Hull

Mhtf57

,84-5 Ha v

MDCCCXLY.

THE MONTH OF
JANUARY.
OXFORD.

" JUDGE NOT THAT YE BE NOT JUDGED, FOR WITH WHAT
JUDGMENT YE JUDGE, YE SHALL BE JUDGED; AND WITH WHAT
MEASURE YE METE, IT SHALL BE MEASURED UNTO YOU AGAIN."

BY WILLIAM WINSTANLEY HULL, M.A.
LI
of Lincoln's inn, barrister-at-law.
late fellow of brasenose college.

MV.g57
\s%sr

SEELEY, BURNSIDE, AND SEELEY,
FLEET STREET, LONDON ,
VINCENT, HIGH STKEET, OXEUIiU.

OTHER PUBLICATIONS, BY THE SAME AUTHOR,
TO BE HAD AT
SEELEY, BTJRNSIDE, AND SEELEY'S, FLEET STREET.

1. An Inquiry concerning the Means and Expedience of pro
posing and making any Changes in the Canons, Articles, and
Liturgy, or in any of the Laws affecting the Interests of the
Church of England. 8vo., pp. 252. 7s. 1828,
2. A Statement of some Reasons for continuing to Protestants
the whole Legislature of Great Britain and Ireland. 8vo. 3s.
pp. 100. 1829.
3. The Disuse of the Athanasian Creed advisable in the
Present State of the United Church of England and Ireland.
8vo., pp. 156. 5s. 1831.
4, Thoughts on Church Reform. 8vo., pp. 16. Price Qd.
1832. 5. Remarks intended to show how far Dr. Hampden may
have been Misunderstood and Misrepresented during the present
Controversy at Oxford. 8vo., pp. 64. Price 2s. 1836.
Also,
Observations on a Petition for the Revision of the Liturgy
of the United Church of England and Ireland, with a Report of
the Discussion it caused in the House of Lords, 26th May,
1840. By John Hull, M. A., Vicar of Poulton-le-Fylde, Lanca
shire, and W. W. Hull, M.A. 8vo., pp. 72. Price 2s. 6d.
1840.

MDCCCXLV.

JANUARY IN OXFORD,
BY WILLIAM WINSTANLEY HULL, M.A.,
LATE FELLOW OF BRAZENNOSE COLLEGE.

The Vice- Chancellor has issued a notice of certain measures to
be proposed in Convocation on the 13th of February, 1845.
1 hese measures are, at least, of a very questionable nature, yet
cannot be accompanied with any official explanation or reference
to competent authorities. If carried they will degrade Mr. Ward,
add a new declaration to the subscription which the Vice-Chan
cellor may now require from any clergyman suspected of holding
erroneous opinions, and enable him to require both ¦ declaration
and subscription from any layman.
In this notice are set forth seven passages from Mr. Ward's
book, there entitled, " The Ideal of a Christian Church Consi
dered." It is then stated, that on taking each of his two degrees
he made and subscribed the declaration of his adherence to the
Thirty-nine Articles of 1562, in the words prescribed by the
Thirty-sixth Canon of 1603. It is further stated that such pas
sages appear inconsistent with the Thirty-nine Articles, and with
the declaration and icith the good faith of him, the said Mr. Ward,
in making and subscribing the same. And it is then declared,
that in a Convocation to be holden at Oxford, on Thursday, the
13th of February, at one o'clock, the said seven passages will be
read, and the following proposition will be submitted to the
House, " That the passages now read from the book entitled, ' The
" Ideal of a Christian Church Considered,' are utterly inconsistent
" with the Articles of Religion of the Church of England, and with
" the declaration in respect of those Articles made and subscribed
" by William George Ward previously, and in order to his being
" admitted to the degrees of B.A. and M.A. respectively, and
" with the good faith of him, the said William George Ward in
" respect of such declaration and subscription.
" Before the question ' Placetne, &c.,' is put, the Vice-Chan-
" cellor will give Mr. Ward an opportunity of answering to the

A

" charge of having published such passages so inconsistent, as
" aforesaid. " If this proposition is affirmed, the following proposition will
" be submitted to the House : — ' That the said William George
" Ward has disentitled himself to the rights and privileges con-
" veyed by the said degrees, and is hereby degraded from the said
" degrees of B.A. and M.A. respectively.
" Before the question ' Placetne, &c.,' is put, the Vice-Chan-
" cellor will give Mr. Ward an opportunity of stating any grounds
" he may have for showing that he should not be degraded."
It is somewhat remarkable, that this first part of the intended
proceedings should be in English; the rest is in Latin, and is an
alteration of Latin statutes. The privilegium against Hampden
in 1836 was in Latin, and enrolled among the statutes.
It will be seen three assertions are involved : that the seven
passages are inconsistent with the Articles, and with the declara
tions, is probably clear enough in the opinion of all who neither
aid nor abet the " Tracts for the Times." That the passages are
inconsistent -with Mr. Ward's good faith "in respect of his decla
ration and subscription," is quite a different matter, and is a
point which he is likely to contest with all his might.
These three measures are to be put distinctly to the vote, and it
is my present purpose to vote against all three, but the reasons
for voting against the second and third are essentially different
from those which render it just and fit to vote against the perse
cution of Mr. Ward. It is true that som'e apology is due to the
Hebdomadal Board, who cannot publish their motives and objects,
for opposing in print the measures which they may determine to
bring forward. They have a painful and laborious duty to dis
charge ; and it is not a light matter to oppose them or to weaken
their government by trying to overrule their measures. The
best apology I can make is, that the second and third of their
proposals seem to me against law and against conscience.
If the proposed measures had been the degradation of Mr. Ward,
and nothing beyond, it would have been enough for the purposes
of justice to have gone to Oxford on the day and voted against
his condemnation at such a tribunal, for many reasons, some of
which I am about to state. Mr. Ward is, in my opinion, false to
his position at Oxford ; but he does not think so himself, and
should have a fair tribunal when he has so difficult a cause to
plead. His books are very mystified and cloudy, save when his
indignation against Protestant truth breaks in some passing
gleam through the rolling volume of words and philosophy. So

far as I can make out what he means by his books, they are of
such a character that it cannot be expected any consistent
member of a Protestant Church will defend them for one
moment. It is my belief, and therefore must be stated, that
Mr. Ward has broken faith with the University, and what is of
far more consequence, broken also his ordination vow : and, on
that very account, I think that I ought not to be one of the
tribunal at which he is to be tried. I feel confident that the
mass of Oxford Masters are against his books and him, and
therefore I think he should not be tried before the Oxford Con
vocation, even if there were not any other reason against such a
miscalled trial.
It must be borne in mind, while we consider the real effect of
such laws as the University of Oxford may pass for admitting or
expelling its members, that the University is not the Church of
England. The Church and State, which ought to be one and
the same body, taken in different aspects, enact the laws of the
realm, several of which give privileges to Oxford degrees. .Some
of our bishops are said to have assumed for themselves the
power of refusing to ordain those who have not taken a degree.
The inns of court also permit a degree to save two years of the
time else necessary for a call to the bar. These assumptions
and privileges all give a tangible value to a degree. It is too
late for a man who has been stripped of his degree in one
University, then to obtain it in another. When the youth
chooses his University, he takes it as its lav/s then stand, and
enrols himself a member of a partnership, the terms of which
cannot afterwards be changed without injustice. The case might
be carried much higher in all fairness, as Oxford is almost a
national establishment, and is so influential a part of our Church,
as to give its rules and proceedings a very deep interest and a
very, solemn character.
Mr. Ward is a clergyman as well as a Master of Arts, a
preacher and teacher in a Church essentially opposed to all the
sins and mummeries of Rome. He should have been dealt with
in that character first, before the proper and legal tribunal, a
tribunal which gives him a fair mode of defending his good faith
which he is called upon to defend. After a patient investigation
of all his authorities, after a careful hearing of all his witnesses, a
competent judge would have pronounced a sentence, and that
sentence would have done something to check the contagion of
Mr. Ward's error. If the sentence seemed unjust, it might be
reversed on appeal: but if no appeal were made, or made, and

the sentence were confirmed, then the degradation of Mr.
Ward at Oxford would have been almost a matter of course, and
hardly needed the Convocation.
The offence of Mr. Ward is a book which men need not
buy, need not read ; it is not a sermon preached in the Univer
sity which men ought to hear. His offence is not an University
offence, or one in any way connected with his place or privileges
as a Master of Arts. His offence is a book published in the diocese
of London. That book is not any attempt to set men's passions
against their duty. It is not what is commonly meant by an
immoral book. It is calculated for the furtherance of God's own
truth, in his own judgment, here erring indeed beyond almost
all precedent. This book was, and is, by himself, in his own
estimate of his duties and responsibilities, calculated and intended
to serve his Creator, his Redeemer, and his Sanctifier ; if it had
been a sermon preached in the University, it should immediately
have been censured, and the preacher suspended until he recanted
his Popery. The sentence of Convocation will not remedy the
evil of his book, but rather otherwise: it will probably be taken
for punishment enough, and so prevent the Bishop from depriving
Mr. Ward of his ecclesiastical promotion, and forbidding him to
preach Popery in Protestant pulpits. The proceedings in Con
vocation are a sheer wanton persecution, incapable of being-
turned to any good, a persecution for opinions Mr. Ward con
siders sound and consistent with his good faith, and which else
would hardly have been published from a vanity so gross that it
could hardly be forgiven a Christian Eratostratus.
The public are hardly aware that a measure cannot be brought
forward in Convocation except by the Hebdomadal Board, which
consists of the Vice-Chancellor, the heads of houses, and the two
proctors, for the current year. The)', and they alone, are to put
the measure into express terms, mostly into Latin terms ; and
in those terms it is brought before the Regent Masters in congre
gation, three days before the Convocation.
In Convocation the Registrar reads out the proposed measure
in the terms of the Hebdomadal Board; and if the Vice-Chan
cellor, the two Proctors, and the majority of the members agree
to those terms, the measure is again read in those terms, and
then put to the vote. It is our law, that if the Vice-Chancellor
and the two Proctors have been overruled at the Hebdomadal
Board, any one of them can carry his point in Convocation by
objecting to the terms in wbich the measure is expressed, and so
prevent its being put to the Convocation at all. If the majority

of the rest of the members refuse to agree to the terms, the
measure cannot be put. The terms cannot be altered, nor can
any amendment be put, because any measure must be approved
and worded by the Hebdomadal Board before it can come before
Convocation at all. Such appears to me to be the true construc
tion of the statute, tit. x., sec. ii., § 2; but a reference to that
statute is advisable, because on a late occasion it was contended
that Convocation had the power of changing the words in which
any measure had been proposed to them, and then putting such
measure, in such new words, to the vote.
In 1836 the Convocation passed an unjust and unfounded
privilegium against Hampden. In 1842 the Hebdomadal Board
endeavoured to repeal it, but found they had raised a fiend they
could not lay : the Italian band was still able to carry the victory,
and shame palsied justice. This story may now be turned to the
benefit of Mr. Ward, a nursling, and for some years a pet nursling,
of the faction which so wisely dreaded Hampden, a faction that
first betrayed the Hebdomadal Board to folly, and then held them
to it in their own despite. Convocation has judged wrong twice
when meddling with Hampden, and is now summoned to meddle
with Mr. Ward, to determine upon his good faith " in respect
of" the seven extracts from his huge and unwieldy book: a book
which the Hebdomadal Board have now compelled members of
Convocation to read, by summoning them in their official charac
ter to determine whether the given extracts be not so far qualified
as to leave Mr. Ward's good faith, which is unimpaired in his own
estimate, consistent with his subscription in theirs. Many masters
of arts would never have read the book but for this summons : and
will refuse to condemn Mr. Ward, leaving his book to the con
sideration of those who have solemnly professed themselves ready,
with all faithful diligence, to banish and drive away all erroneous
and strange doctrine, contrary to God's Word. A master of arts
who has not any enmity against Mr. Ward, or against any other
human being, may very well feel just now how entirely his con
science will shrink and his heart revolt from being supposed in
any, the least degree, to befriend Mr. Ward in his sayings and
doings. Mr. Ward, however, is not to be idly and wantonly per
secuted because masters of arts are very indignant, and measure
Mr. Ward by a standard to which they dare not, perhaps, bring
their own sayings and doings. Unless good reason be shown for
supporting the Hebdomadal Board, it is probable many will vote
against their measures, who feel, as they themselves feel, that
Mr. Ward is unworthy of his degree. Justice is outraged by the

statute against Hampden, and Nemesis is probably at work for the
13th of February next. Something, however, has been gained
for justice beyond what Hampden had, for the Hebdomadal Board
tell Mr. Ward what he has done wrong, and promise him a hear
ing, a promise not so easily kept as made.
The accusation is personal, and the defence must be personal.
Yet how is it to be conducted when every person present is an
accuser in form, and pronounces a sentence in which he has himself
a personal interest. Suppose Mr. Ward employ counsel for several
successive days, and summon archbishops, bishops, and judges of
the land for his witnesses. He cannot enforce his summons, he
cannot compel any witnesses to attend against their will. If he
be his own counsel, suppose he commence by taking up his own
book and comment upon the unfairness by which its very title is
already misrepresented in the indictment. His book is not the
:i Ideal of a Christian Church Considered" — but considered " in
comparison with existing practice." The omission of that
standard, as he v/ill urge, evinces a total misconception, and the
book must then and there be read entirely through, every line.
Then, as a notorious criminal, accused upon circumstantial
evidence, told a jury all the authentic stories in which circum
stantial evidence had failed, Mr. Ward must read other Popish
books by which, perhaps, he was himself poisoned in early youth,
and inquire what has been, or is to be, done with the masters and
doctors who published them. Some, it is true, are anonymous,
but books may be condemned under the statute, (p. 160,) as well
as authors ; besides some are not anonymous, and the fact of
their being written by men of older standing, all honourable
men, and some of them praised by dignitaries, none of them
censured by Convocation, or by any bishop's court, may have led
Mr. Ward to believe his own good faith as unimpeachable as
theirs. Suppose these books produced to be read, and such witnesses
as an accused man can persuade to face an angry crowd to be in
attendance, who is to rule what evidence can or cannot be
admitted? who is to get the University over the folly of trying
to make a deliberative assembly into a tribunal of law without its
forms and rules? Neither before nor since the days of Robes
pierre, to the best of my knowledge, has any deliberative
assembly been called upon to supersede the usual tribunal for
trying an accused individual, except to secure his condemnation.
The Act for the ministers of the Church to be of sound religion
(13 Eliz. c, 12), points out a course which would give a fair trial,

and even the form of the citation will be found in H. M. Procu
rator-General v. Stone, p. 424, of the first vol. of Dr. Haggard's
" Consistory Reports." The ecclesiastical courts now exist, aud
offer a fair and legal trial. Convocation does not and cannot
offer either ; yet it proposes to take away from Mr. Ward a
degree which gives great and legal privileges to its possessors.
It is very difficult to determine in what character the members
of Convocation ought to be considered, legislators, judges, or
gentlemen of the jury ; but in whatever capacity they vote, what
ever name they most delight to hear, each of them has made and
subscribed the same declaration, and it is most probable that each
of them has held and does hold opinions, which are more or less
inconsistent with the strict and literal force and meaning of that
declaration. For instance, every layman among them has sub
scribed to these words : — " That, the Book of Common Prayer,
and of ordering of bishops, priests, and deacons, containeth
in it nothing contrary to the Word of God, and that it may law
fully so be used, and that he himself wiil use the form in the
said book prescribed in the public prayer and administration of
the sacraments, and none other." (Corpus Statutorum Univ.
Oxoniensis, p. 92, tit. ix. sec. v. §. 3.) Again, each member of
Convocation, clerical and lay, has in words declared he believes
the damnatory clauses of the Athanasian Creed to be true, yet
few, if any, believe, them to be literally true as they stand. All
get out of them as best they can : many seem to think the Sixth
Article and the sixth clause of the declaration which Charles the
First prefixed to our Articles, enough for their protection.
Yet, on the other side, they know that in 1536 there was a
limitation of these curses to those who, being taught, should not
believe the creed, and that such limitation is now left out.
(Collier, book ii. pt. 1 1, in Barham's edit, of 1 840, vol. iv. p. 353.)
Again, our whole Church and State, in an Act of Parliament,
recognise the Council of Ephesus as one of the four general
councils competent to pronounce what is heretical (1 Eliz. c. 1.
s. 36), and they decree by another Act of Parliament the use of
the Athanasian Creed. Now, the Council of Ephesus forbids
every creed except the Nicene Creed, to bishops and the clergy on
pain of losing their office, and to laymen on pain of being anatha-
matized. (Joan. Domin. Mansi's edition of Labbe and Cossart's
Councils. Florence, 1760, vol. iv. p. 1361.)
Practically, therefore, the question becomes, what is to be
deemed inconsistency enough to deserve punishment? And we

are called upon to try Mr. Ward's opinions, and determine
whether he be or be not so very inconsistent as to have forfeited
his degrees. If the majority think him so, and degrade him, a
higher court may, perhaps, show the University that Convoca
tion has exceeded its powers. It is not said that Mr. Ward does
now refuse to sign the Articles and .Thirty-sixth Canon : he is,
no doubt, ready and willing to sign them, and, as he happens to
be still a clergyman, he can now be called upon to make and
sign the declaration which he made and signed on taking his
degrees under the statute which it is now proposed to extend to
laymen. It must further be remarked, that unless the Vice- Chancellor
thinks fit to permit Mr. Ward or his counsel to speak in English,
they must speak in Latin, by a statute to that effect ; and this
will almost compel them to read English books in evidence, as a
means of getting out of the statute and rendering their defence
intelligible. This un-English, absurd predilection for Latin
speeches and Latin laws, leaves a legislative assembly open to
those, and only to those, of its members who choose to submit to
the yoke of a foreign tongue. It tends also to embarrass all the
proceedings in Convocation, and makes in our statutes a confu
sion which may be found convenient by some people for some
ends ; but it may be found that it has also inconveniences.
The statute that seems to prescribe the only mode of degrada
tion is not very clear, from using the word generally construed
" his own," to mean " his," and from omitting the noun sub
stantive, that should agree with the adjective, describing the
person whom the beadle is to put out of Convocation. The
beadle may be a plain man, and need something more than
the Latin dictionary to satisfy him, for penal statutes ought always
to be construed strictly. Now any mistake in grammar or learning
may entail upon the poor beadle a worse penalty than a flogging.
It is not expressly stated in the indictment that Mr. Ward's
offence is against the statutes of the University, but it is most
probably intended to convict him of that offence by implication.
Indeed, it must be so, for the other alternative would require
him to have committed an offence for which he could legally be
branded, unless our statute be a poetical confusion of metaphor.
Perhaps, too, it may be well to arrange beforehand what we are' all
to do under the statute, if Mr. Ward shut himself up in his room,
a,nd be within the University but not within the reach.pf the beadle.
Supposing him to be in the Convocation, it is clear he must be

9
turned out without any vote to that effect. So nice, however, is
our sense of justice, that if Mr. Ward be not present within the
University, the propriety of his degradation must be put to the
vote. It would not, of course, be any defence in Mr. Ward's own
mouth for himself, that others have been treated more leniently,
but it is a reason for not assenting to his severer condemnation on
the part of his judges. I consider Dr. Pusey's a more dangerous
offence, and thank the late Vice-Chanceilor and his assessors for
condemning Dr. Pusey's erroneous sermon ; and feel satisfied
they must have felt, and probably with regret, that any statement
from them, "of the grounds on which the sentence was passed"
on Dr. Pusey was not part of their office, and would have been
insufficient to teach his so-called friends, who read the sermon
itself, " what statements of doctrine it was intended to mark as
dissonant from, or contrary to, the doctrine or discipline of the
Church of England as publicly received."
Again, Mr. Newman has put upon the Articles certain con
structions which most people do not think consistent with their
meaning, yet he was not even suspended. Both are older men
than Mr. Ward, and publish books of more learning.
Many others have given in their allegiance to " No. 90 :" some
to Mr. Ward's book. Nov/, if all Or any of these gentlemen are
summoned before Convocation for this, as for a breach of good
faith, without having been previously tried at a fair tribunal for
their erroneous opinions, I should hold it imperative on my
conscience to vote against their condemnation, until some reason
is assigned which convinces me that prosecution is a duty.
Enough has been said concerning the first measure, though by
no means all that Romanists and Romanizers will say. Let
some consideration be now given to the second measure about to
be brought forward. There is a difficulty here to those who
have forgotten their Latin; and, therefore, the very words are
given, and each reader must judge for himself whether those
words declare the consequence of the false interpretation to be,
that the Articles of faith and religion seem hardly adverse to
Romanist errors, or that the false interpreters seem hardly
adverse to Romanist errors. It seems that the latter is most
probable, because the statute works upon the interpreters and
iiot upon the Articles ; but as the object is to be clear and
definite, it is a pity that an uncertain sound should be uttered.
It is to be hoped a time will soon come when our statutes and

10
customs will be revised by authority and put down in the mother
ton<nie. The Latin is : —
" Quoniam vero Articulos illos Fidei et Religionis, in quibus
male-sanse opiniones,et praesertim Romanensium errores, reprehen-
duntur, ita nonnulli perperam interpretati sunt, ut erroribus istis
vix aut ne vix quidem adversari videantur, nemini posthac, qui
coram Vice Cancellario, utpote minus recte de Doctrina vel Disci-
plina EcclesiaB Anglicanee sentiens, conveniatur, articulis sub-
scribere fas sit, nisi prius declarationi subscripserit sub hac
forma :
" Ego, A. B., Articulis Fidei et Religionis, necnon tribus Arti
culis in Canone 36 comprehensis subscripturus profiteor, fide
mea data huic Universitati, me Articulis istis omnibus et singulis
eo sensu subscripturum, in quo eos ex animo credo et primitus
editos esse, et nunc mihi ab Universitate propositos tanquam
opinionum mearum certum ac indubitatum signum."
This declaration is intended to explain the subscription into
something more definite and stringent than Mr. Ward admits it
to be. There is great reason to conclude, that without the
previous license of the Crown the University has not power to
meddle with any part of the Laudian code. (Stat. Oxon., page
119, tit. x., sec. 2, § 2; and page .92, tit. ix., sec. v., § 3.)
The statutes requiring the subscription that are now in force
formed part of the Chancellor-Archbishop's code, as appears by
his address of June 2, 1636, which address is prefixed to the
statutes ; and that code is " accepted, approved, ratified, and
confirmed" by King Charles in his letters patent, which bear
date the 3d of June the same year, and are printed immediately
after the Archbishop's Address in the Statute Book. The power
to make new statutes, and explain old ones, is given in " Stat.
Oxon.," page 119. If intention be material, it is most probable
that Laud intended to restrain any' alteration of any part of the
Oxford code, for which he obtained the King's sanction, because
the same restraint was imposed by him upon the University of
Dublin, of which he was also Chancellor in respect of its statutes.
Lord Campbell and Df. Lushington gave their opinion, in
December, 1836, that the privilegium against Hampden was
illegal; and one reason was, because the previous license of
the Crown had not been obtained. He, however, did not
appeal ; and he could well afford to overlook the falsehoods
by which he was assailed. The University, however,
should not pass any privilegium against Mr. Ward or any

II
other person, upon the presumption that an appeal will
not be hazarded against so rich and powerful a body. Let
each member of Convocation quietly consider the abstract
question of law ; and farther consider what is to be done if the
new declaration be passed, in case any future victim of his
friends or his foes should be brought up before Convocation, and
offer to repeat the Lauclian subscription, yet refuse to make the
new declaration. At any rate, let them remember the declaration
is an ex post facto law, as unjust to other members of Con
vocation as it would now be to Mr. Ward, if the declaration had
been the first measure passed on the 13th February, and then,
immediately it was passed, he had been condemned for refusing
to make it. There is not any real difficulty in mending our laws
in a lawful way. Many members of Convocation may not be
aware that it is necessary, under the ipso facto condemnations of
the Canons, to get a previous sentence from a lawful tribunal ;
and the same principle applies here ; the expulsion of Mr. Ward
seems illegal to me.
The mere condemnation of Mr. Ward is not, however, stated
to be, and is not, in truth, the main object of the approaching
Convocation. It is difficult to understand how the three
measures can be connected. If the subscription that is now
made be not binding in the estimate of such men as Mr. Ward
and his friends, it is not probable that any other subscription will
bind them ; and it is not possible the new declaration should
anywise bind the consciences of the Romanizers, whom the
Laudian subscription does not oblige to renounce any part of the
doctrine of Rome.
The new form provides that the Articles are to be signed in
the sense in which primitus editi sunt, words which seem best
translated into " in that sense in which they have been put
forth from the first," which would assert that the same sense had
all along been put on the Articles. But the words may mean,
(and will be taken for the present to mean,) only "the sense in
which they were put forth at first ; " and then it will remain quite
unsettled what time is meant by " at first." It is observable that
the Article subscribed from the Thirty-sixth Canon explicitly
mentions the Thirty-nine Articles of 1562. Now, these Canons
were passed by the province of Canterbury in 1603, and by the
province of York about two years afterwards : yet the Articles of
1562 are referred to, and not those of 1571. Under this new
declaration, then, are we or are we not intended to subscribe the
-doctrine about preaching to the spirits in prison, (which concluded

12
the Third MSS. Article in 1562 and in 1553, but was struck
out in 1 563 ;) and the clause about the authority of the Church,
which now heads the Twenty-first Article. Do we subscribe
" justificatos sequuntur," or, " follow after justification :" in the
Twelfth Article. And generally, when strictness of subscription
and oneness of meaning are enjoined, how are we to get over the
little inaccuracies and historical discrepancies in what we sub
scribe ? Usage has settled them now, and people subscribe with
considerable, but known latitude of interpretation. Perhaps it
would embarrass most literal subscribers, not out-and out
Papists, to explain what is the authority given to the Church in
matters of faith, by those who hold the Sixth Article.
Even if " at first " were defined such a year, and the sense of
those who then put them forth known fully, how is any future
subscriber to learn in what sense the University, through the lips
of some future Vice-Chancellor, may be proposing them to any
victim whom a dominant faction at Oxford, in order to serve their
own purposes (to divert a storm, for instance, or to raise one),
might falsely accuse, because he loved a truth they hated, or cun
ningly select as one, of himself too weak and unpopular to break
their web or convince the public, he is hardly dealt with. Nay,
the poor victim himself may be chivalrous and willing to be im
molated, if so the real views and growing strength of his party
may be longer undiscovered. A tub for the whale is often found
useful. It may be true, now, at this time, though it is not easy to see
how it can be true in the face of the variations in the Articles
themselves, it may, however, be true that the University now
offers these Articles for subscription in the original sense. But
even that is not enough, for how can that fact be known to be
true by the hapless deponent. How can it be known to be true
years hence at at any given time? Except, indeed, it should be
enacted that at every future auto da fe, whenever held, more than
half the members of Convocation should necessarily attend, and
then and there declare the sense in which the Articles were put
forth at first, and that such is their own sense.
After all, it, is the Articles themselves we are to believe, the
Articles we are to subscribe, and it is totally immaterial to any
honest man what the compilers or what the imposers may
believe to be the true meaning and construction of those Articles,
unless that meaning and construction be made a part of them by
the same authority that requires subscription to them. It would
indeed open a wide door to falsehood and deceit if a subscriber

13
were not bound to the plain sense of the forms he subscribes, but
only to the sense in which their authors or imposers may choose
to take (or to say they take) them in their own hearts. The diffi
culty is insuperable, even in the case when authors and imposers
are alive, and require living men of 'their own day (not future
generations through a long period of years to come) once for all to
sign words in any sense. How can it be done ? if the words mean
that sense, to subscribe the words is enough ; if they do not mean
that sense, to subscribe those words in that sense is a falsehood.
He who subscribes, if honest, must abide by what he subscribes,
and not by any construction others put upon the words he
subscribes. However, if the declaration would explain the
Articles and fix their sense beyond all dispute, it is clear the
University has not any legal authority or any moral right to
require that declaration or to fix that sense. Besides, it is ex
pressly determined that "every loving subject of our Crown is to
take each Article in its literal and grammatical sense " by King
Charles I., in the declaration which under Laud's advice was
drawn up in 1628, and prefixed to the Articles shortly afterwards
as it now stands. — " Heylyns Life of Laud, p. 188, Edit. 1668.
Now the literal and grammatical sense of an Article does not
require us to deny the use of metaphors or metaphorical lan
guage, but to give them their real sense, not adhering to the
metaphor literally, but construing it as it were from a foreign
language to our own.
The third measure proposed will enable the Vice-Chancellor to
require a layman to make the declaration and subscription. The
Vice-Chancellor has now the power of fining a lay schismatic for
a first offence, of making him beg pardon on his knees for a
second, and if he refuse, or offend a third time, of banishing him
without any help of Convocation. It seems to me that is quite
power enough, and should rather be lessened than increased.
The Canons of 1 603 are not binding upon laymen and have not
ever been formally decided to be binding upon clergymen. It may
be held illegal to enforce a penalty upon a layman for the refusal
of subscription to one of these Canons, even if held binding upon
clergymen. The layman's privileges may not be taken away
capriciously. This is not the occasion on which it is necessary or advisable
to reason out the nature and necessity of subscription at length.
It has often been well done, and the whole question is getting by
degrees generally understood. Day after day the wave is rolling
on, and the longer it rolls the greater will be its mass, and the

14
heavier its fall. It is obvious that it may be fair and useful to
require from the clergy greater security for soundness of faith
than from the laity; but it is not probable that greater security
will result from one form of subscription to our Articles rather
than another, and it is not the business of Oxford to deal with
the clergy only, or to pass such laws as are justifiable only on
their account.
There remains yet one matter of some importance to sub
scribers which it will be useful to discuss, before they judge
another man for subscribing. Some allusion has already been
made to the Athanasian Creed, because in an earlier publication,
entitled "A Few more Words in Support of No. 90 of the Tracts
for the Times," p. 22, Mr. Ward has himself contrasted the Sixth
Article with the Athanasian Creed, which, in his words, "con
demns, as in itself a mortal sin, the holding any other doctrine of
the sacred verities on which it treats, than the detailed and specific
one which it draws out."
It seems to me right to speak out on this' point in the first
person. I have twice subscribed the Articles. I consider the
subscription a continuous act as much as if I made it every day,
and am willing at any time to repeat the subscription. To the
best of my knowledge our Articles and three Creeds and Prayer-
book contain sound doctrine, taken bodily as Oxford requires
them to be subscribed. I believe them essentially, and not acci
dentally, opposed to Popery, and to Traetarianism, to all lifeless
formalism, to every argument tending towards Popery. For myself
I believe they give, and were and are intended to give, exclusive
authority and free course to God's Word. I believe too that the
language in which their doctrine is expressed is correct in strict
ness, and when properly understood. He who said he was him
self the door and the way could not but be properly understood,
nor was the understanding any deviation from the literal and
grammatical sense in my estimate. But I also believe the Articles
contain a deal too much, and might be much better expressed in
these our days. And it is certain that he who now seeks to make
their meaning clear by appending a declaration, admits they are
not clear to all intents and purposes, and might be made clearer :
else how can the words of the declaration bind any subscriber vet
more closely? For myself, then, I could wish the Articles less
in extent, and clearer in expression ; but as it is my heart's
belief they contain, as far as words can be said to contain, the
sum and substance of what we are taught in the Bible, I am
content to take them as they are, and do all in my power to get

15
some abridgment and alteration made ; and these abridgments
and these alterations would be for the sake of rendering more
acceptable and intelligible the self-same truths. I hold schism a
great sin, and would enlarge the Church so as to admit, at once,
the great mass of those whom our minuter points of faith and
discipline keep Dissenters. It should not be an article' of faith
that a Christian man may take an oath, though it is true : much
less need every Christian truth be put into our Creeds, or their
original purpose, their only purpose for six centuries, would be
lost by their length.
I fully believe, after a long and careful investigation, the
Catholic faith to be what is stated in the Creed commonly called
the Creed of Athanasius : but it is most positively false that
he who does not keep that faith whole and undefiled shall,
without doubt, perish everlastingly. The damnatory clauses are
neither in the Bible, nor can they be proved thereby. Yet, at
the same time, 1 think these damnatory clauses are true, when
properly understood, for in fact they are only a form of expressing
earnest belief. The form seems to me to have been borrowed from
the earliest ages, and gives the Creed the character of greater anti
quity by very many centuries than it can possibly claim. I know that
the curses which were appended to the Creed adopted at Nicsea in
325, were struck off at Constantinople in 381. I am sure the Atha
nasian curses should be struck off; meanwhile, I insist upon un
derstanding these Athanasian curses as modes of asseverating the
believer's confidence, and not as condemning or any way bearing at
all upon unbelievers. I am persuaded our Church would strike off
the curses from the Athanasian Creed, if she did not shrink from
the probable charge of Arianism, or worse heresy, if worse may
be; and I hope that soon she will believe Athanasian truths
heartily enough and boldly enough to risk such an idle insinua
tion, rather than go on trifling with the language of the common
people, and denying words the literal meaning of which they are
capable in a solemn profession of Christian adherence to the
teaching of the Bible. We should not war against dead heresies.
Under these circumstances, I consider my subscription to the
Articles perfectly consistent with my good faith ; and if I did
not, I should not wait for the Convocation, or any other body of
men to tell me so. Mr. Ward is entitled to be treated as
having the same feeling.
It would be easy to produce many more reasons against the
three measures proposed. It seems to me the old subscription
should not be required at matriculation, and that it would be

right to relax that subscription, and is wrong to create a further
test. I trust there will be found many, as well as myself, who
will on the 13th of February vote against all three of these
measures. And as Convocation might be spared going into the
subject at all, if the Vice-Chancellor or either of the Proctors
would declare his purpose of putting in his veto, I heartily wish
that many would join in a protest against all the three measures
for such reasons as seem to them right. The protest might be
something to the following effect : — Against the first, because it
is an idle insult to the man without any way correcting the
evil he is doing, a cruel mockery of an obnoxious individual,
who might be now fairly tried, without anywise exempting him
from trial at any future time, an act of persecution and
tyranny ; against the second and third, because they seem to me
unwise, unjust, illegal, and suicidal ; because they are powerless
against those in respect of whom alone they could be of any
public use ; because they trifle with the feelings of a pure and
high conscience just in proportion to its pureness and height;
because they cannot further the holy cause of peace and truth
and love, and can and will strengthen and sanction erroneous
notions of faith and salvation ; because they tend to prevent the
matriculation of those who are fully entitled to the benefit of our
schools, and most need their teaching ; because they are part of
a bad system which must, sooner or later, be dashed to the
ground, and may hereafter involve in its ruin what might else
have been maintained for the better service of our sovereign, and
the common good of all her subjects ; because the expression of
certain parts of the Belief to which subscription is now required,
(and will, if the new statute be passed, be required with additional
force and sanction), is in words which ought to be changed,
and ought not to be confirmed, words on which the common
people are likely to put such a construction as sets them at
variance with the Bible; because the requirement of subscription,
in its present form even, to so many points of history and
abstract divinity, and to the damnatory clauses of the Athanasian
Creed, is unwarranted by the Word of Almighty God, and exceeds
the authority given by Him to any of the Churches on earth.
January 11, 1845. LONDON: SEELEY, BURNSIDE, AND SEELEY.
OXFORD : VINCENT.
Price Sixpence.
Macintosh, Printer, Great New Street, London

THE STATUTES REFERRED TO ARE AS FOLLOWS:—
Corp. Stat. Univ. Oxon.
1. For the Present Subscription.
Tit. ix. sec. v. § 3, p. 92.
" Cum Prsesentandus vel Praesentandi ad Apodyterium Domui Congregationis
vicinum devenerint, eorum quilibet Articulis Fidei et Religionis in Synodo
Londini Anno Dom. 1562, editis et confirmatis (lectis prius, vel alio recitante
auditis, in praesentia Praesentatoris sui) necnon tribus Articulis in xxxvi.
Canone comprehensis (lectis prius ibidem, et publice, coram Praesentatore, in
praesentia Procuratorum) subscribet ; qui quidem tres Articuli descripti sunt
Canone xxxvi.0 Libri Constitutionum et Canonum Ecclesiasticorum, in Synodo
Londini coepta Anno Dom. 1603."
2. For enacting new Statutes and explaining old ones.
Tit. x. sec. ii. § 2, p. 119.
" Si quando ex usu Academiae futurum videbitur, aliquid de novo statuere vel
decernere ; vel, si quando circa Decreta et Statuta jam condita, vel in posterum
condenda, dubitatio aliqua emergat, unde ulterior eorundem explanatio re-
quiratur (modo ne, sub explanandi obtentu, sensus Statuto cuivis affigatur,
omnem ipsius vim eludens aut enervans ; neve haec explanandi potestas ad
Statuta Regia Auctoritate sancita vel confirmata extendatur, sine speciali ipsius
Regis licentia) Statutum est, quod priusquam Lex roganda, vel Statutum
explanandum, suffragiis Magistroium Regentium et non Regentium permittatur,
primo ad liebdomadalem consessum PrEefectorum Collegiorum et Aularum per
Vice-Cancellarium referatur negotium.
" Atque ubi, re mature perpensa, inter eos convenerit de verbis conceptis,
sub quibus lex sciscenda aut statutum explanandum illis videbitur, sub iisdem
terminis res ad magistros Regentes in domo congregationis per procuratores
ref'eretur, triduo ante convocationem habendam. In convocatione autem se-
qucnte, iisdem verbis quibus in congregatione proposita fuerat, per Registrarium
nuuidato Vice-Cancellarii palam recitetur : ac demum ubi Vice-Cancellarius
Procuratores et major pars Regentium et non Regentium in terminos consen-
serint, sub quibus lex sciscenda aut statutum explanandum videbitur, .sub
iisdem terminis per Registrarium palam ibidem recitentur et de iisdem Regen
tium et non Regenth m suffragia rogentiir. Sub iisdem etiam terminis in quos
consensum fuerjt in acta redigantur."
3. For the Mode of Degrading.
Tit. x. sec. ii. § 8, p. 127.
" Cum nonnulla sint delicta, quae, contra Statuta hujus Universitatis admisea,
Graduum privatione plectuntur, alia vero, quae (licet alibi commissa) tamen
propter infame supplicii (quo vindicantur) genus, detrahi prius insignia Aca-
demica, et delinquentes exauctorari postulant, ne stigmata, delinquentium
Personis merito inurenda, simul Graduum Academicorum dignitati labeculam
aspergant ; unde aliqua ad ipsam Universitatem redundet infamia :

" Statutum igitur est, quod quoties hujusmodi se tulerit occasio, si delinquens
intra Universitatem prsesens fuerit, Vice-Cancellarius (indicta prius Convoca-
tione) ipsum, Habitu Gradui competente indutum, in Domo Convocationis
sistendum curet, ubi ipsum Vice-Cancellarius gravi ac severa Oratione incre-
pabit, simulque atrocitatem criminis sui ei ob oculos ponet; deinde ipsius
mandato eBedellis inferioribus unus singula Gradus sui insignia, primo Pileum,
mox Caputium, deinde Capam, postremo Togam detrahet ; ac eum in modum,
cunctis insignibus Academicis exutum et nudatum, e Domo Convocationis
proturbabit. " Quod si intra Universitatem praesens non fuerit, Vice Cancellarius (indicta
itidem Convocatione) ibidem delinquentis crimen, et pcenam Degradationis
per Statuta (aut alias ex Decreto superioris Curiae, vel ex congruo) irrogandam
declarabit. Deinde Doctorum, Magistrorum Regentium, et non Regentium
assensu rogato, Instrumentum publicum a Registi-ario palam recitari faciet, in
quo Nomen, Gradus et Crimen delinquentis exponantur; et ipse, de consensu
Doctorum, et Magistrorum Regentium, et non Regentium, Gradu omni Aca-
demico exutus et exauctoratus pronuncietur et declaretur. Mox Idem Instru
mentum, sigillo Officii sui munitum," Valvis Magna? Scholarum Portse appen-
deudum curabit." 4. The present power of the Vice-Chancellor.
Tit. xvii. sec. iii. § 2, p. 159.
Ipsius (Vice-Cancellarii) etiam est, ut, &c.
" Et ut Hasreticos, Schismaticos, et quoscunque alios minus recte de fide
Catholica, et Doctrina vel Disciplina Ecclesiae Anglicanae, sentientes, procul a
finibus Universitatis amandandos curet.
" Quem in finem, quo quisque modo erga Doctrinam vel Disciplinam
Ecclesioe Anglicanae affectus fit, Subscriptionis criterio explorandi ipsi jus ac
potestas esto. Quod si quis S. Ordinibus initiatus (sive Praefectus Domus
cujusvis, .sive alius quis) Articulis Fidei et Religionis, a Synodo Londini A.D.
1562, editis et confirmatis: nee non tribus Articulis comprehensis Canone
xxxvi." Libri Constitutionum ac Canonum Ecclesiasticorum, editi in Synodo
Londini coepta A.D. 1603, subscribere a Vice-Cancellario, requisitus, ter
abnuerit seu recusaverit ; ipso facto ab Universitate exterminetur et banniatur.
Eadem esto poena Beneficiati cujusvis in Universitate commorantis, qui ab
Episcopo Diceceseos requisitus subscribere recusaverit.
" Quod siquis de Schismate suspectus, Vice-Cancellarii judicio, assideutibus
ipsi Praefectis in Ordinario ipsorum Conventu, reus hujus criminis compertus
fuerit ; pro prima vice, mulcta pro arbitrio Vice-Cancellarii ipsi irrogauda evil.
Sin obstinate in errore perseveraverit, iterumve ad Vice-Cancellarium hoc
nomine delatus fuerit; pi-aster mulctam, arbitrio Vice-Cancellarii irrogandam,
erroris sui veniam, flexis genibus, suppliciter petet, eique palam in Domo Con
vocationis renuntiabit. Quod si recusaverit, aut rursus in eodem genere
deliquerit, banniatur.
" Utque tam Conciones quam Libri, quibus male-sana; opiniones propagantur,
cohibeantur," &c, &c.

{

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08837 0748