ¦¦ ; a creed,
which by depriving God of his holy attributes,
does more than half the infidel's work ; but still is
almost the only creed against which, at this moment,
Evangelical Churchmen and Evangelical Dissenters
agree not to speak. John Calvin, having established
this creed, which still retains his name, instituted a
form of Church government at GeneAa totally inde
pendent of the apostolical order, and having, burnt
an opponent theologian, established his authority at
Geneva, and a greater despotism was never exercised
by any Roman prelate in the plenitude of his power.
* " That a Being, who is said not to tempt any one, and even
swears that He desires not the death of a sinner, should irresistibly
determine millions to the commission of every sinful action of their
lives, and then, with all the pomp and pageantry of a universal
judgment, condemn them to eternal misery on account of those
actions, that hereby He may promote the happiness of others who
are, or shall be, irresistibly determined to virtue, in the like man
ner, is of all incredible things, to me the most incredible."

46

Now mark the end. Calvin died in the year 1564 : the
discipline of his Church can scarcely be said to have
survived him. In the seventeenth century, Geneva
was distinguished only by its open profession of infi
delity, till at length the Trinity, the atonement, and
the incarnation of the Son of God, were prohibited,
by authority, as subjects of public instruction.
Now with this striking example before us, I ask
every candid mind this question, — Have we not
cause to fear, should the Evangelical principle of
uniting all sects and parties against primitive doc
trine and primitive discipline succeed in beating
down the Roman Catholic Church on the Continent,
under such circumstances, I say, have we not reason
to fear the progress of antichrist, the triumph of
universal infidelity ?
For my own part, I must confess that when some
four years since I entered the Genevan territory from
Lyons, and saw on my right hand a Roman Catholic
chapel, which appeared to be newly built, and a
Roman Catholic priest walking towards it, — when I
saw this at the barrier, but within the boundary of
that country, so highly blessed by nature, but so
degraded in its religious character, I could not but
consider it a cheering proof of the stability of apos
tolical institutions ".
' There is now said to be an Evangelical re-action in Geneva ;
that Christian humility forms no part of its system may be known
by this fact, that its chief minister (in a conversation with an
English clergyman) declared that he considered the doctrines of

47

We may read an instructive lesson in the example
of Scotland also, whose Calvinistic establishment
commenced at the first, as schismatical bodies ever
have done, by arrogating to itself superior purity, and
more simple attachment to the word of God, and
whose claims were willingly allowed for many years
by men who, nominally in the English Church, had a
secret hatred of Anglican episcopacy. I am old
enough to remember when her superior system of
education, and the superior industry, comfort, and
contentedness of her poor were attributed to the in
fluence of a better religious system, to the practical
superiority of the League and Covenant over the
divinely appointed economy of the Church of Christ.
The old tradition, that when the Church flourishes
the poor rejoice, when she falls they are sure to
suffer, was treated as a mere fable. But now this
delusion has been dispelled, the poor in Scotland are
known to be the most hungry, the most naked, the
most uneducated of any in her Majesty's dominions.
The system of John Knox, who, against his lawful
sovereign, and that sovereign his Queen, defended the
principle of assassination, that Calvinistic system
which was carried out by an ignorant and fanatical
crew, who thought that they were doing God service
by destroying all his holy edifices throughout the land,

St. Clement and St. Ignatius puerilities ; that in spiritual under
standing he looked on them as children in comparison with
himself.

48

— that system, I say, has proved an entire failure :
the altar is rent, and the ashes are poured out ; her
Church is torn asunder, never again to be united,
for she has not suffered by the hand of external
violence, she has not been carried into captivity by
her enemies ; then indeed she might have prayed to
God with pious affection fixed on her holy institu
tions, and her prayer might have been heard; but
the curse of Babel is on her, she has been torn in
pieces by her own principles, and which ever section
may gain the superiority, in its turn it will fall
asunder from the power of the same elements
within it.
I have only made these cursory remarks on the
state of religion in Geneva and Scotland, as this is
beaten ground, and I wish to Avrite somewhat more
fully on the progress which principles totally opposed
to apostolic doctrine and discipline are making
in Germany, through some provinces of which
country they seem at this moment to be marching
in triumphal procession. Up to this time, the
Lutheran reformation in Germany has been contem
plated by the truest members of the Anglican
Church with sympathy and Avith hope; with more
hope, indeed, and with more sympathy than appears
to me to have been warranted by its rise or by
its progress. A morbid philosophy, the fruit of
minds which revelled in every unhallowed imagina
tion, and heard the Avord of God but to despise its
simple teaching, has been for a long season the

49

invariable characteristic of German theology. But
now, when the principles of German Protestantism
are fully developed, it is separated by an almost
imperceptible line of demarcation from open infide
lity in essential points of faith.
The religious system in Germany owed its rise to
a man who, in rash disobedience to his parent, made
a solemn vow to his God, and having made that
vow, sinned again by breaking it, and by persuading
others to do the same ; and his Church, so to speak,
has followed his example, has rejected the primitive
rule of doctrine and discipline Avith unfilial irreve
rence, has done what seemed right in its own eyes ;
and the consequence has been that it exists at pre
sent, not only in friendship Avith, but in base sub
jection to the world, and rather the handmaid of
its philosophy than an opponent witness to the holy,
the mysterious, the self-denying requirements of the
Gospel of Christ.
The present development of the Lutheran system
in Germany is full indeed of the most invaluable
instruction and warning to us. We have had ru
mours lately of divisions, and of yearning for a
change; and Dr. Pusey in his Christian simpli
city believed that a desire was springing up for the
holy privilege of an apostolical succession. But
far different are the feelings of young Germany;
she desires to carry out reformation principles, not
to return to apostolic order; she desires no holy
institutions, no catholic rule of faith, she Avishes

50

" altogether to break the yoke, and burst the bonds ;"
she would rather approximate to the Pantheistic sys
tem than to the Church of Christ. Among her pro
fessors, the instructors and guardians of youth, those
may be found avIio have openly classed Moses with
Homer, and (like the great arch-fiend of the French
Revolution, when he condescended to acknowledge
the existence of some supreme agency, and in
consequence plumed himself on his superior faith,)
have taken credit to themselves as men of piety
in admitting the holy Son of God to have been the
Socrates of Judea. Young Germany is considerably
in advance of the Evangelical party in our Church.
The doctrine of justification by faith only, was un
known in its Lutheran meaning to the primitive
Church of Christ, the Lutheran reformers have used
it practically to enforce the belief that no necessity
exists for bishops, priests, deacons, or creeds. But the
apostles of the new movement in Germany tell us
plainly, that this great watch-word of the old re
formers has served its purpose, in beating down the
Roman Catholic Church, that now artillery more
effective is required by those Avho Avould assail the
Catholic Creed ; and that men aa'Iio are ju-epared to
hold communion with those Avho deny that Jesus is
come in the flesh, must march under a standard that
bears a less equivocal inscription °.
And it is around this standard of revolt that the
wise and the good and the reflecting of this country
° Vide note B, on Justification by Faith.

51

are sohcited to rally. No; while we cling with
affectionate reverence to the religious institutions of
our OAvn faith, and Avhile we deplore the errors of
the Church of Rome, never may we be tempted to
indulge in even a transient sympathy with assaults
directed against her by such an enemy ! Never
may this country, deceived by a name, turn Avith
mistaken hope and confidence to this reforming
movement, and expect that such a hot-bed of impure
motives and undisciplined action can possibly produce
results beneficial to man, or acceptable to God !
Truly, indeed, would every real servant of his hea
venly Master rejoice to see the growth of purer
feehngs and of juster views in the Romish Church,
but he can offer up no prayer to see her overborne
by men far more deeply impregnated with doctrinal
corruption, and utterly without that reverential
spirit which honourably characterizes so many mem
bers of her faith; a spirit which often in practice
mitigates, though it cannot in principle redeem the
errors of their creed.
Some pure-minded persons in this country, at
tracted by the delusive name of reformation prin
ciples, have hailed the progress of the German
movement, but no cautious man who has really
investigated the proceedings, and examined the
principles of its originators, can sympathize with
their career. I except those, of course, many though
I fear there be, who look rather to the triumph
of a party than to the furtherance of the cause of
D 2

52

Christ ; men animated against the Church of Rome
by feelings of rivalry and ancient animosity, and not
by that sorrowful conviction of its real abuses, which
alone should actuate the Christian heart when it
condemns, and which will ever prompt it rather to
deplore the failings than vilify the conduct of an
erring sister. Can any real servant of his God, how
ever blinded by sectarian prejudice, be of opinion,
that the extinction of Romanism in its worst form
would be well purchased by the substitution of a
system which sets forth in a recent and deliberately
enacted code, entitled " General Principles and De
terminations of the German Catholic Church," that
" the uqderstanding of Scripture must be left to
reason, acted upon by the idea of Christianity ;" that
" a difference of apprehension and interpretation as
to the substance of our faith is no valid ground of
separation ;" that " it is the duty of the Church and
of individuals to cause the substance of our faith to
become a matter of living knowledge according to
the spirit of the age." Some articles of this Creed
are less revolting, and have the appearance at first
sight of scriptural truths, but when combined with
such opinions as these, they can be considered only
as the devices of men " Avho confound together the
doctrine of the Lord Jesus Christ with their OAvn
poison, while they seem AA'orthy of belief';" nor can
we entertain a doubt on the subject, when we see
' Vide page 16.

53
that the German Catholic Clergy fraternize readily
Avith another leader, and call him " one of the no
blest men of the people," who, glorying in the title
of the Protestant Apostle, distinctly tells us, that
the main object of the movement is, " to form a
centre of religious union which may comprise not
only the Protestant, the Catholic, and the Greek,
but the very Jew !" who impugns the Godhead, and
even denies the mission of our blessed Lord. This
representative of the new reformation protests
against the " folly of confounding the Bible with
the word of God, the vessel with the contents ;" he
affirms " there is no valid reason for considering it
as strictly holy and free from error;" and finally
pronounces " the doctrines of original sin, of vica
rious satisfaction, and of the Trinity, to be mere
developments of an obsolete theology," saying " that
all the thoughts of his rational mind revolt at the
idea of acknowledging his Saviour as his God."
To croAvn the whole, and render this exposition
of his faith consistent with his motives, the Pro
testant apostle distinctly tells us that his adherence
to that cause originated in the settled indignation
Avhich he experienced three years ago, because a
clergyman of Magdeburg was threatened with dis
missal for publicly declaring himself opposed to the
Avorship of Jesus. Yet our religious periodicals are
beginning to speak the language of this party, and
many look with an eye of favour on their proceed
ings, because their system would be reared upon
the ruins of a Church more scriptural in her views,

54

and far less tainted with deadly heresy. Many
there also are, I fear, even in the bosom of our
Church, who in secret cherish an opinion that no
slight advantage must, at all events, result from the
development of principles which tend to undermine
in any shape, or by any means, the cause of esta
blished authority. With minds so constituted the
Avi-iter of this pamphlet has no sympathy ; he humbly
believes that the half-benighted man, who prostrates
himself before some ancient relic with superstitious
homage, is nearer to his God, and better fitted for
that heavenly home, for which, in the undoubting
fervour of his heart, he yearns, than the vain-glorious
apostle of the so-called Protestant movement, who
coldly reasons on his Saviour, presumes to analyse
the Godhead as a piece of human machinery, exa
mines without reverence, decides Avithout aAve, and
ends by peremptorily denying the highest and holiest
attributes of his Redeemer and his Lord.
And now, having shoAvn the effect of contempt
for the teaching of the primitive Church as it has
acted on Christian societies, and as it influences the
Protestant movements of the present day, I repeat
my appeal to you, whether Churchmen in name, or
Dissenters, who, although differing from each other,
agree to renounce the doctrine and discipline of the
primitive Church of Christ ; who have therefore no
reverential feeling for the Church of your country,
and Avould willingly erase from the minds of men all
respect for her apostolical authority.
Pause, I entreat you, in the career which you are

55

running ; commune Avith yourselves, Avhen removed
for a moment from the intoxicating influences of
party excitement and party applause ; probe your
OAvn motives, ask your oAvn hearts whether some
portion of the faith which you yet retain be not
attributable to the unacknowledged influence of that
Church against which you are arrayed, whether your
spiritual life depends not on her existence ?
The present state and prospects of that Church
are at this moment subjects of the deepest and most
painful interest to all her children.
I have shoAvn that I by no means sympathize with
those, who, as members of the Church of England,
consider it inconsistent with Christian humility to
speak against the errors of the Church of Rome.
She has no claim whatever to our forbearance ; we
have a right to assert the liberty of a Christian
Church, with which Christ has made us free, and to
expose all error, so it be done in the spirit of cha
rity. With regard to the isolated position of the
English Church, which is cast in her teeth by Ro
manists and Dissenters ^, if she find herself alone, but
still retains the profession of the faith which has
been held from the beginning, it is her glory and
her honour. To say that she is alone in this sense,
is to say that she is in the position of all the most
faithful servants of the Lord ; for the word of God
shows us that his most distinguished servants were
alone in a faithless and perverse generation. Eng-
' Vide note C.

56

land has before now stood alone in a righteous, but
as it has appeared to many, in a hopeless cause ; and
she has no reason that I can see to repent having
done so; and may not her Church hope against
hope, even though the state should disown her, to
which she gave, in the day of peril, Avilling and effi
cient aid. It is true her cause has lost one of its
best and ablest supporters. Many with good reason
have considered him as the greatest of living Avriters,
and, until this fatal deed, as one of the first of living
characters. Many have followed him, step by step,
with unquestioning faith, and rejoicing, in spite of
crosses and evil words, that he was carrying them up
to the pure fountain-head of truth : no man's head
seemed more clear to judge what is pure, no one has
more forcibly exposed what is impure in the Church
of Avhich he is now (most grievous thought !) a mem
ber. When we place his noble works before our
children, we must now say they were written by
one who was a pillar of our pure apostolic Church,
but he lived to gainsay his holy doctrines.
This is a deep affliction, and deeply will it be felt
by every sincere member of our Catholic Church.
Her enemies, however, both within and without her
walls, look on the matter in a very different light ;
indeed, we have been told by a venerable prelate
from beyond the seas ^, that the battle for Church
° The following remarks are made on the answer of the
Bishop of Calcutta, to the address of the Society for the Propa
gation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, in which answer, after

57

principles has been fought and lost; that the late
decisions in the Court of Arches ' have settled the
contest for ever ; and he advises his clergy to shake
hands, and to think no more of the matter ; the one
party with a suppressed feeling of triumph, the other
Avith all the shame of those who have suffered a de
feat. But he who thinks that any discouragement
can arise from a rebuke given in such a spirit,
knows little of the patience in which they " possess
their souls," who have counted the cost, and are
engaged in a contest of life and death, for the cause
of God's truth. He who congratulates the country
on the increase of her churches, and not of her
churches only, but of the holy zeal and self-denial
of her ministry, while he mentions the men and the
principles from which this increase has arisen only to
condemn them ; he who, on the other hand, says not
a word against those who take it upon them to
many other like words, he advised a less frequent use of the
term Catholic Church in the official documents of that society,
and the substitution of other words which are in common use
among Christians of all denominations. None of the observa
tions here made are intended to impugn the motives of the
venerable prelate. Some words ui the speech itself, however,
were totally uncalled-for at the present moment, and are calcu
lated to inflict a deep injury on the Catholic faith and the Catho
lic Church of his country.
' I beg leave here to supply an omission which I made in a
tract, published in the year 1843, entitled " A Word in Defence
of our Altars and Catholic Church." I there proved that the
words "altar' and " sacrifice,'' as applied to the Eucharist, had
been in use by the holy Catholic Church from the beginning;

58

mutilate the ordinances of our Church, to scoff at
her most sacred doctrines, and to hold up to con
tempt that apostolic authority which he himself has
the consistency and honesty to vindicate : such a
man, I say, is not likely to pour oil on our troubled
waters. His advice, also, to missionary societies is totally
opposed in principle to their doctrine who were
sent forth by the apostles to convert the world. It
is true that it may be the easiest method to coun
tenance all sorts of opinions, and to rejoice in nomi
nal proselytes to Christianity, under whatever creed
or denomination they may chance to enlist them
selves : by this method we may conform to the spirit
of the age in which we live, and at the same time
persuade ourselves to believe that we are taking the
best means of promoting the cause of our Lord.
and that as late as the year 1640, our Church declared that she
held the word " altar" in the primitive sense ; but I omitted to
state that the Church now uses the word frequently in her solemn
coronation service. This is important as an answer to those who
say that the use of the word " altar" is at this moment unautho
rized, and who would cut us off from communion with the
Church Catholic on a most important article of faith, by denying
that the Eucharist is in any sense a commemorative sacrifice.
The host of pious and learned divines in our Church, including
men of various opinions, such as Bull and Beveridge, who have
held this doctrine, it might have been hoped, would have pre
vented any positive statement of opposite opinions. The testi
mony of Dr. Arnold is not without weight in this matter ; he
confesses that the sacraments of the primitive Church "were all
one with those of the Church of England."

59

But how different is this from the spirit of those
who planted the first Churches; they thought it
their duty to enforce on their converts the advice of
the apostle, and taught them "to say the same
thing in every thing."
And with regard to the Church, a word which we
are advised, as a measure of policy, not to use too fre
quently in official communications ; this word, with
often-repeated commentaries on its meaning, was the
burden of his letters, who not only thought that he
might be addressing his brethren for the last time, but
knew that he was on the road to a sudden and dreadful
death. And what Avas the consequence of this con
duct? The real meaning of the word was known. Men
could not say, as they do now, "Agree on your
creed before you teach us ;" the faith was one ; the
Church Avas one, even as Christ and the Father are
one ; they who were admitted into the Catholic
Church at the same time renounced all vain disputa
tions, and provoked each other only to good Avorks.
In opposition to such teaching, we may take " a
broad intelligible view of the vast doctrines of Chris
tianity," or rather a view which is said to be intelli
gible, but which is not explained. We may, I say, take
this view; but we cannot make it agree with the
doctrine of " one body," " one Spirit," " one Lord,"
" one faith," " one baptism ;" nor with their example
by whose ministry the whole civilized world was
taught to call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord;
in other Avords, we cannot reconcile the compromis-

60

ing schemes of men Avith the unchangeable ordi
nances of God.
And have we not awful warning of the end of
these things in the events which are taking place at
this moment in other countries ? For, between
these two statements, the one by an evangelical
bishop of our Church, " that we should take a broad
intelligible view of the vast doctrines of Chris
tianity;" the other by a leader of the German Ca
tholic movement, " that we should cause the sub
stance of our faith to become a matter of living
knowledge accordant with the spirit of the age;"
between these two statements, I say, there is little
difference of laxity in degree, and none in principle.
From such terms of communion, abhorrent as they
are equally to the word of God and to the doctrine
of his Church, the descent is most easy and natural
to the still more comprehensive creed of the German
Protestant apostle. Indeed, these three methods of
doing aAvay with creeds, and relaxing indefinitely our
terms of Church membership, are three almost equal
steps in the dowuAvard course, and there is scarcely
need of a fourth to sink us in the darkest and
deepest depths of infidelity. Yet the evangelical
press for many years, and by innumerable publica
tions, has endeavoured to poison the public mind,
in order that it might compel the Church of Eng
land to take the first of these steps, by practically
relaxing the terms of her communion. And now
she is called on by an evangelical prelate to descend

61
thus far from her high and holy state, and to publish
to the world her lowered position, by adopting hence
forth a dissenting phraseology in her most important
and official documents. All this is sad indeed ; but
at the same time we cannot be too grateful to the
Almighty, that as He mercifully interposed to open
our eyes in the case of the French Revolution, so He
has now enabled us to see the wretched effects of
evil principles in other states, at the very moment
that we are tempted ourselves to act upon them.
And here it may not be amiss to say a few words
on the insidious manner in Avhich evil principles are
disseminated in this country ; how even the words
of Scripture are perverted to make men think lightly
of holy things, and a spirit of irreverence and self-
conceit is fostered and encouraged, under the mask
of peculiar attachment to the essential doctrines of
Christianity. The aim of all religious rationalism, under what
ever form it may appear, is to diminish as much as
possible the objects of practical belief, and to offend
the corrupt heart Avith the minimum of spiritual
truth. It is the world, not at open enmity with reli
gion, but striving to unchristianize it by connexion
with itself. Thus it happens that it often draws its
keenest weapons from the word of God. The limb
which has been severed from any living body is itself
dead, and utterly useless for its original purposes,
but may be applied to others of an entirely different
kind. This is especially the case with any portion

62

of the truth taken from the Scripture, and bound
up, not with the great body of revealed doctrine to
Avhich it M'as united there, but with some web of
human inventions, far more in harmony Avith the
sinful wishes of our fallen nature. Nay more, op
posing the authority of its high origin to the general
wisdom of revelation, it there becomes the fulcrum
on which the lever of infidelity is worked in the
fashionable religious systems of the day. It supplies
the spiritual dress with which they cover the carnal
principles which create their power and popularity.
For instance, men readily obey the voice Avhich bids
them worship God in spirit and in truth, when the
meaning of those words is clearly that they may
worship Him according to the spirit of the age, and
regard as truth whatever the light of reason, guided
by that spirit, may reveal. They gladly hear that
the kingdom of heaven is Avithin themselves, when
they are taught to look for it in any of those mere
developments of self which bear the name of vital,
but really are the popular substitutes for Christ's
true religion ; but not Avhen they are taught to seek
it in union with the Redeemer through the poAver
of his sacraments ; and in that holiness Avithout
Avhich no man shall see the Lord ; and, least of
all, in the cross of Christ, as knoAvn in the daily
necessity of bearing it. No, to them the god of
this world speaks in the name of the God of heaven ;
in his feigned character he commands his disciples
to put on the armour of light ; in his true one, to

63

indulge their carnal tastes and appetites, whether of
the body or the intellect. And it is the union of
these really incompatible directions in the same
teaching, which distinguishes the systems of the
world from that of the Church. There is also one
fruit of genuine piety which they never bear; I
mean reverence.
Men cling with extreme tenacity to the idols which
they cherish from unworthy motives, but not with
reverence. For reverence is the heart's sincere
acknowledgment of divine truths ; it is the evidence
of their victory over the pride of reason and the
cloud of spiritual darkness in which sin vsraps the
glory of the unseen world. It is that feeling which
controls the fervour of devotion, but gives it inten
sity and truth ; which imparts a purer energy and a
more exalted tone to the Christian's faith, by refining
it from the coarseness of human passions. It is, in
short, the fear of God, and the sign that He has
spoken to the soul. I wish that men would more
often try by the test of reverence the spirit which
is in them.
The faith which is the fruit of earthly systems is
unmarked by reverence, it knows nothing of the
spirit with which Moses put off his shoes from off
his feet, when he knew that the place whereon he
stood was holy ground ; it knows nothing of the
spirit with which Daniel, " when he knew that the
writing was signed, went into his house, and kneeled
upon his knees three times a-day, and prayed and

64

gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime, his
windows being open in his chamber towards Jerusalem."
With the spirit of the Jews of old, it shrinks offended
from the mysteries of the Eucharist. It is too spiritu
ally weak to perform faith's highest office, too worldly
great to walk in that path of humble obedience in
which God will meet the trembling sinner, and
crown him with the most perfect of all earthly
blessings, communion with himself. It seeks, rather,
to find some easy way of escaping from the burden
and the doom of sin, than to bear the image and
impress of God ; or, to follow the blessed steps of
His most holy life, " who died upon the cross," by
claiming sorrow, suffering, and self-denial as its own.
No, this would be the wisdom of the Church, and
from this it flies to the unauthorized teaching of
other guides. Look at it in its effect on the history
of private families. God has provided for their
unity and happiness by binding the wife to the
husband, and the children to both, by a law of obe
dience. But where the knowledge that puffeth up
is acquired, and the fear of the Lord is not under
stood, how often may the ruined peace of domestic
life be traced to the violation of this law. What
evils mark the conversation and the conduct of such
families ! what irreverent handling of holy things !
what flippant familiarity^ Avith the words of Scripture !
'^ There is nothing new in this habit of treating sacred subjects
irreverently, which is now so prevalent among us. St. Athana
sius, who lived in the fourth century, calls it, " the miserable

65
what vehement devotion to individual will! what
lawless emancipation from the restraining influences
of religion! what frequent departures from the
modesty of the Christian temper ! And as it is in
private, so it is in public life. The same cause which
destroys the grace of loving subjection in the wife,
of affectionate obedience in the child, of duty in all
its relations, is visible in the bearing of a people
towards their spiritual and temporal rulers.
How then should we act ? We may learn from
the errors of others. In the first place, let us hold
fast the whole word of God as it is given us in his
Church ; let us not practically receive a part only, by
unduly magnifying the importance of those doctrines
which may accord with any favourite religious system
of our own invention. Let us not reject the autho
rity of the pope only to place self on the judgment-
seat ; but let us on aU controverted points of doctrine
submit vrith deference to the authority of the primi
tive Church of Christ when its judgment can be
clearly ascertained. This is the only true method of
promoting unity ; this is the strong ground which
the Church of England has hitherto taken, and it is
equally unassailable by the Romanist and the secta-
procedure of making sacred and mysterious subjects a matter of
popular talk and debate, which is a sure mark of heresy:' And
Socrates, a Church historian, who lived in the same century, says,
that " in the imperial court the officers of the bed-chamber held
disputes with the women ; and in the city in every house there
was a war of dialectics :" this was during the prevalence of the
Arian heresy. E

66

rian. Let us always bear in mind that the negative
evidence of the primitive Church is conclusive
against all novel systems of doctrine or discipline ;
for it cannot be believed for a moment that any life-
giving truths were unknown to the friends of the
apostles, and to the Churches they planted. All
new systems of faith are therefore to be rejected at
once, under whatever specious forms they may
appear, as being downward steps, however well their
doAvnward tendency may be concealed '.
We are told in bold and irreverent terms, that we
are to expect a severe fight on both sides, a fight
against apostolic order, against those servants of the
Lord who are resolved to keep in his ranks. Others,
with less apparent irreverence, but in the same spirit,
tell us that God will defend his own Church, and
that we need not trouble ourselves about the matter.
But whether the Almighty's promise of protection
to our Church be conditional or not, we are bound
to act, each in his station, as if on the single exer
tions of every individual depended the final triumph
of our holy cause. This conduct alone is worthy of
those servants who "are bought with a price, that
they may glorify God in their body and in their
spirit, which are his."
In this our conflict let us be sure that we adhere
strictly to the first warning given by the apostle to the
' Since this was sent to the press, the " Liverpool Confession
of Faith" has appeared, which is more cautiously worded than the
" New German Catholic Creed," but the very same in principle.

67

Christian combatant, let our " loins be girt about with
truth f it cannot at the present moment be too anx
iously enforced. Let us never be tempted to say any
evil falsely against the Romanist*; knowing the rela
tive situation in which we place ourselves in respect
of them by so doing, from the words of Christ Himself.
Matt. V. 11. Would that we all saw this awful con
sequence of falsehood clearly, and acted as if we saw
it, not only towards the Romanist, but towards those
of our own Church who differ from us. How many
very eloquent orators, how many tattlers and busy-
bodies would be silenced ; how many so-called
religious periodicals would cease to circulate; how
many popular religious booksellers would close their
shops ; how many religious tract depositories would
be shut up. I speak against the present profit of
such persons and such establishments, " but my wish
hath a preferment in it ^" Besides, whilst thousands
of worldly, irreverent minds have rushed at once into
infidelity on detecting the real errors and frauds in
the Roman Church, she has obtained, by the expo
sure of false accusations which have been brought
against her, proselytes of a very different character,
the humble, the reverential, the obedient, the truth-
loving. There is fear also that we may be deterred from
doing what is right, lest it may be said that we
are going towards Rome. I allude especially in
this observation to the holy state of voluntary celi-
* Vide note A. ' Cymbeline, act v. scene 4.
E 2

68

bacy. Mr. Cecil says very truly, "both our Lord
and his apostles seem to establish it as a principle,
that a single state, when it can be chosen, and is
chosen, for the sake of the Gospel, is the superior
state. This, I fear, is too much forgotten, and those
men who might have received the same, and have
done more service in the Church of God by receiving
it, have given it little or no weight in their delibe
rations." This, indeed, is too much forgotten, for it
is wholly lost sight of in our Church. It is true,
that by the compulsory celibacy of her clergy, the
Roman Church has overstepped the word of God ;
but is this any reason for our not advancing as far as
it leads us by the hand ?
Nothing in this country is a more just cause of
ang-uish to the Christian's heart than the religious state
of our populous cities. Many have eagerly subscribed,
in order that lay readers may be appointed to expound
the word of God ; a cheap measure perhaps, and in
accordance with the spirit of the age, but which, as it
authorizes laymen to transgress their proper bounds,
in opposition to the adA^ice of St. Clement ^ and the
example of the primitive Church, Avill be sure to
sow the seeds of discord and confusion among us.
Plad due encouragement been given to the institu
tion of voluntary celibate colleges, I know there
have been pious and learned men, who within the
last few years would have devoted themselves, vdth-
out reward, to this holy office. Why then, instead
" Vide page 14.

69

of attempting to enforce the Offertory on unwilling
congregations, and in this, as well as in some other
instances, striving to pour new wine into old bottles,
have not their services been accepted, who desiring
to die to the world and to live to Christ, who desir
ing literally " to crucify the world with its affections
and lusts," ask only for that sympathy and support
which a society of kindred souls, linked together in
holy brotherhood, might afford them. Should not
holy hands be laid on those whose office, if duly per
formed, calls on them more than any other to walk
wholly with God, and who by the aid of the Holy Spirit
are intended to bring life and light and comfort to
the dead in sin, the ignorant, and the despairing ; are
not those who have embraced voluntary poverty for
the sake of Christ, best suited to enter the abodes of
the most miserable of all men, the poor and un
converted ?
There is another most important consideration
connected with this matter, that is, confession of
sins. It is true that our Church in her exhortation
to the Communion advises this confession, but as a
habit it is practically unknown in the Church of
England ; I do not believe it would be so, if we had
among us societies of devoted men wholly abstracted
from the affairs of this life. I beheve that the
existence of such societies would stimulate us to a
more spiritual walk Avith God. I know that such
a class of men is needed. I have heard heart-
stricken penitents lament, that in their Church they

70

had not the full advantage of confession. I have
seen letters from young men expressive of this feel
ing, who, having fallen under those temptations to
which youth is especially liable, wished to converse
with those who had conquered the flesh Avith its
affections and lusts. This longing I know is deeply
felt ; it is the desire of the lowly and contrite heart,
it should not be despised ; if it be, I fear our Church
will lose many of those who might have been her
glory as they are the cause of joy in the presence of
the angels of God. With regard to the establishment
of holy sisterhoods in our Church, I believe the
benefits to be expected from them are so generally
acknowledged, that we shall not long remain with
out these most useful and pious institutions.
I shall now conclude Avith a few more general and
comprehensive observations on the present crisis of
affairs, and on our line of duty under the circum
stances in which we are placed. The consequences
of late events to the Church of God in this country,
it would be presumptuous even to conjecture ; they
will be such as Divine Grace shall make them,
whether given or withdrawn. Our danger, on the
other hand, is evident, and our duty, especially that
of Christ's ministers, plain. Who can deny that many
vital truths, affecting equally the faith and practice
of Christians, truths which were never disallowed,
but lay in comparative neglect, have, within the last
twelve years, been set forth and maintained with a
power to which we had long been strangers, and,

71

in some degree, proportioned to their unspeakable
importance ; — I allude more especially to the new
birth in Baptism, to the office and authority of
Christ's Church, to the Divine commission of its
ministry, to the true nature of the Eucharistic mys
teries, to the duty of self-denial.
But now some who did run well have been be
witched, so as no longer to obey the truth, and, as
far as human error can avail to this end, have cast a
shade on these holy doctrines ; to which holy doc
trines henceforth vnll be attributed, by the ignorant
and perverse, this decline and falling away of friends.
Inasmuch, however, as on the foundation of Divine
truth alone, and of these truths more especially, can
we maintain our cause against the corrupt Church
of Rome, we must be careful that oar allegiance
and fidelity to those doctrines be draAvn forth into
more active energy by the suspicion and discredit
with which they Avill be now assailed, and we must
prove and manifest before the world that they are
instinct with life; and that, for the expansion of
that life into the most precious and most holy fruit of
which regenerate man is capable, our own Church, the
Church of Christ amongst us, reformed and purified by
God's mercy, and restored to the primitive rule, affords
ample room and opportunity to her faithful children,
who are content to fulfil her purposes, and live by
her direction. And we must be ever more and
more diligent ; as in prayer, so " in reading of the
Holy Scripture, and in such studies as help to the

72

knowledge of the same, laying aside the study of the
world and of the flesh ' ;" for the adversaries against
whom we shall have to contend once more as for
life or death, cannot be met by superficial learning,
misapplied prophecies, vague and general invective,
but by a deep acquaintance with the true meaning
of Scripture, and with the mind and teaching of the
pure and primitive Church of Christ.
' Ordination Service.

NOTES.

Note (A).
Nothing is more common than for Christian men and women
to declare that they believe Rome to be antichrist, and yet to
express their joy in unqualified terms that certain members of
our Church have gone over to it, and to say that they are only
sorry that more do not follow their example. But such persons
cannot be sincere ; they cannot mean what they say ; for, suppos
ing Rome to be antichrist, none but evil spirits could be glad
that any additions were made to Satan's kingdom. How much
better would it be to speak more advisedly on such a sad and
awful subject!
There is also one false accusation against the Church of Rome,
which should be distinctly repudiated by every one who loves
the truth. She is accused of being antichrist, because she
answers to the description of that apostasy which is given in the
First Epistle of Timothy, iv. 1 — 3, that in the latter times some
should depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and
doctrines of devils, forbidding to marry, and commanding to
abstain from meats. Now, every one who has the slightest
acquaintance with the history of the early Church, must know
that this description literally applies to the errors of some among
the first heretics; that the Gnostics held those doctrines, and
that the Manichseans openly professed them ; whereas the Church
of Rome forbids those only to marry who have made a vow of

74
celibacy, and forbids the use of meats only on fast-days, in com
mon with our own Church. These heretical opinions were held
first, I repeat, by the Gnostics and Manichseans, then by the
Cathari and other sects ; and, last of all, by the Albigenses :
indeed, the abstinence from meats seems to have been the charac
teristic doctrine of ancient Puritanism. The story is one that has
been told a hundred times, but conveys a lesson which we should
do well in these latter days to get by heart, that almost all sects
have commenced their attacks on the Church by advancing pre
tensions to superior purity in doctrine and practice. As the
total abstinence societies are now instituted in contempt of the
example of our Saviour, so the various sects of Cathari or Puri
tans in ancient times, made it their mark of distinction to abstain
wholly from meats which God had created to be received with
thanksgiving. It is very remarkable that, in the case of a
highly talented individual, in whom we should least have ex
pected it, this mark of antichrist was attendant on infidelity.
The poet Shelley attributed all the diseases that befall the human
race to the introduction of fire, which enabled men to dress
meats which were not adapted to their sustenance : he professed
his firm belief that if a few generations of men would agree to
abstain from meats, and eat the undressed fruits of the earth,
they would by degrees escape all the bodily evils that nature is
heir to, except old age and death. So ready was this man to
believe any absurd imagination of his own heart, who rejected
with scorn the authority of the Bible and of the Church ! So
credulous is scepticism, so superstitious is infidelity !
Note (B).
In order that my opinions may not be misrepresented with
regard to the doctrine of justification by faith, I here insert some
extracts from my former writings. In my answer to Mr. Bicker-
steth, I have spoken of the true doctrine of justification by faith,
the only hope that the sinner has of being able to stand in the
presence of a holy God, in these terms : —

75
" When St. Paul preached the doctrine of justification by faith
only, he preached it in opposition to the idea that we could be
iustified by doing the works of the law. He never preached
justification by faith without repentance, for they are inseparably
connected ; nor did he ever preach justification by faith without
the works of faith (if we have power given us to perform them),
for then he would have preached a doctrine contrary to St. James,
who insisted on justification by the works of faith. The truth is
(if factious disputants could but see it), that neither faith, nor love,
nor obedience, justify in any other manner than so far as they unite
us with Christ ; it is He that justifleth ; it is by an union with Him
that we are justified, and through Him that we obtain pardon
and acceptance."
And again, in another work : — " The Epistle of St. James
was a stumbling-block to Luther, and has continued to be so to
divines of a certain class in our day ; for this reason, that they
have taken a false view of the subject, and are now constantly
endeavouring to bend the text of Scripture to their creed. The
method most approved at present for this purpose is, to declare
that there are two kinds of justification, one in the sight of men,
and the other in the sight of God ; and that St. James, when he
says, 'We are justified by works,' means that we are justified in
the sight of men only.
" Now St. James, throughout his Epistle, alludes solely to
justification in the sight of God. He argues against faith as
a feeling, or a profession, or any thing but a principle of action,
and declares it to be dead without works ; that is, having no
justifying efficacy at all. ' What does it profit, my brethren,
if a man say, I have faith and have not works ; can faith save
him?' Salvation and justification in the sight of men have no
connexion whatever with each other. The truth is (if factious
disputants could but see it), that neither faith nor works justify,
save as they unite us to Christ; it is He that justifleth, and
through Him alone that we obtain pardon and acceptance. The
man who considers himself justified by his faith, save as it con
tributes to this union, is as self-righteous as he who considers

76
himself justified by his works ; and that he speaks scripturally
who says he is justified by faithful obedience, so far as it
strengthens and cements this union, is plain from the teaching of
all the inspired writers, as well as from that of Christ Himself.
He traces every benefit conferred on us by God to this union ; tells
us that without Him we can do nothing ; that if we abide in
Him, every thing will be given us ; and that if we keep his com
mandments, we shall abide in Him. To hold, therefore, that
justification by works signifies only justification in the sight of
men, is equally antinomian and unscriptural.
" I cannot end these observations without expressing my con
viction that most of the volumes written on this point maintain a
dispute on words only ; that there is no vital difference between
sincere Christians in the matter ; and that if we could be per
suaded to look on faith and works as means to an end only, and
that end an union with and an abiding in Christ (which is surely
the scriptural view of the subject), the controversy, if not alto
gether extinguished, would at least be deprived of all its bit
terness."
Note (C).
I allude especially to the comments which are made on the
isolated state of our Church by an Honourable and Reverend
Clergyman, in his Tract on Unity, which is written to show that
there is no essential difference between the church and the
meeting-house. The author not only holds, but teaches dis
senting doctrines, and yet he remains in full power and activity
as a priest of the English Church. Now, although I think it the
duty of all the Clergy firmly to protest against such proceedings,
yet I do not mean by what 1 say to throw the slightest imputa
tion on the conduct of our bishops. They are in a most difficult
situation ; for ecclesiastical censures are great or small according
to the feeling of those against whom they are directed. It is
with men, as with animals : the faithful defender of his master's
property has been known to leave his house, never to return, for
one angry word. But I will not follow out this illustration ; I

77
will rather say that a bishop cannot act the part of a father in
this respect, he cannot treat the faults of a loving and humble
child with tenderness, whilst he bestows severe chastisement on
the stubborn and self-willed ; they must be lefl, within certain
bounds, to follow their own devices ; whether some influential
members of our Church have not of late in many other places,
but especially at Liverpool, transgressed the utmost limits of
forbearance, is another question. This, however, is certain, some
humble, self-denying men, very nearly resembling George Her
bert in principle, as well as in religious life and conversation,
have left our Church, on account of what they have considered
the ascendancy of dissenting principles within her. Others, on
the contrary, are in the constant commission of a still greater sin
against God by remaining with us, and yet making common
cause, and adopting a common creed, with Independents and
other sectarians, the avowed, the consistent, the determined
adversaries of our Church. Under these circumstances it is surely
the duty of her real friends to let it be known that they are firmly
attached to the characteristic doctrines of the Church of England,
that they will never make any compromise with her adversaries,
that they will never consent to the slightest movement in a down
ward course. The fable of the sheep and wolves speaks to us
plainly at this moment, for there is imminent danger that the
Church of England may lose many of those holy and self-denying
characters who are her best defence, and may then be delivered
up into the hands of her enemies.

THE END.

Gilbert & Rivington, Printers, St. Jolin's Square, Londo

'. Cr.ai 1 r LIBRARY

3 9002 08837 0151