CIHM 
 Microfiche 
 Series 
 (l\/lonographs) 
 
 ICIVIH 
 
 Collection de 
 microfiches 
 (monographies) 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes / Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original 
 copy available for filming. Features of this copy which 
 may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of 
 the images in the reproduction, or which may 
 significantly change the usual method of filming are 
 checked below. 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers / 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged / 
 
 Couverture endommag6e 
 
 □ Covers restored and/or laminated / 
 Couverture restauree et/ou pellicul^e 
 
 Cover title missing / Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 I ] Coloured maps / Cartes g6ographiques en couleur 
 
 □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black) / 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations / 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material / 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Only edition available / 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along 
 interior margin / La reliure serree peut causer de 
 I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge 
 int^rieure. 
 
 Blank leaves added during restorations may appear 
 within the text. Whenever possible, these have been 
 omitted from filming / Use peut que certaines pages 
 blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration 
 apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela §tait 
 possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6es. 
 
 Additional comments / 
 Commentaires suppl6mentaires: 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 
 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exem- 
 plaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibli- 
 ographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, 
 ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^tho- 
 de normale de filmage sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pages / Pages de couleur 
 
 I I Pages damaged / Pages endommag6es 
 
 n 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated / 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculees 
 
 Q Pages discoloured, stained or foxed / 
 Pages d^color^es, tachet^es ou piqu^es 
 
 1^ Pages detached / Pages d6tach6es 
 
 I ^ Showthrough / Transparence 
 
 r~7 Quality of print varies / 
 
 
 
 D 
 
 Quality in^gale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material / 
 Comprend du materiel suppl§mentaire 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, 
 tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best 
 possible image / Les pages totalement ou 
 partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une 
 pelure, etc., ont et6 film6es k nouveau de fafon k 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 Opposing pages with varying colouration or 
 discolou rations are filmed twice to ensure the best 
 possible image / Les pages s'opposant ayant des 
 colorations variables ou des decolorations sont 
 film6es deux fois afin d'obtenir la meilleure image 
 possible. 
 
 D 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below / 
 
 Ce document est (ilme au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. 
 
 lOx 
 
 
 
 
 14x 
 
 
 
 
 18x 
 
 
 
 
 22x 
 
 
 
 
 26x 
 
 
 
 
 30x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12x 
 
 16x 
 
 20x 
 
 24x 
 
 28x 
 
 32x 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Seminary of Quebec 
 Library 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol —^(meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams Illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grftce h la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 Siminaire de Quebec 
 Bibliothdque 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at 
 de la nettetd de l'exemplaire fiim^, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires origlnaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimie sont filmis en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en tarminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmis en commengant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 derniire image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — ^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN ". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds A des taux de reduction diff^rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est i\\m6 d partir 
 de Tangle supirieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images nicest ' ;. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m^thova. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
MSCROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART 
 
 (ANSI and ISO TEST CHART No. 2) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 f4.5 
 •^ 
 
 I>0 
 mm 
 
 Hi 
 
 3.2 
 
 m 
 
 II 4.0 
 
 2.5 
 
 112.2 
 
 j.O 
 1.8 
 
 A APPLIED IIVMGE 
 
 Inc 
 
 1653 East Main Street 
 Rochestei, New York 14609 
 (716) 482 - 0300 - Phone 
 (716) 288 - 5989 - Fax 
 
 USA 
 
■ v^*X"T^ ' 
 
 C0MPREHEN3|\^EM% 
 
 OF THE 
 
 '^ CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 % letter 
 
 TO THE 
 
 REV. D. FITZGERALD, 
 
 '( JlBCTOR OF f>. J'aUL'S pHURCH, pHARLOTTETOWN ; 
 
 ^ ON THE SUBJECT OF HIS. PUBLISHED SERMONS 
 
 ON 
 
 \ 
 
 
 BY 
 
 REV. G. W. HODGSON, 
 
 K , PHAPLAIN OF p. JPeTEI\;S pHURCH, pHARLOTTEaOWN. 
 
 ->•<- 
 
 
 LJS'^ 
 
 CHARLOTTETOWN : ^ / t 
 
 BBEMNEB BEOTHEBS, FBINTEKU, QUKISM »Tlt££T. 
 
 1872. 
 
 \. 
 
 \ 
 
 V 
 
jm 
 
 « 
 
 I 
 
 > 
 
1 
 
 i 
 
 THE 
 
 COMPREHENSIVENESS 
 
 ERRATA. 
 Page 15, line 8, dele " at once " 
 
 TV II LV 11 ±V ±KJ J^KMM^M. VV. 
 
 The teaching and practices of the " Ritualists" are denoun- 
 ced, and then some of your own congregation are addressed 
 as " going to a Ritualistic place of worship," while the ob- 
 noxious doctrines are said to be taught aud the evil practices 
 carried out " in our own midst." 
 
 I quite understand the feelinjr which leads a preacher to 
 avoid, as far as possible, personal allusions in the pulpit, and 
 therefore I suppose that you wished to speakp^wgi^UL^lainly 
 as possible, without direct reference to n^ji^O "^ilecithen 
 I so understand you, I by no means ac)riKov?ledi,o ^he te^ 
 "Ritualistic" as the proper designatioiy'ofc what" | endeavo* 
 to teach, " Ritualist " being a mere paiftyl n^cknanie, ana\liS» 
 all such, intended to create a prejudice (tgainst theffeto whom 
 I* is applied. W ^ 
 
 .f ^■•. 
 £ I 
 
 k* 
 

 f 
 
f 
 
 1 
 
 THE 
 
 COMPREHENSIVENESS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 Reverend Sir ; 
 
 Although in your lately published sermons on " Ritual- 
 istic teaching " you do not directly speak of the Church of 
 which I have charge, yet there are allusions in these sermons 
 which can only be understood of S. Peter's Church, and 
 which it is fair to suppose you wished to be so understood. 
 The teaching and practices of the " Ritualists" are denoun- 
 ced, and then some of your own congregation are addressed 
 as " going to a Ritualistic place of worship," while the ob- 
 noxious doctrines are said to be taught and the evil practices 
 carried out " in our own midst." 
 
 I quite understand the feeling v/hich leads a preacher to 
 avoid, as far as possible, personal allusions in the pulpit, and 
 therefore I suppose that you wished to speakofj jQ^ tU L glainly 
 as possible, without direct reference to n^/rt^^ iWbil«:$^en 
 I so understand you, I by no means acjjrnGwledge the te^ 
 " Ritualistic " as the r^roper designatiory'ot yt^hafj endeavo* 
 to teach, " Ritualist ' ..eing a mere pai^y, ni^knante, and\li£e) 
 all such, intended to create a prejudice ^^iusi' ihesnAO whom 
 it is applied. 
 
 ./ 
 
 c B I 
 
4 
 
 H 
 
 Had the question raised in your sermons been whether 
 certuui doctrines are true or untrue, I certainly should not 
 have written to you ; nor shall I now at all touch upon this 
 quostion. Controversy is a poor way of advancin-r the truth 
 But the reason T write is this. There are contained in vour 
 sei-nioMs cruuinal charges of the -ravest kind a-ainst those 
 persons whom you call liitualists, among whom you include 
 myselt and others who believe what you have denounced 
 
 1 have read your sermons with the utmost care that I could 
 give and tried to «ee just what they mean, and the onlv doubt 
 1 have IS, whether we are allowed even the poor alternative 
 of being either fools or knaves. It is said' that we are en- 
 deavoring to bring in and teach errors which our Churd for 
 three hundred years has renounced, which, " with unblushin" 
 effrontery, we declare to be doctrines of the Church of En-" 
 land. " Unblushing effrontery " must I think imply con- 
 sciousness of wrong doing ; so then tlie teacher knows what 
 he is at)out, i. e. is a conscious liar, while the tau<dit either 
 join m his de.'cption or are so stupidly ignorant asliot to be 
 able to tell the difference "between white and black, li-rht and 
 darkness." It IS better to come straight to the point'and to 
 call things by their right names, and though I am well aware 
 that you have not used language so strong as I have employ, 
 ed and probably would shrink from so doing, yet if your 
 statements are well founded and your proofs correct 
 these and no less than these are the charges you brin- 
 At page 9 you quote that question which was put to both of 
 us at the most solemn hour of our lives— (this question we 
 have both answered in the affirmative, and for the fiilfil- 
 meut of the promise then given we shall have to give account 
 at the Judgment seat of our common Master : " Will you be 
 ready, with all faithful diligence to banish and drive away 
 all erroneous and strange doctrines, contrary to God's 
 word? ) and then it is more than implied tfiat this promise 
 IS wilfully and deliberately violated. You may pei haps mean 
 that tills IS done through ignorance, though then it is hard to 
 talk of unblushing effrontery " and " libels." But even if 
 It be set down to ignorance, ignorance on such matters is 
 inexcusable and criminal in the highest degree, in one who 
 has ventured to assume the awful responsibility of a guide of 
 
 (1) pp- 4 and 6. 
 
 ^ 
 
 1! 
 
If 
 
 -/ 
 
 souls, and implies almost as much moral obliquity and de- 
 serves (jiiite as much censure as a deliberate and wilful breach 
 of a soleuui promise. Now sir these are the points upoo 
 which I venture to write to you ; I must endeavour to show 
 that I luive not violated niy promise, nor am so profoundly 
 ignorant as to understand nothing about what I teach. 
 
 In your sermons you have (juoled passages from a number 
 of b(H)ks, intending thus fairly to represent the teaching of 
 the "■ Uitualists," then you have attempted to show that Ibis 
 teaching is contrary to that of the Church of England to 
 winch these " Ritualists" say they belong. The conclusion 
 from this is a very plain one. It is this conclusion that I 
 dispute. As I have said before, the absolute truth or false- 
 hood of certain doctrines I do not speak of. But is such and 
 such teaching contrary to that of the Church of England? 
 This is the question, and about it I should not hesitate to abide 
 by the decision of any impartial judge. Of this matter the 
 Public are a fjiir judge. We have been dragged to the bar 
 of public opinion, our teaching denounced as "a curse," and 
 we ourselves set down as very questionable characters. I 
 confess for my own part while it gives me no concern (except 
 on their own account) whether people think my teaching true 
 or false, I am very unwilling to lie under such imputation?, 
 as these which have been brought against me, and have too 
 much respect for the good opinions' of those of my fellow 
 churchmen or fellow citizens who nuiy have heard or read 
 your sermons not to attempt to vindicate myself. Then I 
 must remember too not a few others indirectly included in 
 the same charge, for they listen to, encourage and uphold 
 such teaching. It is not to them I write. They know what 
 they believe and what I have eiidea\oured to teach, but it 
 seems only fair that I should try to show /or them to others, 
 what they well know themselves, tha: their position as mem- 
 bers of the Church of England is an honest and honourable 
 one. 
 
 The plan, as far as I can discover it, which you Mem to 
 have laid down for yourself in your sermons is to make de- 
 tached extracts from "Ritualistic" books, also extracts from 
 the decrees of the Council of Trent, to show that thesft 
 agree, and then to show that they difJer in common from the 
 Liturgy, Articles aud Homilies of the Church of England. 
 
6 
 
 
 Besides this there is an historical sketch of the Reformation. 
 I cannot say that tne argument is followed out in so clear 
 and logical a manner as would admit of its being met point 
 by point. It may be my want of perception, but there seems 
 to me to be no little confusion in the earlier portion of your 
 sermon. At page 1 it is said "first I have to show that our 
 Church is sound. This I will do, first, by showing some of 
 the means that were employed, and the efforts that wei-e put 
 forth towards bringing her to this state." I am not going to 
 dispute the fact that our Church is sound, but it is ditftcuft to 
 see how this is proved by showing that she tried to make 
 herself so. This seems afterwards to have occurred to your- 
 self, for at page 12 you say " Having thus brought before 
 you some of the means that were employed in brintrin"- our 
 Church into a sound and healthy condition, I have secondly 
 to show you that her doctrines are sound." But this is what 
 you started to do at page 1 , so according to your own account 
 we are not a bit farther on at page 12 than we were at the 
 beginning. However at page 12 you start again with your 
 first proposition, " the Church is sound," and to prove this, 
 you state that you will show (1) the doctrine of the " Ritual- 
 ists" (2) of the Romanists, (3) that they differ from those 
 of the Church of England. Now here again it may be my 
 fault, but I cannot possibly see the logical connexion of this. 
 Had you begun by assuming the doctrines of the Churcli of 
 England to be sound, (as would have been fair enough in 
 addressing a congregation of Church people) then to^lmve 
 shewn that the "Ritualists" and Romanists contradicted 
 them, would of course have shown their doctrine unsound, but 
 you say that you will s/wiv that her doctrines are sound and 
 that you will do this by showing that they differ from those 
 of tlie Romanists and ' Ritualists." In fact, you assume the 
 premiss, "Ritualistic teaching is false," for only so is 
 there any ground at all for your conclusion. Now this may 
 be a very convenient assumption, but you can scarcely expect 
 that it will be granted in an argument intended to prove 
 " Ritualists " in error. 
 
 I do not say this to make captious objections, but to show 
 why I must in my reply follow a somewhat different line from 
 the one you have adopted. There is one thing given as your 
 subject on the title-page, quite another (one which I should 
 
not dream of disputing) given at the commencement of your 
 sermon ; the premises and conclusions are so confused that 
 it is impossible to follow them regularly. Then further there 
 is one large portion of the sermons which certainly must be 
 said to have nothing to do with either of the matters which 
 you have given as your subject. I refer to the canons and 
 decrees of the Council of Trent. The inquiry is about the 
 teaching of the Church of England ; what then have we to 
 do with that of the Church of Rome? As a matter of fact 
 I believe that the Church of Rome does err in doctrine, but ^ 
 that does not say that because a statement in a book may be '. 
 paralleled by a similar one from a Roman book, therefore it i 
 must be false. At this rate our Prayer Book must be most, J 
 false and Romish, for at least three-fourths of our Collects^-^ 
 and other large portions of our Service, are from the Missa* 
 and Breviary. If these quotations are intended as an appeal 
 to popular passion, and as taking the easier way of ere- _ 
 ating a prejudice against a doctrine rather than taking the 
 trouble of disproving it, such a plan ay be useful enough 
 for some purposes, but is not of much avail by way of an 
 argument. I confess that if there are any persons for whom 
 it Is sufficient to disprove a doctrine to show of it that it is 
 held by Roman Catholics should feel it a hopeless task to 
 attempt to reason with thciii, and am quite willing, as far as 
 they are concerned, that judgment should go against us by 
 default. I shall not therefore consider at all the asserted 
 similarity of the "Ritualistic" and Romanist doctrines — 
 Observe, I do not acknowledge them to be similar, I believe 
 them to be different, but this question is so wholly beside the 
 matter at issue, which is the teaching of the Church of Eng- 
 land, that it would be a mere waste of time to consider what 
 the Church of Rome does or does not teach. 
 
 Further as to extracts from "Ritualistic" books. It is 
 only fair that it should be clearly understood in what sense 
 the expressions quoted are used — what is the truth which 
 suggests such devotional utterances. It will often be found 
 tha^what may appear very strange or exaggerated will be 
 seen to be a perfectly legitimate expression when the truth 
 upon which it rests is clearly understood. Nov/ of the books 
 quoted from, some I have used and recommended, some I 
 have never seen, nor can one agree to be bound by eveiy- 
 
 v:; 
 
 &. 
 

 8 
 
 'S'^^^'^'i^CT'sZI'T "' P— more e„ 
 
 whohavpl ''^^^/he hope in deafh ./p • ' ^'''''^ been the 
 
 ^t course. Sir oU fi • 
 words to you if ' *^"' explanation will bp ^ 
 
 "ipuon of innocence is 
 
rsous more en- 
 ' any objection 
 to quote from 
 ^partial jnd<r. 
 ^i-om detached 
 fu, but from 
 
 'evotional cx- 
 
 leuts. 
 
 state what I 
 
 of the ^reat 
 n the subjects 
 his with (he 
 « I thiuk to 
 hat we have 
 [ wJiich you 
 'hie; it may 
 '"lai' char<,^es 
 ► wish to put 
 "itjou have 
 "■ hy silence 
 honesty and 
 *nd unjust. 
 
 and un re- 
 have never 
 V teaching ; 
 fiis painful 
 lie another 
 I'j, what I 
 ' England, 
 'uths they 
 mes, have 
 sed unde- 
 'd which, 
 
 been the 
 hie souls 
 ifort, and 
 
 waste of 
 
 traitors. 
 
 'ontery " 
 
 cence is 
 
 only to create sympathy that they may the more easily be- 
 guile the imstable. there is no arguing against such a 
 prciudice as this. But I cannot believe that all are willing 
 to think so badly of us, and I would fam hope, {Mr, 
 that when the ■ at of the controversial spirit cools down, 
 you yourself .' "i not be unwilling to learn that some of your 
 fellow creatur.: are not such abandoned characters as you 
 once thought yourself compelled to account them. 
 
 With reference then to the subjects treated of in your ser- 
 mons, I am going to state a belief held now by many m the 
 Church of England, and which has always been held by many 
 in tliat Chui'ch. I do not say that it is the only view of the 
 truth admissible— all I now contend for is that it is admis- 
 sible. 
 
 The first point you take up in your regular list is ^ the 
 Eucharistic Sacrifice. There are also, under this head, 
 allusions to the doctrine of the Real Presence, but as these 
 two truths, though allied, are distinct, it will be better to 
 treat of them separately. 
 
 1st, The Real Presence. Our Lord, at the institution 
 of the Blessed Sacrament, under the most solemn circumstan- 
 ces, said of the bread which he took, blessed, brake, and 
 gave to his disciples, " This is my Body ; " of the cup, " Ihis 
 is my Blood of the New Testament." Our Church says that 
 when so doiuii He waS " instituting and ordaining Holy 
 Mysteries."" He therefore was speaking of mysteries, and 
 therefore we think of them as such, expecting to find in them 
 much that is bevond human reason, which faith alone can ap- 
 prehend. Just\vhat lie said is to be believed, and he said, 
 '' This is my My Body." Had He said— This is a figure of 
 —This represents— This is to put you in mind of My Body- 
 then such statements only Avould have been believed. But 
 He said, '' This is My Body," and we simply take His words 
 as they stand, knowing them to be true, but exceedingly deep 
 and mysterious, their full meaning stretching far beyond the 
 limits of human thought. How it is His Body we do not 
 attempt to explain. Some things, driven l)y errors to speak of, 
 our Church has defined, and these definitions we most heartily 
 accent, vi/ : that '4he Body of Clirist is given, taken and 
 
 eaten in 
 
 the Supper of the Lord, only after an heavenly and 
 
 (1) Page 15. (2) Exhortation in office for Holy Communion. 
 
10 
 
 spiritual manner," and ao^ain "that there is no corporeal 
 presence of Christ's natural Body and Blood." 
 
 The truth is, sir, that much misunderstanding has arisen 
 trom supposing that the term '-real" is opposed to 
 " spn-ituul," and so it is thought by some that wheu a " real 
 presence" is asserted a " spiritual presence" is denied ; and 
 1 luive often ventured to hope that many who strenuously 
 deny and oppose the truth about the Real Presence do so on 
 account of tH:s misunderstanding. But a moment's thou.rht 
 will, 1 am sure, show any one that we may say of that which 
 IS spirdual that it is real, with just as much, nay with more 
 truth than we say it of what is material. God is a spirit, 
 surely he really exists, and is realb,' present every where. 
 Angels are spu-its, are they therefore not real bein-rs ? Natu- 
 ral and material are terms opposed to spii-itual— i-eal certainly 
 IS not. •' 
 
 Further our Church has decidedly rejected a definition of 
 the mode of the presence of the Lord's Body, which by doing 
 away alfogether with the outward and visible si<m, " over- 
 throv^eth the nature of a Sacrament."^ Tiiis is "commonly 
 called i ransubstantiation. This definition we reject. 
 _ What we say then is that in the Blessed Sacrament there 
 IS a real, spiritual presence of the Body and Blood of our 
 l^ord, which cannot be naturally discerned or taken, but (as 
 we are dealing with heavenly things) wliich is discerned and 
 taken only after a heavenly and spiritual manner, and the organ 
 ot the soul by u'hich this heavenly food is received is Faith 
 Hovv these things can be— How this Man can give us His 
 J^lesli to eat we do not pretend to explain or understand, but 
 we take His words as tliey are. Now, sir, this teaching may 
 be all wrong, but how does it contradict that of the Church 
 ot England, by what words in her Services and Ai-ticles are 
 they condemned, and may not anything quoted by you from 
 
 Kitualists be fairly understood in this sense. 
 
 What does our Church say on this subject ? The Catechism 
 says that " the Body and Blood of Christ are verily and in- 
 deed taken and received, by the faitliful, in the Lord's Supper." 
 ,,.p , ^ ..'"^"^ "indeed" are terms just as strong as is "ival." 
 
 Till 
 
 iicn must mean ilinl (he things spoken of 
 
 to be taken. And on this last point 
 
 e " present' 
 
 point the 2«th Article is still 
 
 (1) Article XXVIII. (3) s. John, VI, 
 
 53. 
 
n 
 
 a 
 
 real 
 
 stronger. It says that the Body of Christ is " given, taken 
 aud eaten " wliich again implies a being present that it may 
 be " given and taken," and liere let us observe the accurate 
 and careful wording of this Article, v.hich says that " the 
 means whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten is 
 faith," it does not say that faith is the means whereby It is 
 given ; for the means whereby It is gi . en is the outward and 
 visible sign of the Sacrament as the 25th Article had before 
 ruled. 
 
 Further in the Prayer Book^ the ordinance is spoken of as 
 " the most comfortable Sacrament of the Body and Blood of 
 Christ ;" our Saviour Jesus Christ is said to be our "spiritual 
 food and sustenance in tliat Holy Sacrament," in it we are said 
 "spiritually to eat the Flesh of our Saviour Christ and to drink 
 His Blood," they are "holy mysteries," we pray that at Holy 
 Communioi. we may " so eat the Flesh of God's dear Son 
 Jesus Chi-ist, and drink His Blood, that our sinful bodies 
 may be made clean by His Body, and our souls washed in 
 His most precious Blood."'* 
 
 Now, sir, this authorized devotional language is just as 
 strong as any you have quoted from so called " Ritualists," 
 IS just as liable to misunderstanding ; but also theirs is just as 
 spiritual and evangelical when correctly understood. You 
 have dwelt upon the changes made in various parts of 
 the Prayer Book as of some weight. I shall refer partic- 
 ularly to these at another place, but I would now draw your 
 attention to a change which you have not noticed, but which 
 has a good deal of weight here. A declaration about kneelin<T 
 was added to the Second Prayer Book of p:dward VI, in 
 which it was said that " no adoration was done— or ought to 
 ' be done ... to any real and essential presence, there beino- 
 of Christ's natural flesh and blood." The declaration on 
 kueelmg was added to the Communion office at the last re- 
 vision, 1G61, and was framed from the former one, with the 
 important and significant difference that all allusion to the 
 Real Presence was omitted.'' Does not this look as if the 
 
 (1) Office for Holy Communion. 
 
 annlflTKh^^r^^^^^o'^"!' ^'■•''■»'^. impovtance, because it unquestionably 
 applies tlie 6th Cluipter 8. John tn the H!ess!-<| s;«-ranieiit Their h ivt: hvcn 
 exl3,7;'-Tn,rn?';' '}^^ inte,.p..etMtion of this chapter. ' S^me i omanis" 
 
 o'K/fWmP^«ln.?'•^**'"'"^''''';'■'•?"y/•^'''l•^ ^« the Euciiarist, but 
 
 oui iteloimers certainly applied it in tiiis wiy. 
 
 i..-,.iiw.T,''®f r;?""-''!,"''"!'^ ami essential " have been changed to "corporeal 
 piesence of Christ's naturalflesh and blood." >^"iijuicai 
 
12 
 
 Revisers were anxious not to exclude that belief. In its 
 orinfirial form the declaration might have exchided belief in 
 the Keal Presence, does not tliis change look as if it were 
 intended afterwards to admit this belief. • 
 
 Some of your quotations are about acts of reverence 
 to be shown at th- time of Holy Connuunion. But surely 
 this does not impl; any belief in a nuiterial presence. Our 
 feelings of reverent > are drawn forth just as n.uch by a spi- 
 ritual as by a natura. presence, and when we remember how 
 He commended her who anointed His Body for the burial, as 
 we think of the loving, reverent care with which they laid Him 
 m the tomb, and remember that angels folded up and put 
 reverently by the linen cloths which had touched His .Sacred 
 Body, as we think of these things we are bold to show all 
 possible reverence as we draw near to take that Spii-itual 
 food which He has called His own Body and Blood. Here 
 again we may be wrong, but we cannot think that we are 
 acting contrary to the spirit of a church which is specially 
 careful in her Communion office to enjoin reverence upon both 
 minister and people. The people are ''to kneel meekly" 
 when they receive. The Blessed Sacrament is not to be taken 
 by them, but is, as you have noticed, to be " delivered into 
 their hands^" If anything remains of what has been conse- 
 crated, it is to be " reverently eaten and drunk," and several 
 times in the Rubrics of this Service (and it is the only one 
 in which such directions occur) we find the words " hwnhly," 
 " meekly" and " reverently," describing the manner in which 
 various parts of this most solemn service are to be performed. 
 To show special reverence at the time of Holy Communion 
 may be wrong, but it is not contrary to, it harmonizes with, 
 the teaching of the Church of England. 
 
 2nd, The Eucharis-tic Sacrifice. Christ our Lord died 
 upon the Cross, making there by His one oblation of Himself 
 once offered, a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, obhition, 
 and satisfact-'on for the sins of the whole world ; after His 
 death He ascended into Heaven, there " to appear for us^ ;" 
 " He is a Priest for ever'^ ;" " a Priest upon His throne^ ;" 
 He pleads for us— He is in Heaven " as a I,amb that had 
 been slain*." As on the day of atonement the priest passed 
 behind the veil and with the blood of the atonement made 
 
 -r' 
 
 (1) Eubric in Com. Office. (2) Heb. IX, 24. (3) Ileb. Vi, 20. 
 
 (4) Zech. VI, 13. (5) Kev. V, 6. 
 
13 
 
 f. In its 
 (1 belief in 
 
 if it were 
 
 • 
 
 reverence 
 But surely 
 iicc. Our 
 1 by a spi- 
 !ml)er how 
 ! burial, as 
 y laid Him 
 p and put 
 lis fSacred 
 I ?how all 
 
 Spiritual 
 od. Here 
 at we are 
 i specially 
 upon botli 
 
 meekly" 
 o be taken 
 icred into 
 ecu coiise- 
 tid several 
 
 only one 
 ' hinnhJy" 
 ' in which 
 lerformed. 
 )n\mnnion 
 izes with, 
 
 Lord died 
 
 •f Himself 
 
 , oblation, 
 
 after His 
 
 for us^ ;" 
 
 throne^ ;" 
 
 that had 
 
 !st passed 
 
 ent made 
 
 }. VI, 20. 
 
 
 intercession before the mercy-seat', so Jesus, our areat Hi.rh 
 Priest at His Ascension, passed behind the vail to plead fV,r 
 us with the atonin- Blood, the Blood of the everlastin-r cove- 
 nant. This He is doin- in Heaven ; and we also on earth 
 ai-e commanded to " coutinue a perpetual memorial of that 
 His precious death until His coming again." And this we 
 do when according to His holy institution we '' show His 
 death until He comes."^ What then He does in Heaven, 
 show His death," "appear as the one Sacrifice for sin," 
 that we do on earth sacramentally, when we, as did Melclii- 
 zedek, II.s type, - bring forth bread and wine,"'' and so make 
 the appointed memorial of His death. 
 
 We understand and most firmly believe that the Sacrfiice 
 upon Calvary was perfect and all sutHcient, cannot be repeated 
 or added to in any way, and that the altar service of the 
 Uuirch IS the appointed mode of pleading that one perfect 
 Sacrifice beftn-e the P:ternal Father. In whatever mode our 
 Blessed Lords Body is present in the Blessed Sacrament, by 
 virtue of that presence it is presented to God as a memorial 
 ot His Death and Passion-for whatever objects He presents 
 Himself in Heaven, for these and for none other we thus 
 plead His death on earth. I cannot better describe this doc- 
 
 ZZ Ty'r VV'''' "^ '^'^^'^^y'^ Hymns for the Sacra- 
 ment of the Lord s Supper : 
 
 Vicim Divine, thy grace we claim, 
 
 While thus thy precious deatJi we show; 
 
 Unce ottered up a spotless Lamb, 
 In thy great temple here below ; 
 
 Thou didst for all mankind atone. 
 
 And staudest now before the throne. 
 
 Thou standest in the holy place, 
 
 As now for guilty sinners slain, 
 Ihe blood of sprinkling speaks, and prays 
 
 All prevalent for helpless men ; 
 Thy blood is still our ransom found, 
 And speaks salvation all around. 
 
 The smoke of thy atonement here 
 
 Darken'd the sun and rent the veil, 
 Made the new way to heaven appear 
 
 And show'd the great Invisible : 
 
 (1) Levit. XVI. (2) 1 Cor. XI, 6. 
 
 (3) Gen.xrv.18. 
 
 / 
 
14 
 
 Well pleasod in thee, our God look'd down, 
 And calls his rebels to a crown. 
 
 He still respects thy Sacrifice • 
 
 a,.^^*'.fil^'?"'" ^^"'f ^"th always please; 
 The Offering? sn,okes throu-h earth and skies, 
 Dittusui- life, and j oy, and peace ; 
 
 .IJi':^' *^*y '""■'■''' courts, it comes, 
 And fills them with divine perfumes. 
 
 We need not now go up to heaven 
 To brinir the lon^-souoht Saviour down; 
 
 I iiou art to all alrctady tiiven. 
 Thou dost even now tliy banquet crown ; 
 
 To every faithful soul a()pear. 
 
 And show thy real presence here ! i 
 
 Here again I hope that much opposition arises from mis- 
 nnderstamlnig not from denying the truth. The term " to 
 offer sacnhce has two meanings (1) to slay the victim, (2) 
 to offer the v.ct.m shun. In the first sense we could not speak 
 of a Eucharistic sacuifice. In the second sense as He offers 
 Himself in Heaven, so is He offered sacramentally on earth 
 Some imagine that the Eucharistic Sacrifice is a^repetition 
 of, IS in additon to, the one perfect and sufficient oblation and 
 sa isfac ion mace upon Calvary ; against this error, which, 
 ho P f ';• ' ^''^^P^-^^^'^^^^f ai«ong the uninstructed before 
 he Reform, ion the 31st Article is directed. But we do not 
 think or imply this for a moment ; and we believe that, so 
 tai trom our teaching on this point contradicting that of our 
 Uiurch, It is a view which alone can satisfy what Holy Scrin- 
 t^ure says on the subject. Indeed we trust that our differences 
 
 al ot'thorf ""'" "''•'' ^PP'"'^"' ''^'^" "«^^' '-^"^ ^^-i^e almost 
 altogether fi-om a misconception. 
 
 word"^' ^?™'}''''' Ab«^»t this I need not spend many 
 words. That sins must be confessed to God, all agree ; that 
 sms must be confessed to a minister of God, I ifave never 
 mam ained, nor do I know any one in the Church of England 
 who has. Ihat they r«ay be so confessed, that at tiines i 
 may be useful and helpful so to do, I have taught and, please 
 God, always will so teach ; in this I may be wrong, but I do 
 not contradict the teaching of the Church of England. 
 For the object with which confession would be rccommendod 
 
 line^lie'mineT'' "^'"° ^""'' ^^'"^ '''' ^""^^ ^l^. (The italics in the last 
 
15 
 
 i^n, 
 
 ikies, 
 
 es from mis- 
 ?he term " to 
 le victim, (2) 
 )uld not speak 
 
 as He offers 
 ally on earth. 
 
 a repetition 
 
 oblation and 
 srror, which, 
 ritcted before 
 5ut we do not 
 ieve that, so 
 ' that of our 
 
 Holy Scrip- 
 ir differences 
 arise almost 
 
 spend many 
 agree ; that 
 
 have never 
 I of England 
 
 at times it 
 I and, please 
 lUg, but I do 
 ^land. 
 
 commended 
 ics in the lask 
 
 to any would be to assist them in their repentance ; now there 
 18 or' one office m the Prayer Book in which the Cler-yniau 
 IS d. 0. 'ed hovv to assist any particular soul in its repentance 
 VIZ. the ofhce for the Visitation of the Sick, and there it is 
 specially said " here shall the sick person be moved to make 
 a specuil confession of his sins, if he feel his conscience 
 troub ed with any weighty matter. After which confession 
 the Priest shall at once absolve him (if he humbly and 
 heartily desire It) after this sort ;-Our Lord Jesus Christ 
 who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners who 
 truly repent and believe in Him, of His great mercy for-ive 
 thee thine offences ; and by His authority committed to me 
 I absolve thee from all thy sins. In the Name of the Father' 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." 
 
 Now if Confession be the breaking down of every barrier 
 of natural modesty ; the torturing of the soul and the puttin- 
 It upon the rack; the pollution and not the purify in- of the 
 mind : the injuring and not the benefitting of the better 
 teelings ; the wounding, and not the healing of the consci- 
 ence ; -It IS just as bad for a sick person, as for a whole • if 
 It may assist a sick man's repentance, it may do the same 
 for one in health And so I contend that one who advises 
 a person that confession may assist his repentance leavin- it 
 to his own conscience to use it or not is doing nothin- which 
 the Church of England forbids, on the contrary is do hili 
 what she enjoins. '^ "uiu^ 
 
 There is also the Exhortation in the Communion office 
 which directs those with burdened consciences to come and 
 open their grief, not to any one, but to some discreet and 
 -iearned minister of God's Word. I do not see that there 
 can be any doubt what this means ; however, for argument's 
 sake, I am willing to give it up, and to rest my defencrupon 
 the positive statement in the other service. I would, however 
 say this much: I cannot think that any one who whoU; 
 denied Sacramental Confession would ever have written these 
 words and I am strengthened in this opinion by having noticed 
 that clergymen who do not believe in this ordinance omit 
 them altogether. You yourself, sir, I used to observe ne^er 
 read these words m your own Church, although it is plainly 
 directed that you should do so. I do not know whether thU 
 
 (1) Sermons, page 19. 
 

 16 
 
 omission is still contiimefl ; if -^o, it is a very strong argu- 
 ment for my view of the meaning of the words. 
 
 Here again I vvonld refer to a change in the service to 
 which you have not called attention. In the Prayer Books 
 of 1549 and 1552, the Rubric began : " Here shall the sick 
 person make a special confession if he feel," &c. At the 
 last revision it was altered to " Here shall the sick person be 
 moved to make a special confession ;" so that, though the 
 latter portion of it may have been somewhat weakened,' 
 certainly the first part was strengthened, for it is not now to 
 bo left wholly to the sick man, but he is to be moved by the 
 Priest to special confession of his sins. 
 
 And further that it was expected and provided for that 
 confession should be made is shown by the 113th Canon, 
 which says " Provided always : That if any man confess his 
 secret and hidden sins to the minister, for the unburdening 
 of his conscience, and to receive spiritual consolation and 
 ease of mind from him ... we do strictly charge and ad- 
 monish him, that he do not at any time reveal or make known 
 to any person whatever, any crime or offence so committed 
 to his trust and secrecy, (except they be such crimes as by 
 the laws of this realm his own life may be called in question 
 for concealing the same), under pain of irregularity." 
 
 To advise confession may be wrong, but it can not be con- 
 trary to the teaching of a Church which directs her Clergy 
 to move persons to confession, puts in their mouths a strong 
 foj-m of absolution, and enacts a Canon forbidding them to 
 disclose what has been confessed to them. 
 
 4th, Prayers for the Dead. With reference to the state 
 of souls in that period intermediate between the hour of death 
 and the day of judgment, not much is revealed in Holy 
 Scripture. For those who are not reprobate, it is " to depart 
 and be with Christ," it is to be in Paradise,^ to be in Abra- 
 ham's bosom,^ or with those eager expectant souls who are 
 under the altar.^ For some, it is much to be feared, there 
 remains nothing but a certain fearful looking for of judgment 
 and fiery indignation which shall devour the adversaries, but 
 Holy Scripture always represents the elect as having their 
 
 (1) By the omission of the words " and the same form of absolution shall 
 be used in all private confessions." 
 
 (2) S, Luke XXIII, 43. (3) S. Luke XVI, 22. (4) Rev. VI, &-12. 
 
 T "