ffpp M m S ifiCi g 1 !$=l| I 1 1/W I Ivf AllFOfcfc, ,. ^>vt f?f * ^ % i / i I*- ^ ^ -n UJ a s ^ -x X ^\UJV' 1|(J i ^ J^ I 1 ^ ij i 4 ^clOSAMGElfj> ^OF-CAIIFO/?^ ^OF-CA 1 1 S * ^ 'B\L I i Tf ? % tl I =n s ^ g I 1 ? 1 I i t $ % VvlllBRARYfl/- 3F CAilFO/?,^ ^OF-CAIIFO/?,^ ^V.E-i 1 X "-x. f "> / >*. ^ si THE POSITION THE CHUECH OF ENGLAND CATHOLIC WORLD: SUGGESTED BY A PERUSAL OF No. XC. OF THE " TRACTS FOR THE TIMES." REV. JAMES R. PAGE, M.A. QUEENS' COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, EDITOR OF " BURNET'S EXPOSITION OF THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES, AND PRINCIPAL OF THE COLLEGE FOR CIVIL ENGINEERS. " Christian is my name, and Catholic my surname ; by the one I am distinguished from heathens, by the other, from heretics and schismatics." LONDON: W. WHITE, 24, PALL MALL. 1844. StacR Anne* 5 THE MOST NOBLE HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH & QUEENSBURY K.G. ETC. ETC. ETC. MY LORD DUKE, My connexion with an Institution, of which your Grace is the distinguished President, and so liberal Patron, leads me to dedicate to your Grace the following pages. In offering to your Grace my present work, I feel the more pleasure, because your Grace is known and valued as a true friend and efficient promoter of the interests of the Church of England. In addition to these reasons for my present trespass on your Grace's attention, I would trust to your Grace's kind- ness to accept this dedication of my work as a mark of the sincere respect with which I have the honour to subscribe myself, My Lord Duke, Your Grace's most obedient, humble servant, JAMES R. PAGE. COLLEGE FOR CIVIL ENGINEERS, December 13, 1843. 1C57577 ADVERTISEMENT. THE Author claims the indulgent attention of the reader to a statement of the circumstances under which the following pages have been brought before the public. It is nearly two years since the work was first commenced. An unexpected and unusual weight of business compelled the Author to not only leave aside the subject, but to almost abandon the idea of publication. After some time the Author again resumed his pen, but was again compelled to lay aside the work. The careful reader will see in the volume some grounds for this explanation. In Chapter II. the Author has referred to, and made use of, the contested question of Lucius and Eleutherius. This he felt himself at liberty to do ; as the authenticity of all the particulars of that transaction cannot in any degree affect his point, and, for various reasons, cannot do b VI injustice to those on whom his argument is in- tended to bear. The Author has given, in Appendix B., trea- tises on the three leading points in the Romish controversy The Rule of Faith The Catholic Church and the assumed Infallibility of the Church of Rome. These have already appeared in print. The first two were sermons preached by request, some years ago, in the City of Lon- don, and the last is an extract from a work written at a former period, in reply to some attacks on the Church of England, which were made and industriously circulated by the Rev. T. J. Brown, the Principal of the Papal College at Downside. The object of the Author has been, to give the general reader a concise view of the ecclesiastical and doctrinal position of the Church of England, and at the same time to furnish a student with such matter as may lead him to the study of a question now forced upon public attention by the strange circumstances of these unsettled times. College, Putney, December, 1843. CONTENTS. PREFACE p. xi CHAPTER I. The case stated Union of the Church of England with the See of Rome Consequences to each Church of such Union The only terms of Union Impossibility of their Adoption Strange character of the Idea 1 CHAPTER II. Alleged difficulties in, and objections to, the Thirty-nine Arti- cles Nature of the Objections, and various classes of Ob- jectors Explanation of those Difficulties and Objections To a true Catholic no difficulty in the Articles of the Church of England The real cause of the Difficulties which exist in the Catholic World 12 CHAPTER III. Rise of the Papal power Introduction of that power into England Means by which introduced and maintained State of England under Papal tyranny Whether the bon- dage of England and its deliverance affected the independ- ence or catholicity of the Church of England No schism made by the church or kingdom of England the duty and interest of England to resist the authority and encroach- ments of the Church of Rome . .:,-.'. . . .. 19 b2 Vlll CHAPTER IV. Desired changes in the church Danger of violent changes Only true standard of changes Political reforms in the church Always to be avoided Unity Libel on the Articles and formularies of the church Vanity of the at- tempt to influence the Papacy by concession . . . . 37 CHAPTER V. Promulgation of Articles Whether an uncatholic Act How viewed by different bodies Inconsistencies of those who make light of Articles, or those who impugn the Articles of the Church of England Whether and under what circum- stances a church has a right to promulgate Articles View of the early Church on this subject Nature of the Articles of the Church of England Whether the publishing of such Articles could have compromised the catholicity of the Church of England 51 CHAPTER VI. Catholicity of the Thirty-nine Articles History of Advance towards reformation of the faith of the Church Standard of that reformation Abolition of the Pope's supremacy Further advance in the work of revision of the Articles of the Church The Articles of King Edward's reign . . 66 CHAPTER VII. End contemplated in the Articles fully answered Division of the Articles Respective offices of Scripture and the church The canon of Scripture The Apocrypha Incon- sistency in supposing the Apocrypha inspired and yet not canonical Bishop Cosin on the Apocrypha Authorized version of the Bible The Vulgate Varying editions of- The judgment of the church not infallible An infallible IX tribunal in the church not ordained and not necessary Objections answered Rule of Faith Definition of the term In what sense the Creed a Rule of Faith ... 91 CHAPTER VIII. Justification by faith Importance of Various definitions of the term True meaning of the Eleventh Article Faith the only mean of justification Baptismal or sacramental justi- fication Evil tendency of Hooker on Popish justification " Faith only" excludes Baptism and all other means as means of justification Danger of contrary assertion The nature of Baptism excludes it as a mean of justification Sacramental justification not the doctrine of the Church of England Way in which faith justifies The Homilies, 132 CHAPTER IX. Works before and after Justification The doctrine of the Church of England on the subject Obscure and dangerous statement of Justification in the Tract Similarity between the doctrine of the Tract and that of the Council of Trent on this subject The doctrine of works, as stated in the Tract and by Bellarmine, compared Fallacy of the case of a man being neither in darkness nor light Doctrine of the church on this subject Danger of the opposite view as seen in the Papal doctrine of attrition All works, either works of the flesh or the fruits of the Spirit Works of the justi- fied pleasing to God, and entitled to reward Ground of that reward . . ... . . . 154 CHAPTER X. The visible Church Definition of, by the Church of England Explanation of that definition Objections answered The terms Church, Unity, and Catholicity Barrow, Pear- son, and Taylor, on 169 CHAPTER XL The Church represented by General Councils The Prince's right over all estates within his realm Councils not to be assembled without his consent Burnet on this subject The fallibility of councils The promises of the Church do not prove the infallibility of councils Vain reasoning of the Tract on this subject Gregory Nazianzen on councils The Canons of the Church of England on the authority of synods 184 CHAPTER XII. The Papacy's assumption of the prerogatives of Heaven Im- portance of this question Generally avoided by the advo- cates of the Papal church Curious and incorrect reasoning of Tract No. 90, on the Church of England's condemnation of Romish doctrines Purgatory Image worship Saint worship Archbishop Wake's reply to Bossuet . . .194 CHAPTER XIII. The Twenty-fifth Article of the Church of England Its con- demnation of the new sacraments of the Papal church Extreme unction Practical tendency of Is not a Chris- tian sacrament Not to be reconciled with the doctrine of the Gospel Transubstantiation The Sacrifice of the Mass The doctrine of celibacy The Homilies The supremacy of the Pope Highly unsatisfactory way in which treated by the Tract for the Times The true end of that doctrine Papal tyranny in England 209 CONCLUSION 233 APPENDIX A 241 APPENDIX B . . . . 259 PREFACE. THE writer of the following pages has been fre- quently solicited to devote a portion of his time to a candid examination of all or even of some of the ' ' Tracts for the Times." The grounds of this solici- tation were his having given some attention to the deeply important questions in controversy between the church of England and the Papal see, and also his having always felt and maintained the necessity, in order to the avoiding of schisms and divisions, of a strict adherence to the ancient Catholic rule of order, discipline, and doctrine. To these solicitations the writer has hitherto turned a deaf ear. His decided conviction is, that there is not a more unprofitable expenditure of time and mind than that which is consumed in disputes between members and ministers of the same church. " Sirs, ye are brethren," should silence all con- tention. Xll Besides, when there is before the eye, on what side soever we stretch our view, such a wide and howling waste of moral desolation, or of fatal heresy making havoc of the souls of men, surely it is better to endeavour so to lengthen the cords and strengthen the stakes of our church that this waste may be comprehended within its sphere, and made to rejoice and blossom as the rose, than to trifle away opportunities in disputing with those who profess the same faith, and who bind them- selves to submission to the same rule. The canons of the church have provided that there be no such thing as contrariety in preachers. The canon could not be stretched so far as to bind us in reference to that work which may be called extra-parochial, without too much infringing on our liberties ; but the spirit of the canon should influence us in all such matters as those to which we now refer. When any of the clergy launch out into strange ideas, and proclaim these to the church, the better way would be, at least, in the opinion of the writer, to let them alone. If anything be written by a clergyman tending to promote heresy, or to injure the church of which he is a sworn servant, such an one should be left to the judgment of his bishop, whose pro- vince and duty it would be to silence the offender, and to impose a proper penance upon him for the offence. Xlll There are, however, occasions, and the present is one, when our rule may be set aside ; and, in availing himself of such an occasion, the writer hopes that he may, at least, escape the censure of those who consider non-subscription to the Tracts for the Times, as a proof of a departure from the Catholic faith and discipline. For though he can- not subscribe to the principles of the only one which he has examined, he is not, therefore, a favourer of heresy or schism. Neither has he ever had any sympathy with those who find Popery in everything which does not square with their own contracted views. Nay, he has been himself and that some years before an Oxford Tract ap- peared accused of attachment to Popery, simply because he defended the Orders of the Church, or some portions of the Book of Common Prayer. Besides the writer, no doubt, holds many points in common with the Tracts for the Times, if he may judge by some passages which have sometimes been brought before him, and which, when clothed in terms known only to the student of theology, seem very startling ; but which, if stated in plain language, and divested of their mys- terious garb, would be but common-place propo- sitions, in fact, mere elementary theology.* * We here allude more particularly to the unguarded use of the word " Protestant." We have somewhere read such language as this : " I hate your word Protestant;" ' the unprotestantizing XIV But while the writer has not any sympathy with individuals who find Popery in everything, and who learn to calumniate all who do not pronounce their own Shibholeth far, very far be it from his breast to have any sympathy with those who would even appear to lend their voices " to clear the guilty and to varnish crime.'* When he considers the daring of the national church." Such are the terms put forth by some individuals and works in connexion with the Tract now before us. Every man who has the least acquaintance with controver- sial theology, ought to know that an improper use of the word " Protestant" may cede the whole question in dispute between the churches of England and Rome, or between the church and the various sects which distract the country ; but it does not by any means follow that the word " Protestant" is therefore an improper word. The word is a very good one in its proper place ; and when we consider the ideas which an Englishman attaches to the word, and when we further consider that for a long lapse of years the people of England have not been instructed in such important points, surely we are bound not to use our professional knowledge in such a way as to become a stumbling-block to our own flocks. We are not to use terms in a vague, indefinite, or injurious manner, but we should not use a lawful word in an unlawful manner. It is well to know the true use of the word, but it is not well to make such knowledge an offence to the weak. " It is excel- lent to have a giant's strength, but it is tyrannous to use it like a giant." The writer has long felt the importance of the correct use of this word. Some years since he proved that importance in the settlement of a proposed controversy to which a Romish priest in the midland counties had challenged a clergyman, and to arrange the preliminaries for which, the author of these observations was selected. The priests, of whom there were three in number, proposed, on behalf of their fellow priest, the intended disputant XV conduct of the papal kingdom in usurping the pre- rogatives of Heaven in speaking wickedly for God where HE has not spoken in publishing to the world, under the high but grossly abused name of Heaven's King, as his faith what he has not re- vealed nay, what is directly opposed to that doctrine to which the God of truth has set his seal " That Mr. S. (the clergyman) shall prove that the Protestant church of England is the one holy Catholic and apostolic church." The introduction of the word " Protestant," as an epithet of the church of England, was immediately objected to by us. The priests used every effort to have the clause stand as above, think- ing, perhaps, that we had not any very particular reason for the omission of the word ; but when, after nearly two hours' discus- sion, they found us determined that the word " Protestant" must come out, they became as determined that there should not be any discussion. And there was not. They knew well that they could not attack us, unless, by the improper use of the word, we granted the main question, and mixed ourselves up with every fanatical sect under England's sun which might choose to call itself Protestant." We never before saw a greater triumph, or greater proof of the weakness of the Papacy when treated as a schism, an intruding schism, as she is in England. But should we, therefore, by our knowledge, destroy a weak " brother for whom Christ died" ? The church of England protests, and nobly, against the debasing cor- ruptions of the Papacy; but the church of England is not the Protestant church ; she is the church of England ; her protest is a mere accident, one for the necessity of which she is not ac- countable. Again: if some, in reference to her protest, use the terms Englishmen and Protestants as one and the same, yet is there a vast difference between the religion of Protestants and the Protestant religion. It is then, surely, a pity, when a little explanation would correct the evil, to use terms unknown to the people at large, in such an offensive and startling manner. XVI the writer of these observations finds enough to lead him to pause before he would give even the most silent whisper of his voice to palliate, or seem to palliate, such a system as Popery. But the daring conduct of the Papacy does not terminate in her thus putting herself in the place of God, and pretending to reveal what He had omitted or forgotten to make known as part of his holy religion. The Papacy has gone the one step left above them all, and in the plenitude of sove- reignty which ruled kings with more despotic sway than they ever rulbd their lowliest vassals, she has imposed her articles of faith on the consciences of men, under pain of excommunication here and of eternal damnation hereafter ; leaving us unless, indeed, humility compel us to place ourselves in the category of those who, being void of reason, are not accountable for their actions no alternative but unconditional allegiance to her usurped autho- rity, or unqualified rebellion against our Redeemer and God. Nor is this all. By many of these doctrines she has lowered the standard of the human mind, and shorn it of its natural strength. She has by these had the boast of having produced a darkness worse than Egyptian, when ignorance was deemed nay, by some proclaimed the mother of devotion. To propagate various articles of her new religion the Papacy has wasted Christendom with war, and de- XVII luged Europe with blood. For this she has reared up her dark dungeons of inquisition. For the support of this new system, falsely called Catholic, she has put forth the powers of earth and the terrors of hell. She has enforced her system by the most terrible penalties ' ' by the loss of property, liberty, and life ; by the gaol and the gibbet, the wheel and the rack, the faggot and the cross. Blood has stained the sceptre martyrs have surrounded the throne."* When, too, we find that the Papacy makes use of her new religion merely as an instrument for the promotion of her own sovereignty, and that to this day, in a distracted portion of the British empire, she has a c< kingdom far greater in num- ber than that of her majesty, and constantly guided and directed by the order of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide at Rome"f when we reflect on * Dwight, on Despotism. t All statesmen, or at least all who deserve the name of statesmen, must be aware of the impossibility of attaching the Jesuits and popish priests to any sovereign not in connexion with the see of Rome ; but many persons may not be aware that it is not lawful for the priests of Rome to take the common oath of allegiance in this country. The following, from the fourth Council of Lateran, the same council that made transubstantia- tioh an article of Christian 1 faith, will shew both the fact and the reason : " Some laics do too much usurp upon divine right when they compel ecclesiastical persons, holding nothing temporal from them, to take an oath of allegiance to them. But because, according to the apostle, the servant doth stand and fall to his XV111 these things, we must, unless we account history a fable and reason folly, leave it to others to look on these questions in the calm light of stern philo- sophy, but we cannot find courage to lightly treat of a system of which it is true that its aim has ever been to trample on the kings of the earth, and w^hich can itself be established only on the ruins of the Redeemer's kingdom. These being not the mere feelings arising from non-existing doctrines or imaginary fears, but the result of many years' examination of the religion, and observation on the working, of the papal king- dom amongst us, the writer is induced to offer this apology, were any apology required at his hand, for now venturing on an examination of this far- famed Tract for the Times. He would, in conclu- sion, only add, that under no possible circum- stances would he engage in this undertaking, were it not that while he freely canvasses the opinion of a brother in the same ministry, he has, at the same time, the opportunity of vindicating the church of England, and of placing the doctrines of the Papacy in their true light. With such feelings, then, and with every desire own master, we do forbid, by the authority of the sacred councils, that such clerks be compelled to take this kind of oath to secular persons." And yet, to conciliate these subjects and ambassadors of another kingdom, loyalty, church, bible nay, ccelum deusque, have been too, too often sacrificed ! XIX for the blessing of Heaven on the work of his hands, the writer would now commit these pages to his fellow-churchmen, of whom, in reference to their temporal and spiritual privileges, he has no cause to feel any difficulties, but may truly say " Ofortunati nimium, bona si sua norint" ERRATA. Page 88, line 2, for " or of himself, careless," read " or, if himself careless." Page 89, line 8, should read thus : he resolved into" The church has decided, and so it \s-Causafinita est." THE POSITION OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND m THE CATHOLIC WORLD. CHAPTER L The case stated Union of the Church of England with the See of Rome Consequences to each Church of such Union The only terms of Union Impossibility of their Adoption Strange character of the Idea. IN order to the right understanding of any work, it is of the first importance to know the end which its author has in view. In reference to the work now before us, the end is not very clearly defined : for this reason, it would not be so easy to reply to the tract in question, were we to found our reply solely on the declarations of the tract itself. If, however, we carefully examine the work from the introduction to the conclusion, it would appear that the author is anxious to lay the foundation of a union between the churches of England and Rome to so accommodate the tenets of our church that we may enter into communion with the see of Rome, or that members of the church of Rome may enter into communion with us. The latter is confessedly the most difficult task, therefore the object appears to be to lead us into a compromise with the see of Rome.* We do not envy the man who can lightly esteem the value of Christian unity, or who would place impediments in the way of the promotion of such an inestimable benefit to the world : but to entertain the question of union, in reference to the churches now under examina- tion, is so strange, that we can account for its emanation from such a quarter only on the same principle on which we often find a man shut himself out from the world, and, regardless of the true state of a case or of society, forge out, on the anvil of his own brain, some favourite theory to which he would subjugate earth nay, even heaven itself; but when his theory is cast out upon the busy world, to stand on its own merits and force its way into life, then he opens his eyes, and wonders that, notwithstanding all his labour, his theory makes no progress, but is passed over with the utmost indifference by the practical man. Union between the church of England and the Papacy is impossible. It is a thing which could not, for reasons which need not now be stated, be accomplished without a sacrifice on the part of * See note 1. Appendix A. either, which would involve the very existence of the sacrificing party. Such a union would be purchased by England with the independence and purity of her church ; it would involve a return to the system of novelty, heresy, schism, and idolatry, to deliver us from which our "noble army" of martyrs died, while the same union would destroy the independence of her crown. Our Queen would then be the Pope's vassal, and, ac- cording to circumstances, as in olden times, his lawgiver or his executioner. But if the sacrifice were made by Rome, it would be the utter annihilation of the Popedom, and the sweeping away of all the ponderous machinery by which the Papal throne has been, and is still, main- tained. For Rome must, in such case, return to what she was, when, as in the ages immediately succeeding the apostolic times, she was a church with a Christian bishop, and a Christian a Catholic faith, and not, as in after times, a temporal kingdom, wielding Christianity or Popery, or both, according to convenience, for the purpose of ex- tending the sceptre of usurpation over an enslaved world. It is a very partial view of this great question, to suppose that union is, in this instance, possible on any such terms, as the softening down or even putting away of a few startling doctrines or prac- tices. Even were such accommodation the desire B 2 of the Roman authorities, yet they have it not in their power to reform themselves without remov- ing the prop which supports the whole Papal empire. The Papacy has utterly rejected the sufficiency and completeness of Scripture as a standard of appeal, and Scripture is the only instrument of reformation, and they have established for them- selves a new rule to give authority to their new faith. " Cast away," said Chillingworth to the Jesuit Nott, "your vain pretence of infallibility, which makes your errors incurable." But the Papacy cannot cast away this infallibility ; on the contrary, to this same pretence of infallibility, she we speak not of individuals who may, by the grace of God, be delivered from her sin and her penalties clings with desperate fidelity, as if to verify the sentence of the heathen " Quos Deus perdat prius dementat." We have thought it well, at the opening of the question, to state these terms of union : that we have stated them correctly, every person at all versed in the Romish controversy will admit. This is, we repeat, the only real ground of union ; all else would be but " daubing the wall with untem- pered mortar." Now, in considering this question in connexion with the manifest end of the author of the Tract, two points very forcibly arrest our attention. The first is, that a proposal of such a nature of a union which involves nothing less than sees, churches, crowns, and sceptres, nay, even articles of faith that, we say, such a proposal, whether directly staled, or concealed in self-evident mys- tery, should come from any person occupying such an humble station, as that of a mere pres- byter of the church of England. We desire to think and speak with the greatest personal respect for the author of the Tract, and with the greatest possible politeness ; but we do really think that the author has strangely forgotten himself, and still more the principles which should govern a genuine churchman. When our author sets himself thus up on high, and comes before his church and his country with such a momentous proposition, we do indeed think that such conduct in unauthorized persons argues (we desire, as we have said, to speak with every personal respect) extreme forgetfulness of themselves. We are deeply persuaded, that this travelling out of our respective spheres has been and is the fruitful source of a large share of the troubles which afflict the church in this day of confusion, rebuke, and blasphemy. Individuals and committees usurp to themselves the pre- rogatives of the bishops and church collective, and thus bring the highest offices which our Saviour Christ has established for the further- ance of His kingdom, into disrepute, and often contempt, or at least reproach. The second point is, the extraordinary way in which the author of the Tract proposes to reconcile the existing differences, and to smoothe the way to union with Rome. Now, we consider the pro- position of union, under all existing circumstances, so very strange we had almost said absurd that, as we have above stated, we scarcely know how to account for the emanation of such an idea from divines of the church of England. But, put away for a moment the Utopian character of the idea, and let us indulge the pleasing thought, that such a thing were possible and practicable, surely there is a very direct way to the attainment of this end. The Papacy holds four creeds : the Apostles', the Nicene, the Athanasian, and the creed of Pius IV. The first three are creeds, which, by the confession of both sides, do contain the true Ca- tholic faith, which, as one of these creeds asserts, "Except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved ;" the converse of which is, that they do contain all saving or fundamental truth, about which there cannot be any dispute among true Catholics. The fourth of these creeds is a modern thing first, in fragments palmed upon Chris- tendom in the ages of darkness, and then com- piled out of the floating mass of heresy which had disgraced the church, and made part and parcel of that Christianity or Catholicity, " out of which no man can be saved !"* Now, by the confession of most distinguished Romanists, this creed has no other foundation than the authority of the Papal church ; and the church of Rome, it would seem, has authority, in despite of the warnings of Holy Writ, and in de- fiance of the councils which she professes to re- verence, to make and impose the twelve new articles of this creed as genuine Christianity ; be- cause, say her champions, she is infallible ; and she is infallible, because, to avoid waste of argu- ment, she says that she is so ! * The common cry of the English advocates of the Papacy is " If we be so very wrong in our doctrines, leave us, at least, in quiet possession of our errors. Do not be so uncharitable to us." This pitiful appeal to our compassion deceives many persons, and possesses, besides, the great advantage of diverting attention from the main question in fact, the only question worthy the attention of a moment viz., the impious and un- charitable conduct of the Papal see in sending forth doctrines teeming with novelty, heresy, and idolatry doctrines contrary to all true piety ; and then, instead of leaving us to receive or reject those private corruptions, forcing the same upon our consciences, as conditions of communion, as terms of salvation, and as the voice of the Holy Ghost ; thus calling in the aid of the blessed Spirit, to set His seal to sentiments and errors which, even if not of such a nature as above described, are yet but private opinions added by the Pope to the Catholic faith. These errors, then, are thus forced upon us under pain of ex- communication here, and of damnation hereafter. This view of the question, the advocates and apologists for Rome take good care to conceal from the public eye. We have ourselves had on several occasions to bring to light the dishonesty of 8 Now, if this be so, that this creed of Pius IV. is a new creed, new even to the church of Rome, before the sitting of the Council of Trent, as Chris- tianity ; and if this creed be thus imposed on men in defiance of the Word of God and the decrees of councils ; if also this creed be made to rest on no other foundation than the assertion of the party so deeply interested in its promulgation ; and, further, if this creed be the cause, the sole cause of dissen- sion between the church of England and the Papacy, is it not very strange that the author of the Tract should not have fixed upon this ready mode of settling all differences, and this short end of even respectable Papal apologists in reference to this point. We have been compelled to convict them of either utter igno- rance of their own position, or of the most wilful and design- ing dishonesty in withholding from the people this view of the question. The creed of Pius IV. leaves men no alternative but ex- clusion from heaven or a reception of the heresy and idolatry of that formulary, as Catholic faith. An accurate knowledge of the history, nature, and object of that creed would always, under the blessing of God, guard churchmen from the snares of intriguing Jesuits. We are happy to believe that this creed is beginning to be better known by Englishmen than it was some years ago. For the sake of our lay readers who may not know the formulary to which we refer, we would add, that the creed of Pius IV. commences with the articles of the Nicene Creed, the same that is read in our Communion Service; and then adds twelve new articles to that ancient symbol of Catholic faith. The two concluding articles of the new portion of the creed are 11. "That the holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Roman church is the mother and mistress of all churches, I acknow- ledge ; and I vow and swear true obedience to the Bishop of all religious controversy viz., the utter annihila- tion of this novel piece of religion the casting away of the new creed of Pius IV. ? The church of Rome would then be in the same state in which the primitive church stood, when in possession of those creeds which do contain the true Catholic faith ; and the church of England, continuing to hold those three ancient creeds, could then dispense with all her negative articles, which are the subject of inquiry in the tract before us. She would not then have to pronounce re- specting these objects of her protest or negation ; for then these same objects, if they continued to Rome, the successor of St. Peter, the prince of the apostles, and the Vicar of Jesus Christ. 12. And all other things like- wise do I undoubtedly receive and confess, which are delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred canons and general coun- cils, and especially by the holy Council of Trent ; and withal, I condemn, reject, and accurse all things that are contrary hereunto, and all heresies whatsoever, condemned, rejected and accursed by the church ; and I will be careful that this true Catholic faith, (this true Catholic faith !) OUT OF WHICH NO MAN CAN BE SAVED, which at this time I willingly profess and truly hold, be constantly (with God's help) retained and con- fessed, whole and inviolate to the last gasp, and by those that are under me or such as I shall have charge over in my calling holden, taught, and preached to the uttermost of my power : I, the said N., promise, vow and swear, so God help me and His holy gospels." This is a good specimen of the mo- desty and charity of Rome of that affectionate mother which weeps over England, and desires her return to the Catholic fold ! " Age, thou art shamed " that men of reason nay, even clergymen of our church, should be imposed upon by such flimsy pretensions to Catholic peace, charity, and truth I 10 exist, would be but common errors scattered over the world, and no longer termed and enforced as part and parcel of the religion of the Lord Christ. This is not merely the only true way to union, but this is also the direct way ; and yet how strange that this " Tract for the Times" should not, on such an occasion, have fixed upon this mode of ad- justing differences and reconciling churches ! But no ! the union must take place at the sole expense of the church of England ! We must pay all the cost, and in return receive worse than nothing ! It would, then, appear from Tract No. 90, that the Articles of the church may and should be softened down, so as to no longer hinder any of us taking them in a Catholic, or if the author of the Tract had spoken more correctly a Popish sense. And thus the articles are turned aside from their intention, and from their plain declarations, for the purpose of enabling us to join in communion with Rome, while Rome would, so far as the Tract before us is concerned, continue to bask in the sunshine of delusion, and, in her insolent tone of unbending authority, declare " I am, and none else beside me." And all this compromise for such we must pronounce it is seriously made by a son and clergyman of our church ! This is cer- tainly " the most unkindest cut of all," and may weU remind us of, " He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me." 11 Indeed, we must say though our individual opinion will have little weight that we blush to think that those who are in the enjoyment of even the very least of the honours and influence of the church, should thus set themselves to bend the purity of her confessions of faith, so as to not merely make them approach the confines, but meet the very heresies, of the ages of corruption, by forcing our articles to speak what they never were designed to even whisper nay, what they were written expressly to condemn ; and by making them smooth the way to what they were set forth to render impossible viz., the con- tinuance of any person within the pale of the church of England, who had the least taint of the leaven of Popery. That such is the state of the case with respect to the unsuccessful efforts of the author of the Tract, and with respect to the intention and nature of the Articles, shall more fully appear in the follow- ing chapters. 12 CHAPTER II. Alleged difficulties in, and objections to, the Thirty-nine Arti- cles Nature of the Objections, and various classes of Objec- tors Explanation of those Difficulties and Objections To a true Catholic no difficulty in the Articles of the Church of England The real cause of the Difficulties which exist in the Catholic World. IN carrying out his views and plans, the author of the Tract thus introduces himself to the notice of his readers : " It is often urged, and sometimes felt and granted, that there are, in the Articles, propositions or terms inconsistent with the Catholic faith ; or, at least, when persons do not go so far as to feel the objection as of force, they are perplexed how best to reply to it, or how most simply to explain the passages on which it is made to rest." Our author then proceeds to state his desire to solve those difficulties : " The following Tract is drawn up with the view of shewing how groundless the objection is, and further of approximating towards the argumentative answer to it, of which most men have an implicit apprehension, though they may have nothing more.'' In the first of these extracts a plain declaration is made, that by some it is urged, and by others 13 felt and granted, that there are in our Articles pro- positions and terms inconsistent with the Catholic faith ; that though all do not feel the objection which others admit, yet they cannot well over- throw the objection or explain the passages (in the Articles we suppose) on which this objection is made to rest. It is more easy to assert than to prove, that this "objection" has been felt to any extent, or by those men who, in their day and genera- tion, have been pillars of our church. That the objection is urged, it is true ; the Popish party would urge it, though most inconsistently, first, against the imposition nay, even the framing of the Articles, and secondly, against the special Articles which occupy the attention of the author of this " Tract for the Times." With what the Romish sect may urge we have not anything to do, if only we can shew cause for what we have done, and can overthrow the founda- tion of their charges against us ; but whatever the Papal church may say to the contrary, they, and not we, are concerned in the defence of their, and our, position. In the next place, we cannot see any such force in the author's alleged objections against our Articles ; nor do they appear so very difficult of explanation, if only we would explain them on scriptural and truly Catholic principles, and for 14 the time forget that the Papacy had ever, in the day of her power, forced upon Christendom a new religion. If, indeed, we have any tenderness for Rome, or any desire to conciliate her, then, no doubt, there are very decided objections to, and serious difficulties in, the Articles of the church of England. "As to the real difficulties to a Catholic Christian, in the ecclesiastical position of our church at this day," which the author of the Tract asserts, " no one can deny" It is not so easy to understand such a very general and undefined proposition. There might be difficulties in a church with respect to its domestic economy, to its position in reference to the state, to any particular church, or to the church universal. There may be in one, or all, of these points serious difficulties in the ecclesiastical posi- tion of any particular church. In what, then, our serious difficulties consist we are not informed ; but when we read that the articles are not of the number of those difficulties, and that they are not of the number simply because they admit of a Catholic, or, more properly, Popish sense ; and that they may be so explained as to suit the prejudices of the Papal church; then, we may certainly conclude that those real difficulties consist in our relation to the Papacy with which we once were united. That there are, then, difficulties in the present position of the church of England and the Papacy 15 no man can deny. But that these serious diffi- culties have any, even the least, foundation in the ecclesiastical constitution, or in the Articles of the church of England, no man, except he have a very shallow insight into this controversy, can for one moment assert or suppose. And when we declare that these real difficulties have no foundation in the Articles, we are very far from founding our declaration on the subserviency of our negative Articles to the current heresies of the day, or on the manner in which they may be relaxed, softened down, or, we must add, perverted, to support the falsely called Christian or Catholic doctrines which they were framed and enforced to condemn and exclude from our church, the citadel of England's strength, for ever. Whatever difficulties exist in not merely Eng- land but in western Christendom as to the eccle- siastical position of churches or countries, the fault is justly and solely chargeable on the Papacy. Indeed, when we find the president of the Council of Trent admitting, " That the depravation and corruption of discipline and manners in the church of Rome, was in a great measure the cause and original of all those schisms and heresies, which then troubled the church"* When, I say, we find themselves making such a confession, we, or any other kingdom, seem fully justified, even though we or they had been guilty of schism. * Orat. Prsef. Trid. Concil Sessio. xi. 16 But, further : G. " Cassander, a learned Papist, took special notice that these two sisters, England and Rome, were fallen asunder, even to the dividing of the household." He also observed the author of those fresh-bleeding wounds, and accordingly, as an eye-witness of those differences, protesteth openly that, " The fault is to be laid upon those, which being puffed up with vain insolent conceits of their ecclesiastical power, proudly and scorn- fully contemned and rejected them which did rightly and modestly admonish the Reformation." If we shall further inquire of him what remedy might be applied to such dangerous diseases, he professeth seriously " That the church can never hope for any firm peace, unless they begin to make it that have given cause of that distraction." If we further press him for his advice, how to pro- cure that peace from them, which first occasioned the falling off, he replies, and confidently assures us " That this cannot be effected unless those which are in place of ecclesiastical government, would be content to remit something of their too much rigour, and yield somewhat to the peace of the church; and, hearkening unto the earnest prayers and admonitions of many godly men, will set themselves to correct manifold abuses accord- ing to the rule of divine Scriptures and the pri- mitive church from which they have swerved."* * Lynde's " Via Tula." 17 Now here are plain confessions, and more might be adduced which would abundantly justify us in England under almost any circumstances of sepa- ration from communion with the Roman church. But it is not at all necessary to have recourse to such confessions for proof, that, if there be any serious difficulty in the two churches, the church of England is not to blame. We take higher ground than this, and shew that the blame for any breach of union cannot possibly rest upon us, and that therefore we are not in any awkward position with respect to our standing in the Catholic church or world, but that the fault is with the Papacy alone, and that she has placed herself in this difficult and incurable position, that the true Catholic church of Christ cannot hold communion with her that, in fact, she has, by her doctrines and practices, separated herself from the Catholic church and that by a gulf which can- not be passed over by her for ever, and over which a member of the church of England cannot pass, except under the influence of the greatest possible delusion.* Our work may fall into the hands of those who are not versed in this important question, and whose occupations in life may not allow them leisure to study for themselves in extensive fields of theological controversy. For their sakes and * See note 2. Appendix A. C 18 to correct the too common errors which prevail on the subject of the breach between England and Rome we would give a brief sketch of the his- tory of the Papacy, and especially of its operations in England, down to the period of the sixteenth century, when we shook off a baneful and usurped domination over our civil and religious liberties, and stood forth in a state of freedom, and in a right position with respect to the Holy Scriptures, and the primitive Catholic church. And this we do even at the expense of trespassing for a few moments on the patience of those of our readers to whom these particulars may be as " the twice- told tale, vexing the dull ear of a drowsy man." 19 CHAPTER III. Rise of the Papal power Introduction of that power into England Means by which introduced and maintained State of England under Papal tyranny Whether the bon- dage of England and its deliverance affected the independ- ence or catholicity of the Church of England No schism made by the church or kingdom of England The duty and interest of England to resist the authority and encroach- ments of the Church of Rome. THE bishops of Rome, from almost the very birth of the Christian church, possessed peculiar facilities for advancing themselves to pre-eminence and power. These facilities were not overlooked. Oc- cupying the see of "the mistress of the world," they must of necessity have been more regarded and consulted than were those bishops who moved in a less important sphere. The weak would naturally fly to them for aid, and at times the strong, for more power to oppress. But other cir - cumstances favoured the views of those aspiring bishops. The law of Valentinian empowering them to judge other bishops the reception of this law by bishops the removal of the seat of empire the very thing which would by many have been c2 20 considered as the death-blow to the authority of the see of Rome the endowments of Pepin and Charlemagne these and other events all tended to exalt the bishops of Rome, until they stood before Christendom, not merely as bishops, but as tem- poral princes. Thus one stream after another con- tributed to swell the increasing authority of the Roman pontiff, until, at length, that authority overflowed its natural bounds, and swept with desolation the Western world. We must now refer to the introduction of this power into England. It would be foreign to our present purpose to discuss the question of the in- dependence of the church of England previously to the arrival of Austin. Our object is very sim- ple to refer to the various means by which the Pope contrived to grasp the sceptre of England, and to consider the way in which he exercised his usurped authority. The well-known events the foundation of the English college at Rome, and the establishment, by Ina and Offa, of the Peter-pence for the support of the same, laid a good groundwork for the preten- sions of the Roman Pontiff. Offa, in violation of the rites of hospitality and the laws of God, mur- dered the young king Ethelbert. In order to atone for his sin and quiet his guilty conscience, he made a journey to Rome, and, in obedience to the demands of the Pope, began to endow churches and monasteries. In addition to his other 21 gifts to the church, as it was considered, he en- larged the income of the college which Ina had founded at Rome. Ina, for the support of this college, granted the Peter-pence, which Offa extended throughout his kingdom. We ought to apologize for introducing such a familiar subject, but we do so, not so much on account of itself as of its consequences. This tax soon became a badge of subjection was demanded as a matter of right as a fee to the * ' Prince of the Apostles and his successors," and was exacted with a rigorous hand. Little did the monarchs who im- posed this tax on their subjects think that in this charitable donation was involved the independence of England. They fondly thought that they were adopting the best means of providing a learned and efficient clergy for their subjects, but they never supposed that they were laying a foundation for the overthrow of the civil and religious liberties of their country. In return for this service Offa obtained the cano- nization of St. Alban, the first British martyr, whose relics were said to have been found at Veru- lam. But we shall presently see that the Pope gave England something in addition to these con- secrated bones. Previously to this the Pope had contrived to obtain a footing in England, at least such a footing as enabled him to carry his own point without directly assailing the independence of the Anglican church. In the days of Austin an 22 open attack was made on the independence of our church ; but that attack was not successful, not- withstanding the great slaughter of the monks at Banchor, and the persecution of others who could not see, either in Scripture or reason, why the church and kingdom of England should be the bond- slave of the see of Rome. Therefore, although Austin bent his greatest energies towards the es- tablishment of the authority of the Pope within this realm, he did not succeed ; so far from it, that we find a council, or national synod, held at Hert- ford, in the year 673, and attended by all the Eng- lish bishops, besides a great number of other eccle- siastics, subscribing to the following canons : "That no bishop should encroach on the jurisdic- tion of another," and " that bishops who are out of their diocese ought not to execute any part of their function, but should be contented with an hos- pitable reception." Baronius pretends that this council was summoned by order of the Pope, and that Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, presided as the legate of the holy see. But this conjecture for it is but conjecture, or rather a resolve that the thing should be so, and then a conclusion that it is so is not supported by the historians from whom we derive all that we know or can know of the church in those days ; and facts prove that long after this the Pope had not jurisdiction in England. In the year 680, Theodore, at the request of the Pope, did summon a council to ascertain the opinion 23 of the English church on the subject of the heresy of the Monothelites. But it was acknowledged by Gregory and Theophylact, who presided at the council, that they were the first who acted as legates of the Pope in the kingdom of England. By constant watchfulness and intrigues the Pope contrived to establish his power and authority in matters ecclesiastical ; and, having succeeded in placing his own creatures in the higher offices of the church, he by that means secured the submis- sion of the inferior clergy, who were, indeed, for the most part, put into their benefices through in- terested motives, and with the submission of the clergy he secured the obedience, not yet vassalage, of the people. But thrones are the toys of the Papacy ; it has been so for centuries it is so to the present hour. At thrones and governments they aim. They know human nature well, and therefore are not ignorant of the fact that a people never think for themselves are not, in fact, to lead, but to be led ; therefore we find that the great concern of the Papacy is to establish its authority over kings and governments. Once secure these, and the history of mankind testifies that the most independent people must in time submit their necks to that authority which rules their rulers. In addition to the advantage derived to the see of Rome from the perversion of the tax of Peter- pence, the permission to allow the Pope's legates to sit as such in councils within the realm of Eng- 24 land gave another and a deadly blow to the inde- pendence of our church and nation. How very different the conduct of men in all things relating to religion, and in those that con- cern the common business of life. Under, perhaps, no other circumstances could any foreign power have intruded itself into England, or have esta- blished its interests here. But how frequently we find individuals, under the false notion of religion or charity, contributing to that which may one day be used for their own injury, and, possibly, destruc- tion. These and other events laid the foundation of those claims, in virtue of which the Pope, in after times, called on our monarchs to pay tribute for their kingdom. Certainly the times were changed, and the people with them, when, instead of the meek and gentle bishop counselling a newly converted sovereign, and declaring him the sole lord of his own dominions, we had a very warrior, in the garb of " the vicar of Christ," calling upon a monarch to do homage for his crown. When Lucius applied to Eleutherius for advice respecting the best means of extending and main- taining the Christian religion in his kingdom, what was the language of the bishop of Rome at that time ? "Ye have received of late, through God's mercy, in the realm of Britain, the law and faith of Christ ; ye have with you, within the realm, both the parts of the Scriptures : out of them, by God's 25 grace, with the council of your realm, take ye a law, and by that law (through God's sufferance) rule your kingdom of Britain. For you are God's vicar in your kingdom, according to the saying of the psalm, ' O God, give thy judgments to the king, and thy righteousness to the king's son,' " &c. But this, as the Jesuits would tell us, was the doctrine of the church when she was in her infancy, and is worthy to be followed only by men of ignor- ant and contracted minds, but utterly beneath the attention of those who would so exalt her, when " of more discreet and advanced age," as to make " the crown bow to the mitre, and the sword submit to the pastoral, contrary to the ignorant practice of primitive times." This doctrine of Eleutherius, which passed for Christian conduct in the days of Rome's humility and purity, would not, however, suit the times of the aspiring Hildebrand. He would claim Eng- land nay, the world itself and would make the rulers thereof " the deputies elected by the Lord" his own vassals his very footstool. When, how- ever, he claimed homage from the Norman con- queror, he received an answer as true as it was noble ; but notwithstanding his spirited reply to a man little accustomed to contradiction, William made use of the Italian pontiff and his overwhelm- ing influence to bring under subjection to his measures the clergy of his newly acquired king- 26 dom. Thus, by yielding to the fatal doctrine of expediency, William helped to establish the very tyranny which, in his own case, he had so bravely and successfully resisted. The power of the pon- tiff, once recognised and introduced, continued to advance until a few centuries saw England the mere bondslave of the Pope, when its sovereign was a royal puppet, and his subjects loyalists and rebels, according to the decision of the court of Rome.* Many were the complaints, many the protests, and many the laws made and enacted against this unnatural tyranny. But complaints, protests, and laws, were all in vain, until at last the good Pro- vidence of God so ordered events, and so over- ruled the hearts and actions of those in authority, that the land was freed from this grinding bond- age. The sovereignty of the court of Rome was shaken off the machinery by which it was sup- * John stood out against Papal tyranny until he was forced into the humiliating measure of a surrender of his crown, and with it of the independence of his kingdom to the Pope. After- wards John bore this testimony to the consequences of his fatal act: " Postquam me et mea regna RoinarKB subjeci ecclesice, nulla mihi prospera, omnia contraria advenerunf' Ever since I sub- jected myself and my kingdom to the Roman church, nothing has prospered with me, everything has gone contrary. Matthew Paris adds " De regione libera ancellam fecit per chartum lugu- brem" He made, by a lamentable charter, a bond-slave of a free country. 27 ported was set aside and the church and kingdom were re-established in their primitive and scrip- tural independence. Now this successful resistance to a baneful usurpation had not anything whatever to do with Christianity or Catholicity, and could no more place the church, or rather kingdom, of England, in a state of schism, than did the return of the Jews from the captivity of Babylon place that nation in a different position from that in which it stood be- fore its bondage. The only difference in the two instances is, that in the case of the Jews the hearts of their oppressors were melted into compassion, and a proclamation of their tyrant gave them per- mission to return ; while in the case of England, it was not possible to touch the tyrant's heart ; but the sovereign and people were compelled to assert their own freedom. But in substance, the two cases are precisely similar viz., in a return of the same nation to its former privileges, and to its rightful independence. Nor would the case be altered if, instead of the Pope, we substituted any other sovereign of the earth Russia, France, or any other power might have been our taskmasters ; but this would not have made England by divine right part of any of those empires, nor her people the inheritance of the usurping power. England would be England, only under bondage, and her people, not Russian 28 or French, but English still.* It will not meet the question to say, that in the one case, that of the papacy, the tyrant ruled by means of religion. It is true that the Pope did rule by means of religion, but then it was a religion of his own ; and he it was, by his influence, and not the God of heaven speaking either in his word or by the mouth of the church in her purity, that called this religion Christianity. In making use of religion the Pope acted wisely Finge Deum quoties visfallere plebem, was the motto of the court of Rome. But all despots act in the same way. They have ever " assumed the prerogatives of Heaven, and pre- scribed, as the will of God, (or of the gods,) a system of religious doctrines and duties to their subjects. This system has invariably been absurd, gross, and monstrous. The morality which it has enjoined has been chiefly a code of crimes fitter for the regulation of banditti than of sober men ; the religion which it has taught has been a scheme of impiety." We pity the simplicity of those who imagine that in the use of a religious creed the Papal kingdom acted from motives of love to God and compassion to the souls of men, or from other principles than those which would have influ- enced any despot who might have been placed See note 3. Appendix A. 29 in a similar position. But it is not strange that the Pope should establish and maintain his autho- rity by means of religion, when we know that the leading articles of this new religion are the most important for him, and therefore most necessary to be believed by all the faithful, as absolutely essential to the support of his authority in all things, and as designed to make that authority reach the bounds of the habitable globe. Other articles of this new religion were well calculated to promote the views of the popedom in another respect, as those referred to were to estab- lish his authority and jurisdiction and that view was, the obtaining of large revenues and legacies for the support of the holy see, and its retainers throughout the several kingdoms of Christendom. Is it not, then, very strange that the early Chris- tians should have been so very ignorant of these, in the opinion of the Pope, most fundamental articles of faith ? Nay, that they should, when they professed to deliver all the articles of Christian faith the Catholic faith, as they say, which was necessary to salvation that they should have omitted the most vital points in the judgment of some, and make it necessary that the Pope should stand forth in the painful position of speaking in his own behalf of correcting the ancient Catholic church of supplying what the Holy Scriptures quite forgot to deliver and of forcing upon 30 Christendom, with a high hand, a new creed, to be received under pain of excommunication here and of damnation hereafter. This is the simple state of the question. Either the Catholic church of the first ages deceived the world by delivering, as the Christian faith, an im- perfect creed : or the court of Rome practised the most daring imposition ever before attempted on the human race. And when we consider the nature of this new creed, is it strange that the Pope should have followed the example of other despots, and have governed his empire by means of religion ? But this fact does not constitute the re-assertion of our independence a question of opposition to the Catholic faith, nor does it constitute any real difficulties in the ecclesiastical position of our church. Nay, the very fact of the Papacy having made and enforced a new religion, would have freed us from the sin of schism, even though we had been by divine authority subject unto the jurisdiction of the Pope. We now take another view of the question. Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that, in rejecting the usurped authority of the see or court of Rome, we had broken away from Catholic order and discipline ; that the sovereign with the people on his side had violently deposed the priesthood of the land, and that in the lack of per- 31 sons to officiate in Divine things, the monarch had himself " made priests of the lowest of the people ;" that whom he would he took and consecrated for the priest's office ; even then we should not have stood in any awkward position with respect to the Pope as such, for he has, as to his popedom, as violently opposed Scripture and the early church. We should have placed ourselves certainly in a false position with respect to the church of Rome, if it were possible to sever that church from the popedom ; but we should have done so only in the same way and to the same extent that we should have done with respect to any branch or all the branches of the Catholic church of Christ spread over the whole world. In whatever light, then, we view the question, our ecclesiastical position cannot present any, much less serious, difficulties if those difficulties have reference to one or all of the branches of the true Catholic church for we have not separated our- selves from any of them ; nay, not even from the church of Rome, except so far as she has separated herself from the Catholic church of Christ.* * " And from hence it follows, that no church can be charged with a separation from the true Catholic church, but what may be proved to separate itself in some thing necessary to the being of the Catholic church ; and so long as it doth not separate as to these essentials, it cannot cease to be a true member of the Catholic church. If you would, therefore, prove that the church of England, upon the Reformation, is separated from the true 32 We do, then, trust that the good and true peo- ple of England will prove their allegiance to their sovereign, their church, and their God, by standing fast " in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free," and that they will not suffer themselves to be brought into bondage by false brethren the emissaries of Rome sent hither to spy out their Catholic church, you must not think it enough to say (which as weakly as commonly is said), that no one particular church can be named, which in all things agreed with it ; for that only proves that she differed from particular churches in such things wherein they differed from each other, but that she is divided from all Christian churches in such things wherein they are all agreed, and which are essential to the being of the Catholic church ; when you have proved this you may expect a further answer. This, then, can be no cause why your church should expel the Protestants out of her communion, but it shews us sufficient cause to believe that your church had separated her- self from the communion of the Catholic. For which we must further consider, that although nothing separates a church pro- perly from the Catholic, but what is contrary to the being of it ; yet a church may separate herself from the communion of the Catholic, by taking upon her to make such things the necessary conditions of her communion, which never were the conditions of communion with the Catholic church. As for instance, though we should grant adoration of the eucharist, invocation of saints, and veneration of images, to be only superstitious prac- tices, taken up without sufficient grounds in the church, yet since it appears that the communion of the Catholic church was free for many hundred years, without approving or using these things ; that church which shall not only publicly use, but enjoin such things upon pain of excommunication from the church, doth, as much as in her lies, draw the bounds of Catholic communion within herself, and so divides herself from the true Catholic church. For whatever confines, must likewise divide 33 liberty, and bring them into subjection to that upas power under which their liberty was once withered, and their prosperity so long blighted. Our church is the church of God in England, planted here by His hand, before ever kings became its nursing fathers, or their queens its nursing mothers. It has weathered many a storm, has the church ; for by that confinement a separation is made between the part confined and the other, which separation must be made by the party so limiting Christian commu- nion. As it was in the case of the Donatists, who were there- fore justly charged with schism, because they confined the Catholic church within their own bounds : and if any other church doth the same which they did, it must be liable to the same charge which they were. The sum, then, of this discourse is, that the being of the Catholic church lies in essentials, that for a particular church to disagree from all other particular churches in some extrinsical and accidental things, is not to separate from the Catholic church, so as to cease to be a church ; but still, whatever church makes such extrinsical things the necessary conditions of communion, so as to cast men out of the church who yield not to them, is schismatical in so doing ; for it thereby divides itself from the Catholic church : and the separation from it is so far from being schism, that being cast out of that church on those terms only returns them to the communion of the Catholic church. On which grounds it will appear that yours is the schismatical church and not ours. For, although before this imposing humour came into particular churches, schism was defined by the Fathers and others to be a voluntary departure out of the church, yet that cannot in reason be understood of any particular, but the true Catholic church; for not only persons but churotoes may depart from the Catholic church ; and in such cases, not those who depart from the com- munion of such churches, but those churches which departed from the Catholic, are guilty of the schism." STILLINGFLEET. 34 stood firm under the most terrible persecutions, and even now it lifts its head majestically above all the Romish or other sects, its bitter enemies, and adminsters to her obedient children the pure bread of life, to sustain them on their journey through this wilderness, until they are summoned to join her noble army of martyrs in the realms above. All other bodies, by whatsoever name they are called, who go about this country to seduce the people from the true Catholic faith and discipline, are under the serious charge of schism, and must remain under that charge until they can prove a departure in our church from the order and doc- trine of the Catholic church. The teachers of Romish doctrine are especially guilty of schism in this country ; they have not any lawful business here ; they are mere intruders forced upon us by the Pope, disturbers of the peace of the church, thrusting themselves and their ministrations upon dioceses not their own, in which, or for which, they never were ordained by any lawful bishop of the Church of England. Our bishops are the only true and authorized order of spiritual authority in this realm ; they are the successors of the true bishops of the church of England from the days of her foundation, and they require not the Pope's pall, nor the livery of any earthly power, to give validity to their orders or efficacy to their adminis- trations. 35 When, then, the emissaries or friends of Rome would persuade us of the great love of the Pope, and tell us how his bowels yearn over this his lost family of England, let us think of the time when he governed us with the rod of iron, drained us of all our wealth, blasted all our prosperity, and, worse than all, deprived us of the word of God, the only pure bread of life, and left us to feed upon such husks as fell from, or were doled out from, the oppressors' table. Let us, when these agents and friends of the intriguing Court of Rome would seduce us from the faith for which our martyrs died, and from our allegiance to our Queen, to give us in return their new creed and their new sovereignty let us, one and all, remembering with thankfulness the many and inestimable blessings with which, by His church, God has enriched our country let us tell those emissaries to confine themselves and their operations to their own dioceses, and let us, " from the mouth of England," " Add thus much more That no Italian priest Shall tithe or toll in our dominions."* We must, in conclusion, express our deep regret that any respectable member and minister of our church should so far forget what is due to his church and his country, as to send forth what could, by the most searching eye, be suspected of making light of our deliverance from Papal usur- * See note 4. Appendix A. D2 36 pation, and from the novelties and heresies by which that usurpation was maintained. We proceed, in the next place, to point out the history, design, and nature of the Articles of the church, and to shew that they do not place us in any position of difficulty, not because they may be by some accommodated to the views of Rome, but because they set forth the plain and undeniable doctrine of Holy Writ, and because they cannot, by the utmost ingenuity, be made to countenance any ancient or modern heresies, or support any doctrines or views of the Court of Rome or the Council of Trent. 37 CHAPTER IV. Desired changes in the church Danger of violent changes Only true standard of changes Political reforms in the church Always to be avoided Unity Libel on the Articles and formularies of the church Vanity of the attempt to influence the Papacy by concession. HAVING in the former chapter availed ourselves of our author's assertion, " that there are real difficulties to a Catholic Christian in the ecclesiastical position of our church at this day," to, in some degree, open and explain the question of our standing with re- spect to the church of Rome and the Catholic world, we would briefly notice a few more observations which occur in the introduction to the Tract. The author passes from the asserted difficulties of our ecclesiastical position to a statement of his own feelings with respect to any supposed or desired changes in our church : " If in any quarter it is supposed that persons who profess to be disciples of the early church will silently concur with those of very opposite sentiments in furthering a relaxation of sub- scriptions which it is imagined are galling to both parties, 38 though for different reasons, and that they will do this against the wish of the great body of the church, the writer of the fol- lowing pages would raise one voice, at least, in protest against any such anticipation. Even in such points as he may think the English church deficient, never can he, without a great alteration of sentiment, be party to forcing the opinion or pro- ject of one school upon another. Religious changes, to be beneficial, should be the act of the whole body ; they are worth little if they are the mere act of a majority. No good can come of any change which is not heartfelt, a development of feelings springing up freely and calmly within the bosom of the whole body itself." Now, in much of this passage we cordially agree with the author of the Tract, that it is always bad policy to force with a strong hand, or to accom- plish by means of combination, any measures upon the great body of the church. But we can- not see those deficiencies in the opinion or doc- trine of the church to which our author refers. We must, perhaps, conclude that the articles or doctrines are not sufficiently comprehensive, that they do not embrace all the opinions which some would desire to see embodied in the formularies of our church. We must, however, in one thing, praise the mo- deration of the author. He will not be a party to forcing the opinion or project of one school upon another. The history of the church affords painful proof of the fatal consequences of departure from this rule. The contests which followed the en- forcement of image worship, and, at a later period, 39 the proceedings of the Council of Trent, will always furnish a solemn warning to those who would, by violence or intrigue, force strange opinions on the church, or on any part of the church of Christ. Religious changes must be the act of the body, or we cannot expect men to " hold the faith in unity of the spirit, in the bond of peace, and in righteous- ness of life." We agree with the author of the Tract, that no good can come of any other change. We also subscribe to the opinion that religious changes are to be avoided. " Moreover,' adds the author, " a change in theological teach- ing involves either the commission or the confession of sin ; it is either the profession or renunciation of erroneous doctrine, and if it does not succeed in proving past guilt, it, ipso facto, implies present. In other words, every change in religion carries with it its own condemnation, which is not attended by deep repentance." All this is quite true as an abstract proposition as such we suppose that it is intended by the author of the Tract, for we cannot see the appli- cation of it to our church. It is true that our theo- logical teaching did, in the sixteenth century, un- dergo a change ; but that was not a change made by the introduction of, but only by the ceasing to instruct the people in, new doctrines ; in fact, in " commandments of men," which had quite set aside the ancient Catholic faith. We cannot, how- ever, agree in the sentiment that repentance gives such validity to any change ; we may have re- 40 pentance, and yet sin through ignorance in some changes. The validity of the change must be tried by another standard than the feelings of the sub- jects of that change ; and in reference to the change made in England at the period referred to, such would have been, and is, cause for re- pentance ; that is, for having so long offended God by a blind adherence to vanities which could not profit ; but, at the same time, a cause of great joy and rejoicing for the manifestation of the goodness of God in the deliverance of our nation from the errors and slavery of darkness into the light and liberty of the true religion of his beloved Son. Thus it was in the days of Josiah. When the book of the law was found, and its words read in the ears of the king, he rent his clothes. The people, too, abased themselves for their sin and corrup- tions which prevailed in the absence of the revealed will of Heaven, but they also kept a passover and a joyous and holy feast, to shew their sense of gra- titude for deliverance. While, therefore, we subscribe to the inexpe- diency nay, the evil of change in religious teach- ing, we cannot allow deep repentance to be the test of that change. In another and following part of his introduction, the author of the Tract enforces the important question of unity. His words are, 41 "On these grounds, were there no others, the present writer, for one, will be no party to the ordinary political methods by which professed reforms are carried or compassed in this day. We can do nothing till we act ' with one accord ;' we can have no accord in action till we agree together in heart ; we cannot agree without a supernatural influence ; we cannot have a super- natural influence unless we pray for it; we cannot pray accept- ably without repentance and confession. Our church's strength would be irresistible, humanly speaking, were it but at unity with itself ; if it remains divided, part against part, we shall see the energy which was meant to subdue the world preying upon itself, according to our Saviour's express assurance, that such a house ' cannot stand.' Till we feel this, till we seek one an- other as brethren, not lightly throwing aside our private opinions, which we seem to feel we have received from above, from an ill-regulated, untrue desire of unity, but returning to each other in heart, and coming together to God to do for us what we cannot do for ourselves, no change can be for the better. Till her members are stirred up to this religious course, let the church sit still ; let her be content to be in bondage ; let her work in chains ; let her submit to her imperfections as a punishment ; let her go on teaching with the stammering lips of ambiguous formularies, and inconsistent precedents, and principles but partially developed. We are not better than our fathers ; let us bear to be what Hammond was, or Andrews, or Hooker ; let us not faint under that body of death, which they bore about in patience ; nor shrink from the penalty of sins, which they inherited from the age before them." We agree with the author in his disapprobation of the ordinary political methods by which pro- fessed reforms are too often carried. We have certainly had, for some years, painful proof of the danger of applying political machinery to the re- formation of the church. We do not wish to ex- press our opinion of those who would make the church of Christ, so happily established among us, 42 a mere political puppet, something for statesmen to play with, in the absence of a better toy where- with to amuse and deceive the people. We will not state our opinion of such men, but, if we were to believe themselves, we might well imagine that the days of pure patriotism had once again visited our world, when men hung their harps on the willows because Zion was laid in the dust, and preferred Jerusalem above their chiefest joy. We have, in truth, suffered by the daring conduct of such re- formers, who, nothing dismayed by the example of Uzzah, have been so ready to put forth their un- hallowed, because unauthorized, hands to steady the ark of God. May our present rulers prove themselves true friends of the church, not merely such as may suit the temper and fashion of the times, but such as may best commend themselves and their work to the great Head of the church Himself. The very heathen could instruct us with their " Discite justitiam moniti, et non temnere Divos" As to unity, it is, indeed, an unspeakable bless- ing, but it seems far from us. The golden rule of Augustine, " In necessariis unitas, in dttbiis libertas, in omnibus caritas" is quite forgotten the only way which we can see to true unity : we speak of unity so far as our actions are concerned, but do not at all set aside the influence of the Holy Ghost as the cause of 43 and guide to unity : but to speak of our own actions, the only way to true unity is for the peo- ple to become true churchmen ; to avoid the striving's and factious contentions of dissent on the one hand, and of strange and far-fetched opinions and interpretations on the other. " Media tutissimus ibis," says the philosopher. This is a good rule, and this was the good old fashion of our divines in days gone by. We have often been both pleased and amused with the description of a good church- man, which we beg permission to introduce to our readers. "In matters of doctrine he (Hacket) embraced no private and singular opinions, as many great men delight to do, in vetere via novam semitam qucerentes, says the father (Jerome), but was in all points a perfect Protestant, according to the Articles of the church of England ; always accounting it a spice of pride and vanity to affect singularity in any opinions or ex- positions of Scripture, without great cause ; and withal very dangerous to affect precipices, as goats use when they may walk in plain paths."* We are every day more firmly convinced of the fact, that the loss of vital Christianity, wheresoever we see that loss, is to be traced to a departure from the doctrine, worship, and discipline of the church. And no wonder that when men wander from the church, even in their thoughts, they should suffer loss, and be exposed to the barren pastures of the mountains of pride. If Christ hath esta- * Allport's Life of Davenant. 44 blished a church, He hath established it for a given purpose ; and if \ve search into His mind as con- tained in revelation, or as we may be allowed to gather it from the history of His kingdom on earth, that given purpose is, to not only reconcile sinners to God, but to instruct and feed them when so re- conciled, until, by His mercy, they reach the land where they shall hunger no more. And in speaking thus, we must add, that we do not think that the church has much choice between the man who disturbs its unity by a causeless and violent rending of himself and others from its com- munion, or the individual who would disturb its peace by forcing upon its Articles the countenance of corruptions which they not only cannot sanc- tion, but which they were written to condemn, and who, by such a line of proceeding, lays the foundation of defection on the part of others from the church. The only difference, in our opinion, is, that whereas the act of each individual is in itself pure schism, one of them remains within the pale of the church whose Articles he violates and whose mem- bers he divides ; the other retires to a distance from its communion, and from his less favoured position aims his shaft against it, until, wearied in his efforts, he is reminded of the instruction of the fable, " Cease, viper, you bite against a file;" or, in the language of the prophet, " No weapon that 45 is formed against thee shall prosper, and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn." But while we agree with the author of the Tract in his view of the importance and strength of unity, and in his desire to promote that Christian grace, we must say that we do not at all see that our church is, as by him described, a system of bondage a kind of prison-house, in which we are compelled to work in chains. We cannot under- stand how any man, who has solemnly pledged himself on the altar of the church of England, could speak so as to imply that submission to her voice is a punishment, and that she teaches her children (< with the stammering lips of ambiguous formularies and inconsistent precedents, and principles but partially developed. 1 ' We must say, and we do so with all due respect, that when we first read this disloyal and highly offensive language, we were driven to the conclu- sion that either the imagination and pen of the author got the advantage of his mind : or that he was guilty of actual treason against the church, of whose same formularies he has, before God and the congregation of saints, pledged himself that they are in strict accordance with the word of God, and which formularies he has bound himself to de- fend. We have not anything to do with private or reserved opinions or purposes of the writer ; we 46 have to do only with the words as they stand in the sentence now before us, and in connexion with the matter and avowed end (so far as any is avowed) of the Tract itself. As to the remainder of the passage, " we are not better than our fathers, &c.," we confess that we do not understand its meaning, nor do we see the dreadful punishment of being obliged to " bear to be what Hammond was, or Andrews, or Hooker." We do not see the meaning of this sentence. Our inability to do so may possibly arise from an unac- quaintance with the sentiments of the writer, as he may have expressed them in other publications. But we feel that we have every right to offer these observations. Are they ministers of Christ who send forth such matter? So are we who offer these remarks upon their productions. We should feel such writing as that which is now before us highly offensive coming from any quarter, much more so when it comes from a fellow-pres- byter of a church, whose holy standard has been entrusted to the custody of its ministers ; not that they may lower its pure colours thus before the enemy, but that, if called on to do so, they may exalt it even at the stake, and fight for it faithfully, and preserve its purity even unto death. Nor is the following passage less offensive to the mind of a true churchman : " But these remarks are beyond our present scope, which is 47 merely to shew that, while our Prayer-book is acknowledged on all hands to be of Catholic origin, our Articles also, the off- spring of an uncatholic age, are, through God's good provi- dence, to say the least, not uncatholic, and may be subscribed by those who aim at being Catholic in heart and doctrine." Is this the easy way to speak of the times, and articles of the days, of our deliverance from cap- tivity, and of the re-establishment of our church in purity and independence ? Our Articles, " the offspring of an uncatholic age /" are, " to say the least, not uncatholic," because, for- sooth, they have been protected by a special inter- ference of God's good providence, and therefore they " may be subscribed by those who aim at being Catholic in heart and doctrine." What does our author mean by an uncatholic age, or by what rule does he measure his catholicity ? Surely he leaves his readers the option of measur- ing catholicity by simple subjection to the Papacy ; for we cannot find any other proof of the uncatho- licity of England in the day when her Articles were delivered, than a determination not to submit any longer to the usurped tyranny of the Pope over the bodies and souls of Englishmen, nor any more to teach the Pope's religion to those who should have been taught the religion of Christ. The divines of the church of England who lived in the days of the Reformation were not so devoid of reason or know- ledge as to set themselves against the Catholic doc- trine or discipline of the church of Christ, or to send 48 forth anything which might shew them to be un- catholic. We are not, then, much indebted to our author for this his concession in favour of our Articles that they are " not uncatholic though the offspring of an uncatholic age /" Nor can we value the permis- sion which we receive at his hands, for those " who aim at being Catholic in heart and doctrine to sub- scribe the Articles of the Church of England ! Without this permission multitudes, in days past and present multitudes, who well understood the question of the church, have cheerfully subscribed those Articles, and yet those individuals were truly Catholic in heart and doctrine. If, then, we are to limit the permission to such persons, then it is as much out of place and as self-important as the assumption on the part of the Pope to make the efficacy of many things de- pend on his sanction which, again, as Mason ob- serves, much resembles the conduct of the Kham of Tartary, who, when he has first satisfied himself, has a trumpet sounded, and then gives the kings of the earth leave to dine.* But if the permission was or is designed for a few of the author's private friends who may have been, or who are wandering in the direction of Rome, then we say that the writer of the Tract has displayed the greatest want of wisdom and of loy- * Note 5. Appendix A. 49 alty ; want of wisdom, by vainly imagining that such shallow concessions such insignificant relax- ations, could possibly satisfy the minds of those who, if they know anything, or can be acquitted of being very weak and changeable men, must be prepared to receive with blind subjection all the heresy of the Vatican. Does our author, then, for a moment, imagine that such trifling concessions, though made at the expense of the church of which he is a minister, can satisfy any man who has been beguiled by the devices of the Papacy, and who must not, under pain of mortal sin, doubt anything which may proceed ex cathedra from the Roman Pontiff" the vicar of Christ" the " Deus alter in terris" ? Surely the author's efforts, if thus designed, have in them but a " show of wisdom." Or, if he erred in want of wisdom, had he no respect for the church of England ? Where was his loyalty ? where his determination to watch over her in every respect, and to be ready to drive away all erroneous and strange doctrine far from her communion, if, on an imaginary private necessity, he is ready to lay her honour in the dust, and try to prove, what even by the greatest eiforts of special pleading he cannot do that the church is guilty of the strangest conduct in sanctioning the very errors which she speaks to condemn ? The principle of holy Paul " I will eat no meat E 50 while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend" is much to be admired and adopted. But neither St. Paul nor his principle would sanc- tion the bending of truth to accommodate error ; or the making an experiment on three or four weak and wandering minds, at the expense of any branch of the Catholic church of Christ. We would say to our author " Non tali auxilio, nee defensoribus istis, Tempus eget." 51 CHAPTER V. Promulgation of Articles Whether an uncatholic Act How viewed by different bodies Inconsistencies of those who make light of Articles, or those who impugn the Articles of the Church of England Whether and under what circum- stances a Church has a right to promulgate Articles View of the early Church on this subject Nature of the Articles of the Church of England Whether the publishing of such Articles could have compromised the catholicity of the Church of England. WE would now address ourselves to the question of the Thirty-nine Articles, and examine how far, or in what way, the promulgation of articles at such a period of the age or existence of our church could have compromised her character as a pure branch of the Catholic church of Christ ; or, in other words, whether the promulgation of a new body of articles at the time of the Reformation, was or was not an " uncatholic" act. This question may be viewed in a different light by at least two classes of society ; but it is a ques- tion which involves no difficulty to the instructed E2 52 churchman. One of the classes now referred to would at once concede our right to introduce new articles new churches new faith, just as may best suit the expediency of the day. And yet those who would grant, and who act upon, this assumed liberty, always protest that their standard of appeal is Holy Writ. But it is too evident that such persons hold to another and superior rule, in subjection to which they would bring even the word of Heaven the very and only rule which they profess to follow. The other rule which they thus unduly exalt is their own preconceived opinions or fancies ; con- sequently such persons have, as Jeremy Taylor expresses it, only " an ambulatory creed." If we would find out their religion, we engage in a fruitless undertaking, for, except the private opinions of some persons who may be enticed into or born in these communions, it is impossible to arrive at their faith. They have no positive article beyond, "we believe what the Bible teaches;" and they are wholly to be known and are kept together by a negative religion, or rather, a reli- gion of negatives. "We are not churchmen," " nor papists." Such always manifest more clearly what they are not than what they are, what they do not than what they do hold and maintain. There are connected with such a system many and fearful evils. 53 Now, to such persons it were little use to vindi- cate the promulgation of articles in the sixteenth century of the Christian church ; because they themselves will and must allow the establishment of new articles, or even a new ministry, whenever conscience may be forced or blinded so as to prove a case of necessity, and to justify what is done. But even to such persons we would not be indif- ferent, but would gladly take them out of the hands of those who merely make merchandise of their souls while they gratify their own pride or self- importance and presumption ; and we would shew them, that though we might feel perfectly safe in their approval of our promulgation of articles at the time and under the circumstances referred to, yet we would prove even to them, that we can esta- blish not merely an alleged necessity for, but a full justification of, what our church has done. As to the other class, they are those who cling with such blind devotion to every doctrine or sen- timent that has a foundation in some work which is to be considered authority, solely because it may chance to have the plea of antiquity, that they look upon the least possible change or deviation from the path in which they have been accustomed to tread, as little, if anything, short of the sacrifice of all those principles which constitute the being, or, in more modern language, the essence or life of a church. 54 This class of individuals wanders from the true view of the subject, as does the other ; the only difference being that the one now before us wan- ders in a different direction, and makes a much greater and more troublesome noise about a very simple subject. We are now, be it remembered, engaged in the mere consideration of the right, consistently with Catholic rule, to promulgate our articles, without, at present, any reference to the nature of the articles themselves. There can be no doubt but that the assumption of the power to promulgate any given faith or articles of faith, is most directly contrary to the Word of God ; nay, that such as- sumption is despotic and blasphemous in the highest degree. For such an act is an arbitrary assumption of the highest prerogatives of Heaven ; and yet such has been, such is, the sin, the crown- ing sin, of the Papacy. The nature or quality of the faith which she has enjoined, though in some instances bad as may be, is a question very subor- dinate to the sin involved in the assumption of such power. Now, against the assumption of such power by any individual or church, reason, the Catholic church, and revelation most decidedly protest; and the disregard of this protest has brought in nearly all the divisions which have occurred in the Chris- tian world. It is not necessary to prove, from 55 either reason or revelation, the sin or danger of such assumption of unlawful power. We come to one short mode of settling the question with our opponents, who are in the interest of the papal see, and of exculpating and justifying our own church. Bishop Taylor states the matter thus : " First. We allege that this very power of making new arti- cles is a novelty, and expressly against the doctrine of the pri- mitive church ; and we prove it, first, by the words of the apostle, saying, If we, or an angel from heaven, shall preach unto you any other gospel (viz., in whole or in part, for there is the same reason of them both) than that which we have preached, let him be anathema ; and secondly, by the sentence of the Fathers in the third general council, that at Ephesus, (that it should not be lawful for any man to publish or com- pose another faith or creed than that which was defined by the Nicene council : and that whosoever shall dare to compose or offer any such to any persons willing to be converted from paganism, Judaism, or heresy, if they were bishops or clerks, they should be deposed, if laymen, they should be accursed.) And yet, in the church of Rome, faith and Christianity increase like the moon ; Bromyard complained of it long since, and the mischief increases daily. They have now a new article of faith ready for the stamp, which may very shortly become necessary to salvation ; we mean, that of the immaculate conception of the blessed Virgin Mary. Whether the Pope be above a council or no ; we are not sure whether it be an article of faith amongst them or not ; it is very near one, if it be not. Bellar- mine would fain have us believe that the Council of Constance, approving the bull of Pope Martin V., declared for the Pope's supremacy. But John Gerson, who was at the council, says that the council did abate those heights to which flattery had advanced the Pope ; and that, before the council, they spoke such great things of the Pope, which afterwards moderate men durst not speak ; but yet some others spake them so confidently 56 before it, that he that should then have spoken to the contrary would hardly have escaped the note of heresy ; and that these men continued the same pretensions even after the council. But the Council of Basil decreed for the council against the Pope ; and the Council of Lateran under Leo the Tenth, de- creed for the Pope against the council. So that it is cross and pile ; and whether for a penny when it can be done ; it is now a known case, it shall become an article of faith. But for the present it is a probationary article, and, according to Bellar- mine's expression, fere de fide, it is almost an article of faith ; they want a little age, and then they may go alone. But the Council of Trent hath produced a strange new article ; but it is sine controversia credendum, it must be believed, and must not be controverted ; that although the ancient fathers did give the communion to infants, yet tliey did not believe it necessary to salvation. Now this being a matter of fact, whether they did or did not believe it, every man that reads their writings can be able to inform himself, and besides that, it is strange that this should be determined by a council, and determined against evident truth, (it being notorious that divers of the fathers did say it is necessary to salvation ;) the decree itself is beyond all bounds of modesty, and a strange pretension of empire over the Christian belief." In the canon referred to, the Council of Ephesus decreed against the enlargement of theNicene Creed ; and the next, the fourth general council, the Council of Chalcedon, set its seal to the same doctrine, and so supported the order of the Council of Ephesus. We cannot give better proof of the wisdom of these canons, than the mention of the fact, that the addition of but two words to the Nicene Creed caused much contention, and therefore confusion, and was, in a short time, the parent of no less than thirty " explicative creeds !" And yet the 57 addition made was not a new article of faith, but merely a scriptural explanation or enlargement of an article contained in the creed itself. But such was the jealousy of the early Christian church in guard- ing the prerogative of Heaven, and consequently the peace and happiness of the church, that they were afraid to sanction even the shadow of an addition to that symbol which set forth all that a Christian ought to receive, as the faith once, or once for all, delivered unto the saints. Now, it is not at all likely that we should have quarrelled with the Papacy on account of her assumed power to make and enjoin new articles of faith, and then have forthwith fallen into the same sin ourselves. Nay, we have been most careful to uphold the end or object of a Christian creed, which is well expressed in the following passage, and which end is best defeated by the making of any, even the least, additions to the faith : " In these particular instances there is no variety of articles, save only that in the annexes of the several expressions such things are expressed; as besides that Christ is come, they tell from whence, and to what purpose ; and whatsoever is expressed or is to these purposes implied, is made articulate and explicate, in the short and admirable mysterious creed of St. Paul, Rom. x. ' This is the word which we preach : that if thou shall confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. This is the great and entire complexion of a Christian's faith, and since salvation is promised to the belief of this creed, either a snare is laid for us, with a purpose to de- 58 ceive us, or else nothing is of prime and original necessity to be believed, but this " Jesus Christ our Redeemer ;" and all that which is the necessary parts, means, or main actions, of work- ing this redemption for us, and the honour for him, is in the bowels and fold of the great Article, and claims an explicit be- lief by the same reason that binds us to the belief of its first complexion, without which neither the thing could be acted nor the proposition understood. For the act of believing pro- positions is not for itself, but in order to certain ends, as ser- mons are to good life and obedience; for (excepting that it acknowledges God's veracity, and so is a direct act of religion) believing a revealed proposition hath no excellency in itself; but in order to that end for which we are instructed in such revelations. Now God's great purpose being to bring us to him by Jesus Christ, Christ is our medium to God, obedience is the medium to Christ, and faith the medium to obedience, and therefore is to have its estimate in proportion to its proper end ; and those things are necessary which necessarily promote the end, without which obedience cannot be encouraged or prudently enjoined ; so that those articles are necessary that is, those are fundamental points upon which we build our obedi- ence ; and as the influence of the article is to the persuasion or engagement of obedience, so they have their degrees of necessity. Now all that Christ, when he preached, taught us to believe, and all that the apostles in their sermons propound, all aim at this, that we should acknowledge Christ for our Law- giver and our Saviour ; so that nothing can be necessary, by a prime necessity, to be believed explicitly, but such things which are therefore parts of the great Article, because they either encourage our services, or oblige them, such as declare Christ's greatness in himself or his goodness to us ; so that although we must neither deny nor doubt of anything which we know our great Master hath taught us, yet salvation is in special, and by name, annexed to the belief of those articles only which have in them the endearments of our services, or the support of our confidence, or the satisfaction of our hopes ; such as are, Jesus Christ the Son of the living God ; the crucifixion and resurrec- tion of Jesus ; forgiveness of sins by his blood ; resurrection of the dead, and life eternal ; because these propositions qualify 59 Christ for our Saviour and our Lawgiver; the one, to engage our services; the other, to endear them ; for so much is necessary as will make us to be his servants, and his disciples ; and what can be required more? This only salvation is promised to the explicit belief of those articles, and therefore those only are necessary, and those are sufficient ; but thus, to us, in the for- mality of Christians, which is a formality superadded to a former capacity, we, before we are Christians, are reasonable creatures, and capable of a blessed eternity; and there is a creed which is the gentile's creed, which is so supposed in the Chris- tian's creed, as it is supposed in a Christian to be a man, and that is, oportet accedentem ad Deum credere Deum esse et esse remuneratorem qwerentium eum." BISHOP TAYLOR. In reference to this, the apostles' creed was termed " The Rule of Faith," meaning, that it was to so regulate the belief of Christians, that every- thing, whether in itself true or false, was to be rejected, at least as Christianity, which was not found included in that concise symbol of the Chris- tian religion. "Did not the apostles desire to know nothing but Christ Jesus, and him crucified, and risen again ? And did not they preach this faith to all the world, and did they preach any other ; but severely reprove all curious and subtle questions, and all pretences of science or knowledge, falsely so called, when men languished about questions or strife of words ? Are we not taught by the apostles that we ought not to receive our weak brother unto doubtful disputations ; and that the servant of God ought not to strive ? Did they not say, that all that keep the foundation shall be saved ; some with and some without loss ? and that erring brethren are to be tolerated ; and that if they be servants of God, and yet, in a matter of doctrine or opinion, otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this also unto them ? And if these things be thus, why shall one Christian church condemn another, which is built upon the same foun- 60 dation with herself? And how can it be imagined, that the servants of God cannot be saved now as in the days of the apostles? Are we wiser than they? are our doctors more learned, or more faithful ? Is there another covenant made with the church since their days ? or is God less merciful to us than he was to them ? Or hath he made the way to heaven narrower in the end of the world than at the beginning of the Christian church ? Do men live better lives now than at the first ; so that a holy life is so enlarged, that the foundation of faith laid at first is not broad enough to support the new build- ings. We find it much otherwise. And men need not enlarge the articles and conditions of faith in these degenerate ages, wherein when Christ comes he shall hardly upon earth find any faith at all ; and, if there were need, yet no man is able to do it, because Christ only is our Lord and Master, and no man is master of our faith. But to come closer to the thing. It is certain, there is nothing simply necessary to salvation now, that was not so always : and this must be confessed by all that admit of the so much commended rule of Vincentius Lirinensis ; that which was always, and everywhere, believed by all, that's the rule of faith ; and therefore there can be no new measure, no new article, no new determination, no declaration obliging us to believe any proposition that was not always believed. And therefore, as that which was first is true, that which was at first and nothing else is necessary. Nay, suppose many truths to be found out by industry, and by divine assistances, yet no more can be necessary ; because nothing of this could ever be wanting to the church. Therefore the new discovered truth cannot of itself be necessary. Neither can the discovery make it necessary to be believed, unless I find it to be discovered and revealed by him, whose very discovery, though accidental, yet can make it necessary ; that is, unless I be convinced that God hath spoken it. Indeed, if that happen, there is no fur- ther enquiry. But, because there are no new revelations since the apostles died, whatever comes in after them is only by man's ratiocination ; and therefore can never go beyond a pro- bability in itself, and never ought to pretend higher, lest God's incommunicable right be invaded, which is to be the lord of human understandings. The consequent of all this is, there 61 can be nothing of necessity to be believed, which the church of God, taught by the apostles, did not believe necessary." BISHOP TAYLOR. Now, having thus shewed the mind of the pri- mitive church on the subject of new articles of, or additions to the, faith, and having shewed the reason of its jealousy in thus preserving the faith pure and immaculate, as Christ had entrusted it to his church, we would draw attention to the distinc- tion which here forces itself upon us, and which demands our consideration. The following will explain our meaning : " Here a necessary distinction is to be remembered between articles of faith and articles of doctrine : the one ai-e held neces- sary to salvation, the other are only believed tp be true ; that is, to be revealed in the Scriptures, which is a sufficient ground for esteeming them true. Articles of faith are doctrines that are so necessary to salvation, that without believing them there is not a federal right to the covenant of grace : these are not many, and, in the establishment of any doctrine for such, it is necessary both to prove it from Scripture, and to prove its be- ing necessary to salvation, as a mean settled by the covenant of grace in order to it. We ought not, indeed, to hold commu- nion with such as make doctrines, that we believe not to be true, to pass for articles of faith ; though we may hold commu- nion with such as do think them true, without stamping so high an authority upon them. To give one instance of this in an undeniable particular. In the days of the apostles there were Judaisers of two sorts : some thought the Jewish nation was still obliged to observe the Mosaical law ; but others went fur- ther, and thought that such an observation was indispensably necessary to salvation : both these opinions were wrong ; but the one was tolerable, and the other was intolerable, because it pretended to make that a necessary condition of salvation, 62 which God had not commanded. The apostles complied with the Judaisers of the first sort, as they became all things to all men, that so they might gain some (1 Cor. ix. 19 to 23) of every sort of men : yet they declared openly against the other, and said, that if men were circumcised, or were willing to come under such a yoke, Christ profited them nothing , and upon that supposition he had died in vain. From this plain precedent we see what a difference we ought to make between errors in doc- trinal matters, and the imposing them as articles of faith. We may live in communion with those who hold errors of the one sort, but must not with those of the other. This also shews the tyranny of that church which has imposed the belief of every one of her doctrines on the consciences of her votaries, under the highest pains of anathemas, and as articles of faith. But whatever those of Trent did, this church very carefully avoided the laying that weight upon even those doctrines which she receives as true ; and therefore, though she drew up a large form of doctrine, yet to all her lay -sons this is only a standard of what she teaches, and they are no more to them than articles of church-communion. The citations that are brought from those two great primates, Laud and Bramhall, go no further than this : they do not seem to relate to the clergy that subscribe them, but to the laity and body of the people. The people, who do only join in communion with us, may well continue to do so, though they may not be fully satisfied with every propo- sition in them : unless they should think that they struck against any of the articles, or foundations of faith ; and, as they truly observe, there is a great difference to be observed in this par- ticular between the imperious spirit of the Church of Rome, and the modest freedom which ours allows." BURNET. Again, " The question between us and the papal church in this point is, not whether the church has power to decree rites or cere- monies, and authority in matters of faith. This cannot be denied ; every church has this power within itself; but whether the church has authority to enlarge the catholic and apostolic faith by decreeing as necessary to salvation cer- tain articles, which, by her own confession, have not any other foundation except only her own decree. This is the question be- 63 tween the reformed and the Church of Rome. Our articles are articles of church communion or church discipline, drawn up for the better furtherance of the faith of Christ, and rendered necessary for the reasons given by our author in his introduc- tion, p. 5. But it must ever be borne in mind, that so far from adding anything to the faith of Christ, two of those articles, the 6th and 20th, declare the Bible to be the sole standard of faith ; and that, as it is not lawful to decree anything contrary to it, so it is not in the power of the church to add anything, even though it be not contrary, to that revelation given in the in- spired Word of God. This which we reject is the power usurped by the Church of Rome ; in which matter she has not only daringly set at nought the solemn injunctions in the Word of God, but also the decrees of councils which she professes to so highly reverence." PAGE'S BURNET, NOTE, ART. XX. Our church, then, never proposed a new article of faith never altered or set aside the creeds of the Catholic church; nay, the sixth, eighth, and twentieth of her Articles shew that she has not only not done so, but that she has solemnly abjured the right or power to set up anything against or in addition to the Holy Scriptures, or to add to or supersede the ancient creeds of the Catholic church ; and so long as England adheres to the line of conduct to which she is pledged by these three articles that is, as long as these remain articles of our church no man can justify his conduct in thrusting upon his brethren, to the dis- turbance of the peace of the church, every far- fetched doctrine which he may drag out of the dust of real or pretended antiquity ; and, on the other hand, no man can justify his separation from the church of England, much less his setting up a 64 new church for himself; for by those articles, no article of faith can be enjoined on his conscience, which, as a Christian, he is not bound to believe, and without the belief of which he cannot be con- sidered a true Christian at all. And if, for other things, he flies in the face of God, and breaks the unity of His church, and ex- poses the wounded body of Christ to the scorn of the infidel, to God he must one day, except he repent, answer for his sin. For whatever popular clamour may assert to the contrary, there is such a sin as the sin of schism, and the guilt and danger of that sin, though clearly explained in the Word of God, is fearfully trifled with in the present day. If, then, we have, in obedience to imperious necessity which necessity we shall presently dis- cuss made and enjoined on our clergy subscrip- tion to the Thirty-nine Articles, we have not in so doing violated, in even the least degree, any prin- ciple truly Catholic. Wherever we have spoken on the subject of doctrine, we have merely given the mind of the church of England respecting the same ; but we have not dared to put ourselves in the place of God, by creating and imposing on men even one new article of faith. We have only done what the church in the earliest and purest ages always did ; we have endeavoured to baffle the ingenuity of carnal speculation, and to silence the prevarications of dishonest men, by not allowing 65 the Scripture view of those articles of faith to be set aside, that their vain conceits may occupy the place, to the ruin of immortal souls. And in re- spect to our negative articles, we have only, in following the Catholic rule, rejected all those inven- tions of men, which are mere heresies obtruded upon the church. As to those Articles which refer to the internal policy of our kingdom, they are set forth in ac- cordance with the liberty allowed to, and ever ex- ercised by, particular churches. So that let our articles be considered as a whole, or in any or every part of their threefold division, in whatever light they are viewed, either as to the framing or the promulgation of them, the act was not only not uncatholic, but strictly Catholic, and in close ac- cordance with the liberty ceded to, and acted upon by many branches of the church Catholic, without the least possible prejudice to the command or spirit of the Catholic church of Christ. 66 CHAPTER VI. Catholicity of the Thirty-nine Articles History of Advance towards reformation of the faith of the Church Standard of that reformation Abolition of the Pope's supremacy Further advance in the work of revision of the Articles of the Church The articles of King Edward's reign. WE now come to a consideration of the Articles themselves, having, in our former chapter, con- fined ourselves solely to the abstract question of the promulgation of Articles at an advanced period of the existence of a church. It is true that we did in the last chapter name three of those Articles so promulgated by the church of England. We used them, however, not to shew their truth or false- hood their catholicity or uncatholicity in them- selves but merely as internal evidence respecting the act of the imposition of the whole code ; or, in other words, to prove that the act of promulgation was not designed to interfere with any divine or Catholic rule ; that such interference could not have been entertained by the framers of the Arti- cles, and never can be entertained so long as those three Articles are obeyed in the letter and the spirit. 67 We would now shew that there is not anything in the Articles themselves which could do that which the mere promulgation of them did not, and could not, effect viz., violate in any degree the rule of the Catholic church ; for the nature of even articles of doctrine might possibly have compro- mised the right of promulgation. Had, for in- stance, our reformers gone too far, or taken too much upon them had they erred, either through ignorance, inadvertence, or design, they might then, in the discharge of a duty lawful in itself, and moreover, truly consistent with Catholic prin- ciples, have introduced some points which would have marred their professed object, and which would have placed the church in the unhappy posi- tion of having either added to, or taken from, or contradicted, the Christian faith, and so have placed a barrier in the way of Catholic communion. We suppose such a case solely for the purpose of dis- tinction, and of proving more clearly the perfect catholicity, in every respect, of the Articles of our church. The history of the Articles is briefly this : The great corruptions in doctrine and worship which prevailed during the dominion of the papacy were so great, that many nations groaned under them and sighed for deliverance. The necessity of we will not use the word change, but would use the term, purgation, so as to bring back the Christian r2 68 church to its originally pure position, was univer- sally felt, and for a long time by not merely Eng- land and English divines, but by other countries, and by many divines of the Roman church ; nay, the necessity was granted even by Popes, and by them reformation was promised. The Council of Trent assembled and decreed for reformation. We are told, however, of one protester against any reformation. Nicholas Scomberg, a Dominican and cardinal, opposed the idea, and pressed the Pope and cardinals with these wise reasons : " It would give occasion to the Lutherans to boast that he (Luther) had forced the Pope to make that reformation ; and, above all, it would be a beginning to take away not only the abuses, but good uses also, and so to endanger the whole state of religion." With other nations reformation in doctrine, worship, and discipline, was not an easy work ; indeed, the tyranny which lived upon the corrup- tions of the day proved too strong for some nations who struggled for spiritual liberty. But where, as in our kingdom, the Reformation was a national act that is, where a professedly* Chris- * The present question is not iu any degree aftected by the character of the then reigning sovereign of England ; therefore it would be mere waste of our own time and of the reader's patience to anticipate and discuss the cavils which might be raised on this subject. 69 tian king stood in his position as a nursing father of the church then reformation was begun in a lawful manner, and was conducted to good success. The character of our Reformation bears a strong resemblance to that under Josiah, and may be well summed up in the words of one of its great pro- moters Elizabeth. * ' England ' (said she) hath embraced no new religion, nor any other than that which Jesus Christ hath commanded, that the primitive and Catholic church hath exercised, and the antient fathers have alwaies with one voice and one minde approved." In the earlier stages of the Reformation the par- liament passed acts for the abolition of the autho- rity and jurisdiction of the Pope within the realms of England ; while the convocation which sat about the same time was occupied in the question of the articles of religion. After much debating between the two parties, those who were in favour of the Pope and those who were anxious to assert the in- dependence of the church, the former party headed by the archbishop of York, the other by the arch- bishop of Canterbury, the adoption of the promul- gation of a body or collection of Articles was car- ried. " This being published occasioned great variety of censures. Those that desired reformation were glad to see so great a step once made ; and did not doubt but this would make way for further changes. They rejoiced to see the Scriptures and 70 the ancient creeds made the standards of the faith, without mentioning tradition or the decrees of the church. Then the foundation of Christian faith was truly stated, and the terms of the covenant between God and man in Christ were rightly opened, without the niceties of the schools of either side. Im- mediate worship of images and saints was also removed, and purgatory was declared uncertain by the Scripture. These were great advantages to them ; but the establishing the neces- sity of auricular confession, the corporal presence in the sacra- ment, the keeping up and doing reverence to images, and the praying to saints, did allay their joy ; yet they still counted it a victory, to have things brought under debate, and to have some grosser abuses taken away. The other party were un- speakably troubled. Four sacraments were passed over, which would encourage ill affected people to neglect them. The gain- ful trade by the belief of purgatory was put down ; for though it was said to be good to give alms for praying for the dead, yet since both the dreadful stories of the miseries of purgatory and the certainty of redeeming souls out of them by masses, were made doubtful, the people's charity and bounty that way would soon abate. And, in a word, the bringing matters under dispute was a great mortification to them ; for all con- cluded that this was but a preamble to what they might expect afterwards. " When these things were seen beyond sea, the papal party made everywhere great use of it, to shew the necessity of ad- hering to the Pope ; since the king of England, though, when he broke off from his obedience to the apostolic see, he pre- tended he would maintain the Catholic faith entire, yet was now making great changes in it. But others, that were more moderate, acknowledged that there was great temper and pru- dence in contriving these Articles. And it seems, the emperor, and the more learned 'divines about him, both approved of the precedent, and liked the particulars so well, that, not many years after, the emperor published a work not unlike this, called the " Interim ;" because it was to be in force in that interim, till all things were more fully debated and determined by a general council, which in many particulars agreed with these articles. Yet some stricter persons censured this work much. 71 as being a political daubing ; in which, they said, there was more pains taken to gratify persons, and serve particular ends, than to assert truth in a free and unbiassed way, such as be- came divines. This was again excused ; and it was said that all things could not be attained on a sudden ; that some of the bishops and divines, who afterwards arrived at a clearer under- standing of some matters, were not then so fully convinced about them; and so it was their ignorance, and not their cowardice or policy, that made them compliant in some things. Besides, it was said, that as our Saviour did not reveal all things to his disciples, till they were able to bear them, and as the apostles did not of a sudden abolish all the rights of Judaism, but for some time, to gain the Jews, complied with them, and went to the temple, and offered sacrifices ; so the people were not to be overdriven in this change. The clergy must be brought out of their ignorance by degrees, and then the people were to be better instructed ; but to drive furiously and do all at once might have spoiled the whole design, and totally alienated those who were to be drawn on by degrees ; it might have also much endangered the peace of the nation, the people being much disposed, by the practices of the friars, to rise in arms ; therefore these slow steps were thought the surer and better method." BURNET. So far, then, was some advance made in the purgation of the Catholic faith in the separation of the chaff from the wheat the dross from the gold. The historian has given prudential reasons for reform not having been carried farther at that time. But in addition to those which may be adduced from the danger to the nation by reason of the seditious conduct of the monks, who derived a flourishing trade from the superstitions under which the Catholic faith had been too long buried, we may add, that it is not easy for us, who live at 72 such a distance from those ages, to sit in judg- ment upon those who had been kept in darkness, and who therefore could not all at once see clearly to divide the truth from those corruptions which had been palmed upon the church as part of the true Catholic faith. Thus, too, it was, in the days of Hezekiah, and Josiah, and afterwards in the re-establishment of the pure worship of God under Ezra, after the return of the Jews from the land of their captivity ; the evil was not cast out all at once ; but as the people came to search the Word of God and to know His mind, so by that standard, and by that alone, they measured what was held by the church, and cast away everything from the worship of the sanctuary which was not found written in the law of the Lord. In the reign of Edward VI. still further progress was made in the matter of reformation and in the purification of the Catholic faith. Articles were prepared and published, which shewed the desire to have all things in accordance with the Holy Scriptures, and consequently to put away all that did not square with that standard of appeal. Independently, however, of the comparatively slow progress of the reformation of the church, which may have arisen from the darkness which covered the land and the gross darkness which enveloped the people, and from the fact of even those with whom reformation must have begun, 73 having been themselves, with few exceptions, too ignorant of the contents of the inspired volume, there was one grand obstacle to a national return to the pure Catholic faith that obstacle was, the power which the Pope possessed, by means of the clergy, to arrest the progress of any movement which was not begun and conducted under his im- mediate authority. The power of the Pope was the great idol, to prop up which the false system of religion and the debasing superstitions of the times were made subservient. It was not possible to carry reform in a lawful way, but by means of the clergy. The clergy themselves were the nomi- nees and slaves of an Italian priest. Some may have been unwilling slaves, but they were slaves, and until the power which enslaved them was de- stroyed no good could be expected for the people, especially when that good, in order to deserve the name of good, must have come through the clergy. However, in the year 1534, an act was passed for the abolition of the supremacy of the Pope in England, and for the annihilation of that tyranny which had so long mightily oppressed the people. After much deliberation, examination, and also discussion, it was concluded, " That the Pope's power in England had no good foundation, and had been managed with as much tyranny as it had begun with usurpation ; the exactions of these courts were everywhere heavy, but in no place so intolerable as in England, and though 74 many complaints were made of them in these last three hundred years, yet they got no ease, and all the laws about provisions were still defeated and made ineffectual ; therefore they saw it was impossible to moderate their proceedings ; so that there was no other remedy but to extirpate their pretended authority, and thenceforth to acknowledge the Pope only Bishop of Rome, with the jurisdiction about it defined by the ancient canons; and for the king to reassume his own authority, and the pre- rogatives of his crown ; from which the kings of England had never formally departed, though they had for this last hundred years connived at an invasion and usurpation upon them, which was no longer to be endured." BURNET. Accordingly, in the parliament held from the 1 5th of January to the 30th of March, in the year 1534, an act was passed for the abolition of the Pope's jurisdiction within the realm of England. The act contained several articles, founded on the conclusions at which the parliament had arrived. " They first controverted his, the Pope's, power of dispensing with the law of God." " From that they passed on to examine what jurisdiction he had in England, upon which followed the convicting the clergy in a premunire,* with their submission ; and that led them to * <' It (premunire) took its original from the exorbitant power claimed and exercised in England by the Pope, which, even in the days of blind zeal, was too heavy for our ancestors to bear. It may justly be observed, that religious principles, which, when genuine and pure, have an evident tendency to make their professors better citizens as well as better men, have, when perverted and erroneous, been usually subversive of civil government, and been made both the cloak and the instrument of every pernicious design that can be harboured in the heart of man. The unbounded authority that was exercised 75 dispute the Pope's right to annates, and other exactions, which they condemned : and the condemning all appeals to Rome naturally followed that. And now, so many branches of that power being cut off, the very root was next struck at, and the foundations of the papal authority were examined. For near a year together there had been many public debates about it ; and both in the parliament and convocation the subject was long canvassed ; and all that could be alleged on both sides maturely considered. The several arguments being fully opened in many disputes, and published in several books, all the bishops, abbots, and priors in England, excepting Fisher, bishop of Rochester, were so far satisfied with them, or so un- willing to leave their preferments, that they resolved to com- ply with the changes which the king was resolved to make. Fisher was in great esteem for piety and strictness of life, therefore great pains were used by the archbishop and others to bring him to a compliance, but with no effect. "On the 9th day of March, 1534, the House of Commons began the noted bill for taking away the Pope's power, and sent it to by the Druids in the west, under the influence of pagan super- stition, and the terrible ravages committed by the Saracens in the east, to propagate the religion of Mahomet, both witness to the truth of that ancient universal observation that, in all ages and in all countries, civil and ecclesiastical tyranny are mutually productive of each other. It is therefore the glory of the church of England, that she inculcates due obedience to lawful authority, and hath been, (as her prelates on a trying occasion once expressed it,*) in her principles and practice, ever most unquestionably loyal. The clergy of her persuasion, holy in their doctrines and unblemished in their lives and conversa- tion, are also moderate in their ambition, and entertain just notions of the ties of society and the rights of civil government. As in matters of faith and morality they acknowledge no guide but the Scriptures, so, in matters of external polity and of pri- vate right, they derive all their title from the civil magistrate ; they look up to the king as their head, to the parliament as their lawgiver, and pride themselves in nothing more justly * Address to James II., 1687. 76 the Lords in five days' time, who, after six days longer, passed it without opposition. In this bill ' They set forth the exac- tions of the court of Rome, grounded on the Pope's power of dispensing ; and that as none could dispense with the laws of God, so the king and parliament only could dispense with the laws of the land : therefore such licences and dispensations as were formerly in use, should for the future be granted by the two archbishops, some of which were to be confirmed under the great seal ; and they appointed that hereafter all commerce with Rome should cease. They also declared, that they did not design to alter any article of the Catholic faith of Christendom, or of that which was declared necessary to salvation. They confirmed all the exemptions granted to monasteries by former Popes, but subjected them to the king's visitation ; and gave the king and his council power to examine and reform all in- dulgences and privileges granted by the Pope : the offenders against this law were to be punished according to the statutes of premunire.' This act, reducing the monasteries entirely to the king's authority, put them in no small confusion ; and those who loved the Reformation, rejoiced both to see the Pope's power than in being true members of the church emphatically by law established ; whereas the notions of ecclesiastical liberty, in those who differ from them, as well in one extreme as the other, (for I here only speak of extremes,) are equally and totally de- structive of those ties and obligations by which all society is kept together ; equally encroaching on those rights, which reason and the original contract of every free state in the uni- verse have vested in the sovereign power ; and equally aiming at a distinct independent supremacy of their own, where spiritual men and spiritual causes are concerned. The dread- ful effects of such a religious bigotry, when actuated by erro- neous principles, even of the Protestant kind, are sufficiently evident from the history of the anabaptists in Germany, the covenanters in Scotland, and that deluge of sectaries in Eng- land who murdered their sovereign, overturned the church and monarchy, shook every pillar of law, justice, and private property, and most devoutly established a kingdom of the saints in their stead." BLACKSTONE. 77 extirpated, and to find the Scriptures made the standard of religion.' 1 ECHARD. Thus was this obstacle to the propagation of the true Catholic faith removed. " The generality of the people expressed great joy to see themselves freed from a yoke which neither they nor their forefathers could bear. None but the monks ex- claimed against it, who drew upon themselves the king's indignation, the effects whereof fell heavy upon them afterwards. Those who wished for the Reformation were highly pleased to see the main obstacle removed, believing the rest would quickly follow. But this Reformation, which they waited for with so much impatience, made not, in this reign, that progress they imagined they had ground to expect." In the reign of Edward the Articles received fur- ther revision. This, however, was not done imme- diately on the accession of the young king. Some allege, as the reason for the delay, the desire that the king should be of more mature age before he set his hand to the promulgation of the revised articles. But the more likely reason is, that until the bishops and clergy were brought more to one mind, it was judged best not to interfere with the doctrine of the church. Burnet writes thus : " Many thought they should have begun first of all with those. But Cranmer, upon good reasons, was of another mind, though much pressed by Bucer about it. Till the order of 78 bishops was brought to such a model, that the far greater part of them would agree to it, it was much fitter to let that design go on slowly, than to set out a profession of their belief, to which so great a part of the chief pastors might be obstinately averse. The corruptions that were most important were those in the worship, by which men, in their immediate addresses to God, were necessarily involved in unlawful compliances, and these seemed to require a more speedy reformation. But for speculative points, there was not so pressing a necessity to have them all explained, since in these men might, with less pre- judice, be left to a freedom in their opinions. It seemed also advisable to open and ventilate matters in public disputations and books written about them for some years, before they should go too hastily to determine them : lest, if they went too fast in that affair, it would not be so decent to make alterations afterwards ; nor could the clergy be of a sudden brought to change their old opinions. Therefore, upon all these considera- tions, that work was delayed till this year ; in which they set about it, and finished it, before the convocation met in the next February." As we write for the laity, we shall also insert these Articles : " They began with the assertion of the Blessed Trinity, the incarnation of the eternal Word, and Christ's descent into hell ; grounding this last on those words of St. Peter, of his ' preach- ing to the spirits that were in prison.' " The next Article was about Christ's resurrection. " The 5th, about the Scriptures containing all things neces- sary to salvation : so that nothing was to be held an Article of faith that could not be proved from thence. ' The 6th, that the Old Testament was to be kept still. " The 7th, for the receiving the three creeds, the Apostles', the Nicene, and Athanasius' creed, in which they went accord- ing to the received opinion, that Athanasius was the author of that creed, which is now found not to have been compiled till near three ages after him. " The 8th makes original sin to be the corruption of the 79 nature of all men descending from Adam ; by which they had fallen from original righteousness, and were by nature given to evil : but they defined nothing about the derivation of guilt from Adam's sin. " The 9th, for the necessity of prevailing grace, without which we have no free will to do things acceptable to God. "The 10th, about divine grace, which changeth a man, yet puts no force on his will. " The 1 1th, that men are justified by faith only : as was de- clared in the Homily. " The 12th, that works done before grace are not without sin. ' The 13th, against all works of supererogation. " The 14th, that all men, Christ only excepted, are guilty of sin. " The 15th, that men who have received grace may sin after- wards, and rise again by repentance. " The 16th, that the blaspheming against the Holy Ghost is, when men out of malice and obstinacy rail at God's word, though they are convinced of it : yet persecuting it, which is un- pardonable. " The 17th, that predestination is God's free election of those whom he afterwards justifies: which, though it be matter of great comfort to such as consider it aright ; yet it is a danger- ous thing for curious and carnal men to pry into : and it being a secret, men are to be governed by God's revealed will. They added not a word of reprobation. The 18th, that only the name of Christ, and not the law or light of nature, can save men. "The 19th, that all men are bound to keep the moral law. " The 20th, that the church is a congregation of faithful men, who have the word of God preached, and the sacraments rightly administered : and that the church of Rome, as well as other particular churches, have erred in matters of faith. " The 21st, that the church is only the witness and keeper of the word of God : but cannot appoint anything contrary to it, nor declare any articles of faith without warrant from it. "The 22nd, that general councils may not be gathered without the consent of princes : that they may err, and have 80 erred, in matters of faith : and their decrees in matters of salva- tion have strength only as they are taken out of the Scriptures. " The 23rd, that the doctrines of Purgatory, pardons, wor- shipping of images and relics, and invocation of saints, are without any warrant, and contrary to the Scriptures. " The 24th, that none may preach or minister the sacraments, without he be lawfully called by men who have lawful au- thority. " The 25th, that all things should be spoken in the church in a vulgar tongue. " The 26th, that there are two sacraments which are not bare tokens of our profession, but effectual signs of God's good will to us : which strengthen our faith, yet not by virtue only of the work wrought, but in those who receive them worthily. " The 27th, that the virtue of these does not depend on the minister of them. " The 28th, that by baptism we are the adopted sons of God ; and that infant baptism is to be commended, and in any ways to be retained. " The 29th, that the Lord's Supper is not a bare token of love amongst Christians, but is the communion of the body and blood of Christ : that the doctrine of transubstantiation is con- trary to Scripture, and hath given occasion to much supersti- tion : that a body being only in one place, and Christ's body being in heaven, therefore there cannot be a real and bodily presence of his flesh and blood in it : and that this sacrament is not to be kept, carried about, lifted up, nor worshipped. " The 30th, that there is no other propitiatory sacrifice but that which Christ offered on the cross. " The 31st, that the clergy are not by God's command obliged to abstain from marriage. " The 32nd, that persons rightly excommunicated are to be looked on as heathens, till they are by penance reconciled, and received by a judge competent. " The 33rd ; it is not necessary that ceremonies should be the same at all times : but such as refuse to obey lawful cere- monies, ought to be openly reproved as offending against law and order, giving scandal to the weak. 81 " The 34th, that the Homilies are godly arid wholesome, and ought to be read. " The 35th, that the Book of Common Prayer is not repug- nant, but agreeable to the gospel ; and ought to be received by all. " The 36th, that the king is supreme head under Christ : that the bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in England : that the civil magistrate is to be obeyed for conscience' sake : that men may be put to death for great offences : and that it is lawful for Christians to make war. " The 37th, that there is not to be a community of all men's goods; but yet every man ought to give to the poor according to his ability. " The 38th, that though rash swearing is condemned, yet such as are required by the magistrates may take an oath. " The 39th, that the resurrection is not already past, but at the last day men shall rise with the same bodies they now have. " The 40th, that departed souls do not die, nor sleep with their bodies, and continue without sense till the last day. " The 41st, that the fable of the millenaries is contrary to Scripture, and a Jewish dotage. " The last condemned those who believed that the damned, after some time of suffering, shall be saved. " Thus (adds the historian) was the doctrine of the church cast into a short and plain form, in which they took care both to establish the positive Articles of religion, and to cut off the errors formerly introduced in the time of Popery, or of late broached by the anabaptists and enthusiasts of Germany. Avoiding the niceties of schoolmen, or the peremptoriness of the writers of controversy : leaving, in matters that are more justly controvertible, a liberty to divines to follow their private opinions, without thereby disturbing the peace of the church." BURNET. It is foreign from our present purpose to examine the check which in the days of Mary these efforts to purify the Catholic faith received. After many 82 and severe struggles, the church triumphed in the days of Elizabeth. Then was the finishing hand put to the work of reformation. Then the Catholic religion was severed from the system of Popery, and our Articles were set forth as the vindication of the Catholic faith, the grand bulwark against the Papacy, and the glory and the strength of our nation. We would now examine the design of the several editions of these articles of religion. It is very evident that the design was to instruct the nation on the subject of popish errors, and to bring back the people to the ancient Catholic faith, as it was held by the primitive church. The object of " The Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man," which preceded the articles promulgated in the reign of Henry VIII., was to expose the errors of the Papacy, and to set aside all those " commandments of men" which had passed among the people as the voice of God. To the same end were the articles of Henry published ; and in the work now referred to, the " foundation was laid for the articles that came quickly after it." As the knowledge of pure Christianity progressed in the land, and as impediments were removed, the Articles were brought nearer to the standard of Heaven, until at length, in the days of Elizabeth, 83 the present body of the Thirty-nine Articles were sent forth. There was not any subscription required to " The Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man," but to the Articles there was a positive subscription de- manded, which, too, continues in force unto this day. The legal subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles is enjoined by the statute of Elizabeth, which establishes them, and requires every clergy- man to declare his assent and sign them in the presence of his Ordinary. And further, each cler- gyman, when appointed to any preferment, must, within two months after his induction, read the Articles in the face of the congregation, and declare his cordial assent to them. " This subscription must be consic^ed as a declaration of the opinion of the subscriber ; and therefore, if he declare that he subscribes and assents to the Articles, so far forth as they are agreeable to the Word of God, 'tis not good. Tis true, the form of subscription is not set down by the statute, but by the canon it is expressly required that he subscribe and allow the book of Articles, and that he acknowledge them, and every one of them, to be agreeable to the Word of God." The following is the canon : " Subscription required of such as are to be made Ministers. " No person shall hereafter be received into the ministry, nor either by institution or collation admitted to any eccle- o2 84 siastical living, nor suffered to preach, to catechize, or to be a lecturer or reader of divinity in either university, or in any cathedral or collegiate church, city, or market town, parish church, chapel, or in any other place within this realm, except he be licensed either by the archbishop, or by the bishop of the diocese where he is to be placed, under their hands and seals, or by one of the two universities under their seal like- wise ; and except he shall first subscribe to these three articles following, in such manner and sort as we have here appointed : " 1st. That the king's majesty, under God, is the only su- preme governor of this realm, and of all other his highness's dominions and countries, as well in all spiritual or ecclesias- tical things or causes, as temporal ; and that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within his majesty's said realms, dominions, and countries. " 2nd. That the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering of bishops, priests, and deacons, containeth in it nothing con- trary to the Word of God, and that it may lawfully so be used ; and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed, in public prayer and administration of the sacra- ments, and none other. " 3rd. That he alloweth the book of articles of religion agreed upon by the archbishops and bishops of both provinces, and the whole clergy in the convocation holden at London, in the year of our Lord God one thousand five hundred sixty and two; and that he acknowledgeth all and every the articles therein contained, being in number nine-and-thirty, besides the ratification, to be agreeable to the Word of God. " To these three Articles whosoever will subscribe, he shall, for the avoiding of all ambiguities, subscribe in this order and form of words, setting down both his Christian and surname, viz., I, N. N., do willingly and ex animo subscribe to these three Articles above mentioned, and to all things that are con- tained in them. And if any bishop shall ordain, admit, or license any as is aforesaid, except he first have subscribed, in manner and form as here we have appointed, he shall be sus- pended from giving of orders and licences to preach for the 85 space of twelve months. But if either of the universities shall offend therein, we leave them to the danger of the law and his majesty's censure." Proof of the compliance of the clergyman within two months with this canon and statute, must be regularly signed by some members of the congre- gation ; so that from this law there is not any mode of escape. Now, for what purpose has all this precaution been taken by the state and by the church by the statute and by the canon law '? For the evident purpose of carrying out into each parish and con- gregation the design of the Articles, and that design, as we have seen, was to wean the nation away from all Popish error, and to bring them to the standard of the Word of God as the only rule whereby to judge of faith, or of controversies in matters of faith, and so to maintain loyalty to the constitution by preserving the people from all con- nexion with the Papacy, and to hinder the possi- bility of any such thing coming to pass, as the existence or continuance in our church of any clergyman in the least degree infected with that baneful system of falsehood, superstition, and idolatry. This was most necessary at the time of the first publication of the Articles, and indeed we have even now much necessity for the same rule. Burnet thus states the reason of this necessity : " There were, besides this common practice, two particular circumstances in that time that made this seem to be the more 86 necessary. One was, that at the breaking out of that light there sprang up with it many impious and extravagant sects, which broke out into most violent excesses. This was no ex- traordinary thing, for we find the like happened upon the first spreading of the gospel ; many detestable sects grew up with it, which tended not a little to the defaming of Christianity, and the obstructing its progress. I shall not examine what influence evil spirits might have, both in the one and in the other ; but one visible occasion of it was, that by the first preaching of the gospel, as also upon the opening the Reformation, an inquiry into the matters of religion being then the subject of men's studies and discourses, many men of warm and ill-governed imaginations, presuming on their own talents, and being desirous to signalize themselves, and to have a name in the world, went beyond their depth in study without the necessary degrees of knowledge, and the yet more necessary dispositions of mind for arriving at a right understanding of divine matters. " This happening soon after the Reformation was first set on foot, those, whose corruptions were struck at by it, and who both hated and persecuted it on that account, did not fail to lay hold of and improve the advantage which these sects gave them. They said that the sectaries had only spoke out what the rest thought : and at last they held to this, that all sects were the natural consequences of the Reformation, and of shaking off the doctrine of the infallibility of the church. To stop these calumnies, the Protestants of Germany prepared that confession of their faith which they offered to the diet at Augsburg, and which carries its name. And after their examples all the other churches which separated from the Roman communion pub- lished the confessions of their faith, both to declare their doc- trine for the instruction of their own members, and for covering them from the slanders of their adversaries. " Another reason that the first reformers had for their de- scending into so many particulars, and for all these negatives that are in their confessions, was this : they had smarted long under the tyranny of popery, and so they had reason to secure themselves from it, and from all those who were leavened with it. They here, in England, had seen how many had complied with every alteration, both in King Henry and King Edward's 87 reign, who not only declared themselves to have been all the while papists, but became bloody persecutors in Queen Mary's reign : therefore it was necessary to keep all such out of their body, that they might not secretly undermine and betray it. Now, since the church of Rome owns all that is positive in our doctrine, there could be no discrimination made but by con- demning the most important of those additions, that they have brought into the Christian religion, in express words : and though, in matters of fact, or in theories of nature, it is not safe to affirm a negative, because it is seldom possible to prove it ; yet the fundamental article, upon which the whole Reforma- tion and this our church depends, is this, that the whole doc- trines of the Christian religion are contained in the Scripture, and that therefore we are to admit no article as a part of it till it is proved from Scripture. " This being laid down and well made out, it is not at all un- reasonable to affirm a negative upon an examination of those places of Scripture that are brought for any doctrine, and that seem to favour it, if they are found not at all to support it, but to bear a different and sometimes a contrary sense to that which is offered to be proved by them. So there is no weight in this cavil, which looks plausible to such as cannot distinguish common matters from points of faith." How, then, with such facts before us facts which no possible ingenuity or sophistry can ever set aside how, with such facts before us, any man or body of men, officiating by licence of, and hold- ing preferments in, the church of England, could for one moment conceive, much less execute, the design of interpreting or forcing the Articles of the church, so as to soften the protest against the Papacy, or make the step an easy one to commu- nion with Rome, we are indeed at a loss to con- jecture. Nay, we wonder that any man who could 88 deal thus with our confessions of faith and with our discipline, should continue, or of himself, care- less respecting the matter, should be suffered to continue a minister of the church of this emanci- pated kingdom.* We would respectfully suggest to those clergymen who have sent forth and sanc- tioned this Tract before us, that if they are making mere experiments to startle weak minds if they are presuming on the unacquaintance with theo- logy which is acknowledged to pervade even too large a body of the clergy, they may find them- selves carried a little farther than they at first proposed. Chillingworth was blinded, but he was blinded by a very different system. He resolved that there * It is no light matter to have the peace of a church invaded by one of its own sons and ministers. It is enough, surely, that the church should be assailed by open enemies ; therefore was the following royal declaration prefixed to the Articles of the Church of England : " That if any publick reader in either of Our Universities, or any head or master of a college, or any other person respec- tively in either of them, shall affix any new sense to any Article, or shall publickly read, determine, or hold any public Disputation, or suffer any such to be held either way, in either the universities or colleges respectively; or if any divine in the Universities shall preach or print anything either way, other than is already established in convocation with Our Royal Assent ; he, or they the offenders, shall be liable to Our dis- pleasure, and the Church's censure in Our Commission Eccle- siastical, as well as any other. And We will see there shall be due Execution upon them." Royal Declaration respecting the Thirty-nine Articles. 89 must be an infallible judge of controversies, and then too hastily concluded that such infallible tri- bunal must belong to the Papacy. Having thus resolved, he did not take the pains which the author of the Tract has taken to make light accom- modate itself to darkness. He took the short and sensible method. What he could not account for he resolved into the church as decided, and so it is Causa finita est. With this kind of argument or reproof he silenced doubts and fears. But his history teaches a lesson. Chillingworth was, as Locke has borne witness, a master of reasoning. He convinced some of his friends that Popery was truth. They followed his example in embracing that system ; but wRen, by the grace of God, he was delivered from those errors from which too few apostates turn again to take hold of the paths of life, he could not bring back the friends whom, by his carnal reasonings, he had beguiled, while the attempt to do so severed the ties of long and sincere friendship, and added more than a drop to the cup of sorrow which he himself was doomed to drink. " FACILIS descensus Averni, Noctes atque dies patet atri Janua Ditis : Sed revocare gradum, superasque evadere ad auras, Hoc opus, hie labor est." Any man, we repeat, who, wearing the surplice of the church, could make light of the impassable 90 gulf which separates England from the Papacy any man who would so far compromise the interests of our church, may not find his, for it is not, a very difficult work ; but he may go farther than he at first designed. His speculations may make giddy the heads of others ; he may have to account to them, to his country, and to his God, for such con- duct, and he owes a most humble apology and deep reparation to the church with whose purity he trifles and whose interests he thus betrays. 91 CHAPTER VII. End contemplated in the Articles fully answered Division of the Articles Respective offices of Scripture and the church The canon of Scripture The Apocrypha Incon- sistency in supposing the Apocrypha inspired and yet not canonical Bishop Cosin on the Apocrypha Authorized version of the Bible The Vulgate Varying editions of The judgment of the church not infallible An infallible tribunal in the church not ordained and not necessary Objections answered Rule of Faith Definition of the term In what sense the Creed a Rule of Faith. OUR next business, which shall be our object in this chapter, is to shew that the Articles fully answer the end contemplated by the church in their promulgation, and in the subscription to them which is required on the part of the clergy. That end and that subscription are to, in the first place, divide between truth and error, by separating Christianity or the Catholic faith from Popery, with which it had been too long amalgamated and identified ; and, in the second place, to exclude from the church every clergyman who might be in any, even the least, degree infected with the poison of the Romish, or rather Popish system, and so 92 preserve the church and nation in a state of free- dom, purity, and independence. That the framers of the Articles did not fail in their purpose, so far as any confession and sub- scription could bind men, an examination of the Articles themselves will abundantly establish. The Articles may be divided into three classes those which contain simple Christianity, or, in other words, the positive Articles ; those which protest against error, and deny the right of certain propo- sitions to be considered Catholic truth, or the negative Articles ; and, thirdly, those which refer to mere matters of discipline and to the circumstances of the kingdom. The second class, the negative Articles, state the grounds of separation between the churches of England and Rome, so far as England is concerned, and they are the subject of the Tract now before us. These Articles of the second class either affirm something in opposition, not to the Catholic church or faith, but to the Papacy and Popery, or else they deny to some doctrines taught by the Pope and his party as Catholic faith, any claim to be considered either as truth, much less as the revealed truth of Christianity ; or, in other words, as any portion of that " true Catholic faith, out of which no man can be saved." This examination of the Articles will bring us at once into collision with the author of the Tract. 93 The first of those Articles brought under our notice are the sixth and the twentieth. The former asserts the sufficiency of Scripture as a rule of faith, and the exclusion of every other rule ; or, in other words, every other standard of appeal in mat- ters of faith. The other gives its proper place to the church as the keeper of Holy Writ as an authority in matters or controversies of faith ; and this Article indirectly, but most clearly and indis- putably, confirms the proposition of the sixth Article that the Scriptures are the only source of Christian doctrine, and the only standard of appeal in matters of faith. We shall now quote, as does the author of the Tract, these two Articles, and then examine his sen- timents respecting them. " ARTICLE VI. Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation. " Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation : so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be be- lieved as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the church." " ARTICLE XX Of the Authority of the Church. " The church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith : and yet it is not lawful for the church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the church 94 be a witness and keeper of holy Writ, yet as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of Salva- tion." Having quoted these, our author proceeds " Two instruments of Christian teaching are spoken of in these Articles Holy Scripture and the Church." Here we would at once suggest a more correct statement or definition. Holy Scripture and the church are not two instruments of Christian teach- ing, as the term teaching is and ought to be under- stood. The church is an instrument of teaching, and of Christian teaching, but Holy Scripture is not, properly speaking, an instrument of Christian teach- ing, and it is by the confused way in which Scripture is thus spoken of, that those who would deny its sufficiency and completeness as the sole standard of appeal, perplex many minds, and engage men in endless controversies. Holy Scripture is the source from which Christian teaching is drawn ; it is the volume which contains the Christian faith, and there is not any book extant which reveals any Christianity which is not to be found in Holy Scripture. In the same way the confused use of the words " Rule of Faith" perplexes some per- sons, and gives the Papacy no small advantage over uninformed minds. The word Rule is often so stated as if it were one and the same with the individual who makes 95 use of it ; whereas there is a wide difference between the two. The lesson, or subject of teach- ing, is one thing ; the instrument of teaching, or the teacher, quite another. No man would con- found Virgil, or Horace, or Homer, with the master who makes those works the basis of his instruc- tion. There may be masters of various capabilities and of very different characters ; but their qualities cannot alter the fact that Horace, or Virgil, or Homer, are still Horace, Virgil, or Homer ; and that no other books are so, and that nothing can be called theirs which is not to be found in the writings which bear their names. We are told that the world itself could not con- tain the books which should be written, if all that the Divine Founder of Christianity uttered and did were to have been recorded ; and yet we have but one of his sayings preserved which is not to be found in the four Gospels, and that saying is inci- dentally preserved by the Apostle Paul, through whose writings the Spirit of God would teach the fact which we now declare. And so much has this point been felt by the Papacy, that when she would reveal a new Christianity she was obliged to set forth a new rule, or, to speak more clearly, a new source of Christian faith a new standard of appeal. We mast not, therefore, if we would have an end of controversy, and would settle matters in our minds, use those terms loosely, or confound the 96 source of Christian instruction with the instrument of Christian teaching. Our author then goes on to inquire : " First, what is meant by Holy Scripture ; next, what is meant by the church; and then, what their respective offices are in teaching revealed truth, and how these are ad- justed with one another in their actual exercise." The books of Holy Scripture (our auchor adds) are enumerated in the latter part of the sixth Article, so as to preclude question. Still two points deserve notice : " First, the Scriptures, or canonical books, are said to be those ' of whose authority was never any doubt in the church." Here it is not meant that there never was any doubt in portions of the church or particular churches concerning certain books, which the Article includes in the canon ; for some of them as, for instance, the epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse have been the subject of much doubt in the west and east, as the case may be. But the Article asserts that there has been no doubt about them in the Church Catholic ; that is, at the very first time that the Catholic or whole Church had an opportunity of forming a judgment on the subject, it pronounced in favour of the canonical books And next, be it ob- served, that the books which are commonly called Apocrypha, are not asserted in this Article to be destitute of inspiration or to be simply human, but to be not canonical ; in other words, to differ from Canonical Scripture, especially in this respect viz., that they are not adducible in proof of doctrine that this is the limit to which our disparagement of them ex- tends is plain, not only because the Article mentions nothing beyond it, but also from the reverential manner in which the Homilies speak of them." The first point is of little moment. If it esta- blishes anything, it would only prove the liability 97 of Christians, or particular churches, to err in Divine things, and to make mistakes when decid- ing respecting the Word of God. We do know, however, that portions of Holy Writ have been rejected by some because these portions did not seem to agree with their theories. Besides, the opinions of individuals, or of particular churches, respecting the genuineness or authenticity of any particular books of Holy Writ cannot, could not, possibly affect the question of the completeness of the Holy Scriptures as a rule of faith, or rule whereby to judge of controversies in matters of faith. Nor is it necessary, in the present instance, to enter into the arguments by which the canon of Scripture may be established and vindicated. The next point is of more importance, and is introduced in the following passage : " The books which are commonly called the Apocrypha, are not as- serted in this Article to be destitute of inspiration, or to be simply human, but to be not canonical ; in other words, to differ from canonical Scripture, specially in this respect viz., that they are not adducible in proof of doctrine /" We do not know when we have met with a more extraordinary passage than this. We can easily understand the Romish statements on this subject, but it is clearly impossible for us to find out the meaning of this sentence now before us. The Article does not assert the books to be destitute of inspiration, but only ! to be not canonical ! ! 98 How was it possible for the church to more clearly express the fact ? All the inspired books are cano- nical, or brought into the canon of Scripture ; any book therefore which is not canonical, is, in the judgment of not merely our church, but of the church Catholic, not inspired, unless we admit that some portion of the Word of God has been ex- cluded from the canon of Scripture ! In one sense, if we were disposed to trifle with the words, both inspiration and Scripture may be applied to compositions of men. No man can call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Ghost. No man can in any way set forth, in sermon or essay, the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ, except he be assisted by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost ; and that ser- mon or essay is as much Scripture, in the wide sense, as any writing of the Old or New Testa- ment can be. But all this is beside the question of the canon of Holy Scripture. We are either occu- pied in the consideration of the Word of God, or we are occupied about something wholly unworthy of thought, unless we should be guilty of such absurdity or profanity as to say or suppose that the Holy Ghost did not give sufficient inspiration to some books to make them of equal weight with the others which were written under His protecting and assisting influence, and yet that He gave them enough to make them above the writings of good and pious men, and to constitute them inspired ; 99 and so we should have the church brought into such a position as this deciding that certain books were inspired by the Holy Ghost, and yet were not worthy of being introduced into the canon of Scripture. Neither does it state the question rightly, to sup- pose that these books differ from canonical Scrip- ture in this respect viz., that they are not addu- cible in proof of doctrine. The matter is this they are not adduced in proof of doctrine, because they are not Scripture at all, that is, canonical Scripture, or, in other words, the inspired Word of God. For if they were Scripture, or inspired, in the sense in which these terms are used, they would be adducible in proof of doctrine ; and to say that they would not be so, would be a sin nothing short of blasphemy. The question now is not one of regard or disre- gard for these books, but whether the church ac- counts them inspired, or, in other terms, the Word of God, and yet excludes them first from the canon, and then from the right to establish any doctrine. Bishop Cosin well draws the distinction in the following words : " Other books, what honour soever they have heretofore had in the church, or what is there still continued to them ; yet if they cannot shew all these marks and characters upon them 1. That they are of supreme and divine authority ; 2. That they were written by men specially acted and inspired for that purpose by the Spirit of God ; 3. That they were by the same men and the same authority delivered over for such to all pos- H2 - 100 terity ; 4. That they have been received as such by the church of God in all ages; and 5. That all men are both to regulate their faith and to measure their actions by them ; as by the un- doubted witnesses of God's infallible truth and ordinances de- clared in them; if they want any of these peculiar and proper notes of difference, whereby the BOOKS of GOD are distinguished from the WRITINGS OF MEN, pious and useful books they may be in their kind, but they shall want that honour which is spe- cially reserved to the dignity of SOVEREIGN and DIVINE SCRIP- TURE, whereunto this honour is due, (saith St. Augustine,) and to no other writing besides, That whatsoever is there said is undoubtedly true, and ought most firmly to be believed, without any further question or disputation about it; which cannot be said of any other writing that was ever composed, and sent abroad into the world." And again, in reference to the new canon of the Council of Trent, and to the manner in which the Apocrypha has been so unduly and improperly exalted by the Papacy, the same bishop writes " By which their unsufferable and inexcusable determination in that council, they have given the world sufficient cause to reject the council, if there were no other reasons to be brought against it (as many and very many others there be) but this alone ; that herein against the common faith, and the Catholic canon of the church of God, they have gone about to bind all men's consciences to theirs, and given no more faith or rever- ence to the true and infallible Scriptures of God, than they do to other additional books and writings of men. " For the whole current of antiquity runs against them. And the universal church of Christ, as well under the Old as the New Testament, did never so receive these books, which are now by us termed Apocryphal ; nor ever acknowledged them to be of the same order, authority, or reverence with the rest, which both they and we call strictly and properly canonical. " In proof whereof, we shall here recite the testimony of the church in every age concerning the canon of the Old Testa- 101 ment, and the books that belong thereunto. Where the ques- tion will not be 1st. Whether those Apocryphal books either have been heretofore, or may still be read in the church, for the better instruction and edifying of the people in many good precepts of life ? 2nd. Nor whether they may be joined to- gether in one common volume with the Bible, and compre- hended under the general name of Holy Scripture, as that name is largely and improperly taken ; 3rd. Nor whether the moral rules and profitable histories and examples therein contained may be set forth and cited in a sermon or other treatise of re- ligion ; 4th. Nor whether the ancient fathers thought these books (at least many passages in them) worthy of their par- ticular consideration both for the elucidation of divers places in the Old Testament, and for the better enabling of them to get a more perfect understanding of the ecclesiastical story ; 5th. Nor yet, whether in the very Articles of faith, some cer- tain sayings that are found in those books (agreeable herein to the others that are canonical) may not be brought for the more abundant explaining and clearing of them. For all this we grant, and to all these purposes there may be good use made of an apocryphal book. But the question only is Whether all or any of those books be purely, positively, and simply, divine Scripture, or to all purposes, and in all senses, sacred and canonical, so as that they may be said (or ever were so accounted) to be of the same equal and sovereign authority with the rest, for the establishing and determining of any matter of faith, or controversies in religion, no less than the true and undoubted canonical books of Scripture themselves." Bishop Cosin then brings forward the testimony of every age down to the sixteenth century, in support of our, and, consequently, against the new, canon of the church of Rome. It is, then, very difficult to conceive the object of the writer of the Tract in raising any question about the Apocrypha. The question is not whether it be lawful for Christians to read those books, or whether the books be useful and valuable 102 in some respects, or whether, as such, they deserve the high respect of the Catholic church, but whether they be the inspired, and therefore infal- lible word of God. If they be not such, the dis- cussion of the subject is an idle expenditure of time and thought a mere raising of subtleties and doubtful disputations, too well calculated to per- plex weak, uninformed, and unsettled minds. And, indeed, we are as far from the discovery of the author's meaning and object in the portions of his work which follow that which we have now examined. He goes on to assert that the church excludes those books from the office of establishing any doctrine, and that this is the limit to which our disparagement of them extends ; and that this is plain, not only because the Sixth Article men- tions nothing beyond it, but also from the reverential manner in which the Homilies speak of them. Surely the church, by her Articles and her Homilies, does quite enough in placing the Apo- crypha under an interdict, so that it should not, on any account whatever, be applied to establish any doctrine of Christianity. This is the only question at issue. This was the only work which the church had in this respect to perform. The object of the Article was not to revile, or in any way depreciate the value of the Apocrypha, but to guard the prerogatives of the Word of God. This the church of England has done directly and indi- rectly ; directly, by asserting the sufficiency and 103 the completeness of Holy Writ ; indirectly, by ex- cluding- those books which some portions of Chris- tendom had so unduly exalted. It was not, there- fore, any part of the work of the church to revile books which it was merely her business to put in their proper place. To have condemned books which contain much good, solely because of some errors, would not have been in accordance with, " Destroy it not, for a blessing is in it ;" but such proceed- ing might have suited the dispositions of those who cannot speak well of anything which does not in every particular suit the prejudices of their own school.* Therefore it does appear to us a mere work of supererogation to reconcile the compati- bility of such reverence for the Apocrypha, as in the Homilies, with such disparagement of the same as may be found in the Article. From this our author descends to another and very secondary question the authority of the English version of the Scriptures " whether it is * " The Romans having banished Tarquinius the Proud, and taken a solemn oath that they never would permit any man more to reign, could not herewith content themselves, or think that tyranny was thoroughly extinguished, till they had driven one of their consuls to depart the city, against whom they found not in the world what to object, saving only that his name was Tarquin, and that the commonwealth could not seem to have recovered perfect freedom as long as a man of so dan- gerous a name was left remaining. For the church of Eng- land to have done the like, in casting out papal tyranny and superstition, to have shewed greater willingness of accepting the very ceremonies of the Turk, Christ's professed enemy, than of the most indifferent things which the church of Rome 104 imposed on us as a true comment on the original text, as the Vulgate is upon the Roman Catholics. It would (he adds) appear not. " It was made and authorized by royal command, which can- not be supposed to have any claim upon our interior consent. At the same time, every one who reads it in the services of the Church, does, of course, thereby imply that he considers that it contains no deadly heresy or dangerous mistake. And about its simplicity, majesty, gravity, harmony, and venerableness, there can be but one opinion?' This is very poor approbation of the translation of the Holy Scriptures which the church of Eng- land puts into the hands of her children. It was only made and authorized by royal command, and can- not be supposed to have any claim upon our interior consent ! At the same time, those who use it at least imply that they do not consider that it contains deadly heresy or dangerous mistake ! ! The sentence about the simplicity, majesty, gravity, harmony, and venerableness, is a poor compensation to a loyal churchman for the qualified praise, or rather, approveth, to have left not so much as the names which the church of Rome doth give unto things innocent; to have ejected whatsoever that church doth make account of, be it never so harmless in itself, and of never so ancient continuance, without any other crime to charge it with than only that it hath been the hap thereof to be used by the church of Rome, and not to be commanded in the word of God this kind of proceeding might happily have pleased some, but the Almighty did, (Hooker goes on to say,) for the good of the church and the warding off troubles and confusion, use the bridle of his provident restraining hand to stay those eager affections in some, and to settle their resolution upon a course more calm and moderate." Hooker. 105 indirect censure, which is contained in the preced- ing paragraph of the words of the Tract. In a few words the late Dr. Doyle, the titular bishop of Kildare, said more in favour of the ver- sion of the Scriptures which has been set forth by authority of the church of England. But we pass on from this subject. We would much prefer the word " translation" to the term " comment," as used by our author in the passage now quoted. The church gives this our version to her children as a faithful translation ; and we think that, under such a constitution as that with which we are, as a nation, so highly favoured, we are bound to receive that version which the Sovereign, with the advice of his Privy Council, in which the church has her representa- tives, places in the hands of his people. It is only as a faithful translation that the work is given ; and we are not so circumstanced with respect to it as the Papal church is with respect to the Vulgate. The history of the Vulgate will sufficiently explain this. " I would, moreover, state, that I examined the work of the learned Dr. James, and saw in his Bellum Papale that the edition of the Bible published by Clement differed from that published by Sixtus in two thousand places!!! And these, not merely typographical errors, as you state, but most im- portant differences ; and if you wish for some of them, I can, in my next letter, give a few. My allusion to these differences was to shew how popes have contradicted popes, and that it is impossible to know what edition of the Bible is authorized by you. " As now I have the opportunity, I would give some ac- count of your version of the Scriptures. The Council of 106 Trent (Sessio iv.) declares, that as no small advantage would arise from some one of all the Latin editions of the sacred books being held as authentic, decrees that the ancient Vulgate edition be held as authentic, and that no one, under any pre- text, should dare or presume to reject it. The very same council, in the same decree, gave notice of an edition which was afterwards to be set forth, as accurately as possible, and this was to be held authentic ; giving a fine name to a thing that had not then seen the light f Certainly, the correction of the Vulgate should have preceded the great praise bestowed on it. ' For how, with any shadow of good sense, could the assembled fathers (at Trent) set the seal of their approbation to a work, which they acknowledged to stand in need of correction, and that before they knew whether or not the correction would answer their views, and merit their approbation ?'* There were many copies of the Vulgate differing from each other, and consequently there was some confusion on this point. ' Robert Stephens undertook to remedy it, by publishing his critical editions of the Vulgate in 1528, 1532, 1534, and 1540, and particularly in 1545 and 1546. These, particularly the last, having incurred the censures of the doctors of the Sorbonne, John Hentenius, a divine of Louvaine, was employed to pre- pare a new edition of the Vulgate. This he accomplished in 1547. A third corrected edition was published by Lucas Bru- gensis, with the assistance of several other divines of Lou- vaine, in 1573, and reprinted in 1586. The labours of the Louvaine divines not having been, in every respect, approved by Pope Sixtus V., he commanded a new revision of the text to be made with the utmost care. To this work he devoted much time and attention, and corrected the proofs of the edition, which was published at Rome in 1590. This edition Sixtus pronounced to be the authentic Vulgate, which had been the object of inquiry in the Council of Trent, and ordained that it should be adopted throughout the Roman church,' and pronounced an anathema against those who should alter it. 'But, notwithstanding the labours of this Pope and his anathema, this edition was discovered to be so exceedingly incorrect, that his successor, Clement VIII., caused it to be suppressed, and pub- * Maclaine's Mosheim. 107 lished another authentic Vulgate in 1592, which differs more than any other from that of Sixtus V., and mostly resembles that of Louvaine.'* Dr. James makes the following just observations on these infallibility-destroying variances. ' There is a great controversy between us and the papists concerning the version of Jerome. That Jerome was learned, and that he put forth a version, is received by protestants and papists ; but what this is, and where it is, is disputed. But let us grant that the edi- tion papists now use, called the Vulgate, is the same which Jerome handed down, yet when we have so many of our ad- versaries acknowledging various editions of the Vulgate, im- proved and corrected by Stephanus, Hentenius, the doctors of Louvaine, (" Louvaniensibus,") Sixtus V., and Clement VIII., may we not ask, what copy they wish to be received, amidst so many disagreeing editions, for the true, legitimate, authentic, and undoubted ? If they praise the industry of Stephanus, they condemn the labours of Hentenius ; if they approve Hentenius, the labours of the Louvaine doctors are useless ; if the Lou- vaine were diligent, (and they certainly were,) what need of the double labour of Sixtus V. ? Some may say all the other edi- tions must lie by, and Sixtus Fifth's be received, because he is Pope, and as such, in a matter of faith, he neither can de- ceive nor be deceived. But Sixtus and Clement are opposed. Sixtus says, Clement denies ; Clement says, Sixtus denies ; ( O Concordia discors f /) Sixtus put forth his edition to last for ever ! edit, anno 1590. In 1592, Clement VIII. published a new edition so contrary to Sixtus', that you would not know it to be the same. Which must be received which believed ?"f We cannot dwell further on this question ; but we have, we trust, said enough to prove that the new canon of Scripture set forth by the church of Rome is as far from any solid pretension to catho- licity as is any one of the new articles which she has added to the faith of Christ, and that our * Home's Introduction. t Page's Letters to a Romish Priest. 108 church has done all that could have been required at her hands in the way in which she has separated the Apocryphal from the canonical books ; and further, that what our church has done, does both directly and indirectly set aside all other books, and set up and establish the canonical as the only inspired books, and as the only standard whereby either individuals or churches can prove the con- formity of their doctrines and their teaching to the mind of God.* The Tract then proceeds. Next we come to the main point " The adjustment which this Article effects between the respective offices of the Scripture and the Church ; which seems to be as follows : " It is laid down that 1. Scripture contains all necessary Articles of the faith ; 2. Either in its text or by inference ; 3. The church is the keeper of Scripture ; 4. And a witness of it; 5. And has authority in controversies of faith; 6. But may not expound one passage of Scripture to contradict an- other; 7. Nor enforce as an Article of faith any point not con- tained in Scripture. From this it appears, that the church ex- pounds and enforces the faith ; for it is forbidden to expound in a particular way, or so to enforce as to obtrude ; next, that it derives the faith wholly from Scripture ; thirdly, that its office is to educe an harmonioits interpretation of Scripture. Thus much the Article settles." * Divines of the papal church have made the same distinc- tion between the Apocrypha and the Word of God. Bishop Morton writes " That we have in the Romish school (as is confessed by their Canus, Pererius and Bellarmine) many who lived before the Council of Trent, and were esteemed the most eminent doctors in their times ; who all have excluded some of these foresaid books, and some have branded them all with the 109 With these points we have not any dispute only we would request the reader to draw in his mind a wide distinction between the authority that delivers the faith, and the authority that pro- nounces upon any controversies which may be founded upon part or the whole of that faith once for all delivered. God is the authority for our faith, and it is the province of wisdom to receive with meekness that faith, not questioning anything respecting it, even though any Article of that faith may be beyond the range of human intellect. In such, or in any case, it is enough that God hath spoken. The province of the church is, when questions or doctrines arise which in any way affect that faith which has been committed to her custody, or which pretend to be part and parcel of, or which are contrary to, that faith, to try those doctrines or questions by the only rule or standard by which note of Apocrypha ; according rather unto the ancient church of the Jews, and the primitive profession of the churches Chris- tian, than unto the novel conceits of after times.'* Cardinal Cajetan was one of those divines who is so decided against the new canon of the papacy, and in reference to him " Ambro- sius Catharinus, a Romanist, (quoted by Lynde in his " Via Devia,") professeth that Cajetan, in this point, committed al- most as many sins as he delivered words !" And Canus, an- other Romanist, is quite ashamed of Cajetan I Thus those zealous Romanists, who would bend all truth to the interpreta- tion of the Fathers, and who would, and do, bend the Fathers to speak according to their modern notions, are ready to put the cardinal out of their synagogue for his very uncalled for and unpalatable admissions. 110 they can be tried, and then to pronounce her judg- ment, which judgment her children are bound to respect and follow ; and the man who lightly con- temns the decision of the church, and makes tumults and divisions to establish his own unsup- ported opinion, is to be esteemed " as an heathen man, and a publican." But the judgment of the church, when she exer- cises her authority in matters of faith, is not in- fallible. There is not any such certainty that she may not err, as is always the case when the great Head of the church himself speaks. As the church of Jerusalem has erred, so may any other church ; and our own church is as liable as the Jewish or Popish church to have said " They err in vision they stumble in judgment." When we say liable, we mean, so far as the promises of God or any external acting on the church are concerned ; but the matter is far from being probable ; our position is far removed from that of either the Jewish or the Papal church they erred in judg- ment, because they departed from the written word and gave heed to traditions and pretended secret revelations. We have boldly proclaimed the sufficiency and completeness of the written word as the only standard of appeal in matters of faith, and for our conduct in this God has highly honoured our church, for, without any offensive comparisons, we may boldly challenge the Chris- tian world to produce a church so pure in its doc- Ill trines and so greatly consistent with truth in its decisions ; and if we were to confine ourselves to our own empire, we might say, look upon the poor and wretched spectacle which those sects, which have cast off our yoke, present to the eye look upon and examine them closely, and then bless God for the unspeakable privilege of having been born and nursed a member of the church of God so happily established in England. Here, however, two questions arise, and these are in a measure brought forward in the Tract before us, though not exactly as they present themselves to our mind. We shall state them. In the first place, this difficulty may arise in the minds of some If the church, whose province it is to exercise authority in controversies of faith, may err in her decisions, then there is not any security offered to the man who is invited and even expected nay, required, to submit to her decisions. This is a question of only apparent difficulty one which is often used by some persons to perplex those whose faith they cannot directly assail. Now we should consider, first, the distinction made above between the authority which delivers the faith and the authority which decides in controversies of faith. If this distinction be borne in mind, the difficulty will at once vanish. In those things which concern our salvation, God himself hath spoken. He who cannot err has told us what is 112 the faith by which alone we can be saved, and which we could not have ourselves discovered, and this is, moreover, revealed to us in such plain terms, that, to use the prophet's words, " The wayfaring man, though a fool, shall not err therein ;" and again, " He may run that readeth." For instance, that Jesus Christ is " the way, the truth, and the life ;" and " that no man cometh unto the Father but by Him;" and "these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that believing ye may have life through his name." These are articles of faith delivered by the highest, the only authority that is in such an instance entitled to speak and this is truth, for it is revealed by an infallible authority. Again, "There is one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus." Here again is a similar article delivered on the like infallible authority. Now the delivering of such is the peculiar province of God. But we find doctrines first matters of mere con- jecture, then of something more, then of belief, and lastly of teaching, obtruded upon the church ; as, for instance, should a question arise, whether, besides worshipping God in spirit, or God alone, we should not also worship God through images, that is, with relative worship ; or whether we may not also worship angels and saints with an in- ferior worship ; or, again, whether, though we 113 are told that there is one Mediator between God and man, yet we may not have recourse to other medi- ators, and to their intercessions on our behalf. In these and such questions, which arise from a mis- conception or wilful perversion of the faith, it is the province and business of the church to decide. In these things she has authority, as asserted in the article authority in controversies of faith ; but it must be evident to every one who bestows the least consideration upon the subject, that there is here a wide difference between the faith itself and those questions which arise out of a misconception or perversion of the same ; and a still wider dif- ference between the degree of authority requisite for the delivery of the faith and that necessary for the decision in controversies of, or respecting, the faith. In the former case we require an infallible authority, for such authority alone has a right to call upon us in such weighty matters, and such infallible authority we have : for to reveal the faith God has spoken, and God is Truth. In decisions of the church in controversies we have not an infallible authority, neither is such at all necessary neither would such an infallible authority be of any use to us, unless we were possessed of infallible means of arriving at the truth of each decision. This is clearly proved to us in the fact, that the Papal church, which, not- withstanding its many variations and contradic- 114 tions from, and to, the church Catholic, and also itself, usurps this high and sole prerogative of Heaven infallibility, is yet, after all, compelled to rest the belief of her infallibility upon pruden- tial motives ! And, consequently, if we are liable to err, when acting on prudential motives, in such a question as infallibility itself, as much are we liable to err in our comprehension of those decisions re- specting the faith, which are made to rest upon this assumed privilege.* And thus has the Holy Ghost most mercifully ordained. He sets his own seal to, and delivers, on his own infallible authority, the faith. He gives to his church such promises, that those who rightly use his holy Word shall not err materially or fundamentally when giving any opinion or judgment upon questions connected with that faith. We have, in the one case, the highest certainty ; we have, in the other, as much certainty as can possibly be required. It may appear difficult, at first, to some minds, to reconcile the submission to the authority of the church, which is most certainly required of every baptized person, with the limited authority which is here set forth. But what ? Is not a servant and his message to be respected by those to whom he is duly sent, because, forsooth, he does not possess the authority and mind of the master himself? Is not an ambassador to be heard, believed, honoured, * See note 6, Appendix A. 115 because he is not so great as the monarch that sends him ? Nay, there is no reason in such sup- positions. If a servant or his message be slighted, it is not an offence against the servant, but against the master that sent him. The master must take up the quarrel, for now it is his. If the ambassa- dor be dishonoured, the monarch is insulted, and he must bear the quarrel, and call upon his subjects to avenge the wrong ; and that although the servants or ambassadors may have been not only inferior to their respective masters, but may also have been both fallible and frail men. So, too, is it with the court of Heaven. Christ, the King of kings, to whom all power is given in heaven and in earth, sends forth his servants his ambassadors ; to them he gives his written word as the burden of their message to the sons of men ; on them he bestows privileges and power ; and therefore, though so infinitely beneath himself in every respect, yet, because they are his servants and ambassadors, he says, " He that heareth you, heareth me ; He that despiseth you, despiseth me ; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me." Such is his declaration respecting his law- fully sent and faithful servants and ambassadors. The man, therefore, who resists the ministry of the church of Christ, resists the ordinance of God ; and such an one will one day find it a poor ex- cuse to say, "We did not submit ourselves to i 2 116 them that had the rule over us, because God thought fit to put his treasure in earthen vessels ! to entrust his high commission to fallible men !" If, then, we observe the distinction between the faith itself and controversies in faith, and between the degree of authority necessary in the deliverer and that in the expounder of the faith between, in fine, the source of all faith and the defender of that faith, then all seeming difficulties vanish. Other questions naturally arise out of this sub- ject, but we shall confine our observations to the two which have been selected by the author of the Tract. " Two important questions, however, it does not settle viz., whether the Church judges, first, at her sole discretion, next, on her sole responsibility ; i. e., first, what the media are by which the Church interprets Scripture, whether by a direct divine gift, or Catholic tradition, or critical exegesis of the text, or in any other way ; and next, who is to decide whether it inter- prets Scripture rightly or not ; what is her method, if any ; and who is her judge, if any. In other words, not a word is said, on the one hand, in favour of Scripture, having no rule or method to fix interpretation by, or, as it is commonly expressed, being the sole rule of faith ; nor, on the other, of the private judgment of the individual being the ultimate standard of inter- pretation." As to the way in which the church judges, or the media by which she interprets Scripture, it was not necessary for our Articles to have delivered any opinion on the subject. The church, i.e., the bishop and clergy, for by them collectively and 117 individually the'church must judge and interpret the church, we say, must judge for herself with the judgment of discretion, and then interpret, having availed herself of all the advantages within her reach, and having rested upon the promises of God, that he would grant his Spirit to those that ask it. On a question like this now before us, it is very easy to throw difficulties in the way and to start objections, but the end of the objectors, if their principles were carried out, would be to make man an irrational being that is, to lead us to be- come sceptics, and to cast away reason. When the first general council was held, men were not then embarrassed with all those difficulties which are now by some presented to our minds. Those who assembled at that council made the Word of God their standard of appeal, and held their con- sultations as men who had no doubt but that there was such a thing as truth, and some way of arriv- ing at a knowledge of that truth, while, at the same time, they never felt any difficulty in the objections which might have been raised against them because they did not pretend to any infallibility. The following is the account given by the histo- rian of the council : " Before the bishops met together in one place, the logicians busied themselves propounding against divers others certain preambles of disputation, and when divers were thus drawn to disputation, and allured as it were by bait, a layman, one of the number of confessors, of a simple and sincere mind, set himself against the logicians, and told them thus in plain words 118 That neither Christ nor his apostles had delivered unto us the art of logic, neither vain fallacies, but an open and plain mind to be preserved of us with faith and good works. The which when he had spoken, all that were present had him in admiration, and held with his sentence. Then the logicians, after they had heard the pure words of plain truth, quieted and settled themselves aright. So that at length by that means the stir raised by occasion of logic was wholly suppressed." SOCRATES SCHOLASTICUS. Again, when some at the council would have enforced the celibacy of the clergy, the same his- torian informs us, that by one plain appeal to Holy Sripture, Paphnutius broke the yoke which the favourers of celibacy had prepared, and, adds Socrates, " To conclude, the whole council, then assembled of eccle- siastical persons, yielded unto the sentence of Paphnutius, wholly ending all controversy that might rise in this behalf." Such a course of proceeding was in accordance with the call of the prophet " To the law and to the testimony ; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them ;" and again, in the New Testament Scriptures " These (the Bereans) were more noble than those in Thes- salonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so ;" and it is then added, " Therefore many of them believed." And what, after all, is this, but the fulfilment of the promise, " If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God ?" We repeat, then, that both churches and individuals 119 must judge with the judgment of discretion, whether the subject be the meaning of Scripture, the meaning of the writings of Christians of the early or later ages, or the meaning of the decisions of the church of this or any other country ; and in such decisions we can have moral certainty, and beyond this it is not possible for us to go, unless, indeed, we set aside reason and establish a system of fanaticism, under which every man professing to be acted on by divine and infallible assurance or impulse, would both teach and do that which was " right in his own eyes." We have dwelt thus long upon this point, as it has been at all times a favourite mean by which the Papacy would embarrass unsteady minds by which, indeed, she has embarrassed minds not a few. Her position is, that since we are liable to err, there must be a living, speaking, infallible tribunal for the decision of disputes and for the expounding of the mind of God. The plain an- swer to this is, that many things may seem to us most necessary, and yet God has not ordered them so for all that. Such a tribunal we have shewed is not necessary now ; it is enough that we have an infallible authority to deliver the faith. But the following will serve to shew that the pretence is a fallacy merely put forward to perplex where un- sound arguments fail to convince. The Papal church claims the privilege of infal- 120 libility ; or, as a distinguished priest of that com- munion once expressed it to us, the privilege of " inerrancy." This privilege is assumed for these two obvious reasons for the purpose of deciding controversies in matters of faith, and for expound- ing the mind or Word of God. How the Papacy has used this privilege let the following extract shew : " And although this pretended infallibility be so necessary to maintain unity, yet is it so far from effecting this, that itself is the greatest occasion of division. Some will have it to be vested in the Pope ; some contend fiercely against this, and would place it in a council ; some in a council, when confirmed by the Pope ; and all in the church, as they say, while no two of them can give an inquirer a satisfactory answer, when he demands where the church is to be found in which this infalli- bility is lodged ? But it is all one which opinion we adopt. For we have Popes against Popes councils against councils councils confirmed by Popes against councils confirmed by Popes doctors against doctors, not forgetting Mr. Brown's opposition to the Rhemists, and to other high authorities in his church and the church of one age against the church of an- other and their church of this day as opposite to Scripture as light to darkness. It is no marvel, then, that an inquirer should weary himself, when he would search for this infallibility. And not only cannot this treasure be found, for the purpose of de- ciding controversies, but the papacy cannot furnish a certain and authorized, much less infallible, commentary upon any single verse of Scripture. " These two great advantages to be expected from those who boast so loudly of this infallibility, they have not conferred upon the world. With respect to the latter, we may well say, with Chillingworth, What an impudence is it to pretend that your church is infallibly directed concerning the true meaning of Scripture, whereas there are a thousand places of Scripture, 121 which you do not pretend certainly to understand, and about the interpretation whereof your own doctors differ among them- selves? If your church be infallibly directed concerning the true meaning of Scripture, why do not your doctors follow her infallible direction ? And if they do, how comes such differ- ence among them in their interpretations ? Again, why does your church thus put her candle under a bushel, and keep her talent of interpreting Scripture infallibly thus long wrapped up in napkins ? Why sets she not forth infallible commen- taries upon all the Bible ? Is it because this would not be pro- fitable to Christians, that Scripture should be interpreted ? It is blasphemy to say so ; the Scripture itself tells us ' all Scrip- ture is profitable,' and the Scripture is not so much the words, as the sense thereof; and if it be not profitable, why doth she employ her doctors to interpret Scripture fallibly ? Unless we must think that fallible interpretations of Scripture are profit- able, but infallible interpretations would not be so !' " Page's Catholic Truth not Assailed, and Popery not Vindicated. As to not a word being said, on the one hand, in favour of Scripture having no rule or method to fix interpretation by, or, as it is commonly expressed, being the sole rule of faith, nor, on the other, of the private judgment of the individual being the ultimate standard of interpretation, our author thus speaks, " We may dispense with the phrase, ' Rule of Faith,' as ap- plied to Scripture, on the ground of its being ambiguous ; and, again, because it is there used in a novel sense ; for the ancient church made the apostolic tradition, as summed up in the creed, and not in the Bible, the regulajidei, or rule. More- over, its use, as a technical phrase, seems to be of late intro- duction in the church, that is, since the days of King William the Third. Our great divines use it without any fixed sense, sometimes for Scripture, sometimes for the whole and perfectly adjusted Christian doctrine, and sometimes for the creed ; and 122 at the risk of being tedious, we will prove this, by quotations, that the point may be put beyond dispute." The term " Rule of Faith" is certainly obscure. The writer of these remarks has not ever made use of the words in controversy, except only where another title would have caused confusion, and then the expressions have always been explained so as to set forth a more accurate definition of the office of Scripture than the words "Rule of Faith" can possibly do. Nay, with a clever disputant of the Romish church, a person using these words may experience much difficulty ; may, in fact, involve himself in endless explanations and definitions quite beside the original question. The words have Ijeen used much, invariably used, since the days of William III. Tillotson adopted them as the title of his work, and ever since the words " Rule of Faith" are employed in most cases to set forth the sufficiency and com- pleteness of Holy Scripture as a standard of appeal in matters of faith. Chillingworth used it thus : " Scripture, the only rule whereby to judge of con- troversies ;" but the term " Rule of Faith" is not so new. Some of the fathers used it in reference to the written word, and perhaps the only difficulty in the term arises from the manner in which the Romish controversialists have endeavoured to con- found the rule with the judge, in order to shew some necessity for their pretended living, speaking, 123 infallible judge of controversies. The following, from Chillingworth, will shew this : " As for the impossibility of Scripture being the sole judge of controversies, that is, the sole rule for men to judge them by, (for we mean nothing else,) you only affirm it without proof, as if the thing were evident of itself, and therefore I, conceiving the contrary to be more evident, might well content myself to deny it without refutation : yet I cannot but desire you to tell me, if Scripture cannot be the judge of any controversy, how shall that touching the church and the notes ofitbe determined? And if it be the sole judge of this one, why may it not of others ? why not of all ? those only excepted wherein the Scripture itself is the subject of the question, which cannot be determined but by natural reason, the only principle, beside Scripture, which is common to Christians." Again " In your second paragraph you sum up those argu- ments wherewith you intend to prove that Scripture alone can- not be a judge in controversies ; wherein I profess unto you be- forehand, that you will fight without an adversary. For though Protestants, being warranted by some of the fathers, have called Scripture the judge of controversy ; and you, in saying here, that Scripture alone cannot be judge, imply, that it may be called in some sense a judge, though not alone; yet, to speak properly, (as men should speak when they write controversy in religion,) the Scriptures is not a judge of controversies, but a rule only, and the only rule for Christians to judge them by. Every man is to judge for himself with the judgment of discre- tion, and to choose either his religion first, and then his church, as we say ; or, as you, his church first, and then his religion. But by the consent of both sides, every man is to judge and choose; and the rule whereby he is to guide his choice, if he be a natural man, is reason ; if he be already a Christian, Scrip- ture ; which we say is the rule to judge controversies by. Yet not all simply, but all the controversies of Christians, of those that are already agreed upon this first principle, that the Scrip- ture is the Word of God. But that there is any man or any 124 company of men appointed to be judge for all men, that we deny ; and that I believe you will never prove. The very truth is, we say more in this matter, than evidence of truth hath made you confess in plain terms in the beginning of this chapter viz., ' that Scripture is a perfect rule of faith, foras- much as a writing can be a rule ;' so that all your reasons, whereby you labour to dethrone the Scripture from this office of judging, we might let pass as impertinent to the con- clusion which we maintain, and you have already granted ; yet out of courtesy we will consider them. " Your first is this ' a judge must be a person fit to end con- troversies, but the Scripture is not a person nor fit to end con- troversies, no more than the law would be without the judges; therefore, though it may be a rule, it cannot be a judge.' Which conclusion I have already granted ; only my request is, that you will permit Scripture to have the properties of a rule that is, to be fit to direct every one that will make the best use of it to that end for which it was ordained, and that is as much as we need desire. For, as if I were to go a journey and had a guide which could not err, I needed not to know my way, and so, on the other side, if I know my way, or have a plain rule to know it by, I shall need no guide. " Grant, therefore, Scripture to be such a rule, and it will quickly take away all necessity of having an infallible guide. But without a living judge it will be no Jitter (you say) to end controversies than for the law to end suits ; I answer, if the law were plain and perfect, and men honest and desirous to under- stand aright and obey it, he that says it were not fit to end controversies must either want understanding himself, or think the world wants it. Now the Scripture, we pretend, in things necessary, is plain and perfect, and men, we say, are obliged, under pain of damnation, to seek the true sense of it, and not to wrest it to their preconceived fancies. Such a law there- fore to such men, cannot but be very fit to end all controversies necessary to be ended. For others that are not so, they will end when the world ends, and that will be time enough.' 1 We think that our church has most admirably defined this point. The sixth Article states in its 125 true light the properties of the rule, clearly dis- tinguishes the rule or standard from the judge, and more, we think, than any other short statement, sets forth the impossibility of anything being con- sidered an article of Christian faith which does not square with the standard of Heaven the only standard of all true religion.* This is the propo- * " That the Scriptures do not contain in them all things necessary to salvation, is the fountain of many great and capital errors ; I instance in the whole doctrine of the Libertines, Familists, Quakers, and other enthusiasts, which issue from this corrupted fountain. For this, that the Scriptures do need a suppletory ; that they are not perfect and sufficient to salvation of themselves, is the Trpwrov \//u&>, the great fundamental truth of the Roman religion, and that of the Libertines, and Quakers, and those whom in Germany they call Spirituales ; such as David George, Harry Nicholas, Swenckfeld, Sabastian Franck, and others. These are the men that call the Scriptures the letter of the Scripture the dead letter, insufficient, inefficacious. This is but the sheath and the scabbard the bark and the shadow a carcass, void of the internal light, not apt to imprint a perfect knowledge in us of what is necessary to salvation ; but the Roman doctors say the same things. We know who they are that call the Scriptures the outward letter ink thus figured in a book unsound characters waxened-natured words, not yet sensed apt to blunder and confound, but to clear little or nothing ; these are as bad words as the others, and some of them the same ; and all draw a long train of evil consequences behind them. 1. From this principle, as it is promoted by the fana- tics, they derive a wandering, unsettled, and a dissolute religion. For, they supplying the insufficiency of Scripture by an inward word, which being only within, it is subject to no discipline, reducible into no order, not submitted to the spirits of the prophets, and hath no rule by which it can be directed, examined, or judged. Hence comes the infinite variety and contradictions 126 sition -the great proposition which our church proclaims, and which every pure church is bound to maintain, and which every church would main- tain, were there not some secret reason to the contrary. " Is it not," said the prophet to Ahaziah, " be- cause there is not a God in Israel that ye go to inquire of Baal-zebub, the God of Ekron?" Even so might we taunt our adversaries. Is it not because God has not in his word given the sum of Christian faith, that ye go to other sources for of religion, commenced by men of this persuasion a religion that wanders from day to day, from fancy to fancy, and alter- able by every new illusion a religion in which some man shall be esteemed an infallible judge to-day, and next week another; but it may happen that any man may have his turn, and any mischief may be believed and acted, if the devil get into the chair. 2. From this very same principle, as it is promoted by the Papists, they derive a religion imperious, interested, and tyrannical. For, as the fanatics supply the insufficiency of Scripture by the word internal, so do the Roman doctors by the authority of the church : but when it comes to practice, as the fanatics give the supreme power of teaching and defining to the chief elder in the love, so do the Papists, especially the Jesuits, give it to the Pope ; and the difference is, not that the fanatic gives the supreme judgment to some one, and the Papists give it to the whole church ; for these also give it but to one man, to the Pope, whose judgment, voice, and definition, must make up the deficiencies of Scripture ; but because the fanatics (as it happens) change their judges every month, therefore they have an ambulatory religion : but that of the Roman way establishes tyranny, because their judge being one, not in person, but in succession, and having always the same interest, and having already resolved upon their way, and can, when they list, go 127 your new and unchristian creed ? The dispo- sition to look for revelations at the mouth of any other than God is the surest proof of apostasy with its many fears. Why did Saul go to the witch of Endor ? Solely because he was afraid to ask council at the mouth of God. Would not the Pope and his party fly with as much confidence to the written word as a standard of appeal in every question, as now they fly from it to other standards, if they did not full well know, as many of them- selves have confessed, that their new articles and further upon the stock of the same principles, and being esta- blished upon human power, will unalterably persist in their right and their wrong, and will never confess an error, and are impatient of contradiction, and therefore they impose irreme- diably, and what they please, upon consciences of which they have made themselves judges. Now, for these things there is no remedy but from Scripture, which, if it be allowed full, per- fect, and sufficient unto all the things of God, then whatsoever either of these parties say must be tried by Scripture, it must be shewed to be there, or be rejected. But to avoid the trial there, they tell you Scripture is but a dead letter unsensed, characters, words without sense or unsensed ; and therefore this must be supplied by the inward word, says one ; by the Pope's word in cathedra, says the other; and then both the inward word and the Pope's word shall rule and determine everything ; and the Scriptures will signify nothing. But as, under pre- tence of the word internal, every new thing shall pass for the word of God, so it shall do also under the Roman pretence. For not he that makes a law, but he that expounds the law, gives the final measures of good or evil. It follows from hence, that nothing but the Scriptures' sufficiency can be a sufficient limit to the inundation of evils which may enter upon these par- ties relying upon the same false principles." Bishop Taylor. 128 practices have not any, even the least, foundation in the Word of the living God ? This is the question the only question about which churchmen should trouble themselves. And so long as we contend for this property and honour for the Word of God, it does not so much signify whether we use the terms rule, or standard, or any other similar title. When, therefore, the word " rule" is applied to the creed, it is not for a moment to be supposed that those who thus used the word ever meant that the creed was, or indeed could be, a rule in the sense in which Holy Scripture is so. The creed was, and is most certainly, a rule to try all Christians from heretics, and that in a short and easy way ; but it is only a rule so far as it contains the sum of what a Christian ought to believe, for even when we have the creed thus placed before us, we have still to go back to the regula regulars to that which gives any authority to the creed. And in this sense we receive the creeds. "The three creeds ought thoroughly to be received, for they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture."* ^P* The creed at once, and in the most easy way, convicts heretics. If it were not deduced from Holy Writ, then heretics might triumph ; but the deduction of the creed from Holy Scripture con- founds them all. And thus it is that we can, in * Article VIII. 129 few words, convict the Papacy of heresy. For instance, the creed of Athanasius, received by the Papacy in common with us, lays down the Chris- tian or Catholic faith, the Articles being the same as those summed up in the Apostles' and Nicene creeds, only more enlarged and explained. Having declared these Articles, the creed says, "This is the Catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved." As much as to say, that if a man does believe the articles of the creed he shall be saved. Here is a plain unanswer- able declaration, that the creed contains the Catholic faith, and that such faith is the faith through which salvation is to be obtained. But this doctrine would not suit the ideas of a church in which, as Taylor wittily remarks, " faith and Christianity increase like the moon." Now this creed is, to those who acknowledge it, a rule of faith ; it ought to be such to the Papacy, which professes to so highly reverence the decrees and decisions of the (early) church. To the Papal church then it should be a rule that is, a confes- sion by which to regulate, in few words, what is Christian faith, what articles of belief distinguish a Catholic from a heretic ; and by this document we may convict the Papal church of novelty and heresy. For had the Pope appeared in those days with his new articles, the first of them setting forth and insisting on his own supremacy, and had he K 130 addressed the church of that day with " My good fathers, you are much mistaken ; you have not laid down the Catholic faith, but here" handing in his novelties, heresies, and, we must say, idolatries " here is the true faith, out of which no man can be saved," how would not the early Christian fathers have surveyed the man ? Such, then, is the value of creeds for the more easy detection of novelty and heresy. But it must be quite evident that when we call the creed a rule, we do not mean the same thing as when we apply this title to Holy Scripture. We do not thereby seem to question the completeness of Holy Writ as a rule, for the only value of the creed is, that its articles are deduced from Scripture deduced, too, by the church in times of its purity, not as if the church had a right, in any degree, to create arti- cles of faith, but only because such articles are so clearly delivered by Heaven, that the church which should deny them could not lay claim to the title of a true, that is, a pure and faithful church. We cannot conclude this chapter without ex- pressing deep regret at the air of indifference which marks the style of the Tract before us. We refer to the way in which creeds and Scripture are thrown together into the same scale, as if for the sole purpose of perplexing the mind of the reader, and of leaving him under, if not a convic- tion, at least a doubt of the all-important truth 131 that the Bible, and not the deductions or decisions of fallible men, or as fallible councils, is the stan- dard, the sole standard of appeal in matters of faith, and that as we cannot add to the sufficiency or lustre of the sun in his meridian splendour, so neither can we add to the perfection, completeness, and glory, of the sun of revelation the written word of the living and true God. K2 132 CHAPTER VIII. Justification by faith Importance of Various definitions of the term True meaning of the Eleventh Article Faith the only mean of justification Baptismal or sacramental justi- fication Evil tendency of Hooker on Popish justification " Faith only" excludes baptism and all other means as means of justification Danger of contrary assertion The nature of Baptism excludes it as a mean of justification Sacra- mental justification not the doctrine of the Church of Eng- land Way in which faith justifies The Homilies. A VITAL question passes next under review the doctrine of justification by faith only. The im- portance of this doctrine cannot be overstated. We may form some idea of that importance from the fact, that ignorance of this doctrine was the rock on which the Jewish church made shipwreck : " For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteous- ness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." Ignorance or perversion of the same great doc- trine has been the foundation and fruitful source of all the false ways and corruptions with which the 133 Papal church has deceived Christendom, and de- stroyed so many souls of men. " This," says the great Hooker, after stating and exposing all these corruptions, " this is the mystery of the man of sin. This maze the church of Rome doth cause her followers to tread, when they ask her the way to justification." It is possible to raise many disputes on this article, while the truth of all statements on the subject will depend on our idea and definition of the word justification or righteousness. Thus it may be quite true that we are justified by faith that we are justified by the sacraments or that we are justified by works ; and unless we come to some definition of terms and distinct understand- ing as to the question at issue, we may dispute for ever, and never arrive at a satisfactory conclu- sion. A simple-minded Christian would be very much startled by a strong declaration that we are justified by works ; but it is very true that we are so, both in the sight of God and man. But does this mean that our works, whether done with or without grace, can furnish that covering or robe in which the church shall be presented to the Father without spot, blemish, wrinkle, or any such thing ? No ! but works justify us, insomuch as they prove us to be in possession of that faith which is " the only hand that putteth on Christ unto justification, and Christ the only garment which, being so put 134 on, covereth the shame of our defiled natures, hideth the imperfection of our works, preserveth us blameless in the sight of God, before whom otherwise the weakness of our faith were cause sufficient to make us culpable, yea, to shut us from the kingdom of heaven, where nothing that is not absolute can enter."* Again : the sacraments may be said to justify but how ? Is it that the reception of them, or their efficacy provides the robe with which the church stands arrayed here in the sight of God, and shall hereafter stand before the "great white throne" of the heavens ? No, but they convey to us the grace of God, whereby we are enabled to walk worthy of the vocation wherewith we are called, of the robe wherewith we are covered ; the sacra- ments and ordinances of God are paths in which his blessings are strewed by his bountiful hand, and gathered by the church with an adoring and thankful heart, and consequently a mean whereby that faith which is counted for righteousness is refreshed and strengthened. In all these views of this great question, everything will depend on our meaning of the word justification. "There is a glorifying righteousness of men in the world to come, as there is a justifying and sanctifying righteousness here. The righteousness whereby * Hooker. 135 we shall be clothed in the world to come, is both perfect and inherent. That whereby here we are justified is perfect, but not inherent. That whereby we are sanctified is inherent, but not perfect."* If we but observe the distinction here so clearly laid down by Hooker, we shall not experience any difficulty in the understanding of this question, or in the interpretation of the eleventh Article quoted in the Tract " That we are justified by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine." The righteousness, or justification, spoken of in the eleventh Article, is that defined by Hooker as "perfect, but not inherent." Therefore the same Article thus ex- presses itself, "We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, by faith, and not for our own works or deservings." It is, if possible, still stronger in the Latin version ' ' Tantum prop- ter meritum Domini ac Servatoris nostri Jesu Christi, per jidem, non propter opera et merita nostra, justi cor am Deo reputamur." Here justification is quite independent of any other consideration or means, save only the overflowing love of God coming down to men because of the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, while faith is the mere chan- nel through which, per fidem, we are made ac- quainted with and partakers of the Divine love. * Hooker. 136 Faith is the mean by which the consequence of the Divine love viz., the justification of the sinner for Christ's merits, or the accounting or reputing him just for or because of the merit of Christ, is applied to any individual; "It is," as Hooker saith, " the only hand that putteth on Christ unto justi- fication." It is the hand, and it is the only hand. That there should be any other hand is clearly an impossible thing, unless we reject the doctrine of the church of England* and embrace that of the Papal church, that we are justified or made righteous by the infusion of a " Divine spiritual quality" and when once we come to such doc- trine, we effectually make " Christ dead in vain," and then is it of little moment whether we come to grace of condignity or of congruity. We make the righteousness, by virtue of which we are ac- cepted of God, a something in ourselves whence * " This article was directed against the popish doctrine of Human Merit, which our reformers, with reason, considered as inconsistent with the whole scheme of redemption through Christ alone, and in particular as striking at the very root of the Christian duty of humility. Let us attend to the words in the Latin, which is much clearer than the English Tantum propter meritum Domini ac Servatoris nostri Jesu Christi, per fidem, non propter opera et merita nostra, justi coram Deo reptttamur. Observe, that faith is not opposed to works, but the merit of Christ is opposed to the merit of our works propter meritum Christi non propter opera et merita nostra and it is per fidem non propter fidem. It is here asserted that WE ARE ACCOUNTED RIGHTEOUS BEFORE GOD, ONLY FOR 137 it comes is not the question ; and, if in any degree in ourselves, or to go from ourselves to the church at large the bride of Christ how then can it ever come to pass that we, or the church, shall be presented faultless, " without spot, blemish, wrin- kle, or any such thing," before the throne of the Divine Majesty ? When we have done our best, the best that we can do even by the powerful aid of the Holy Ghost, our good, or the good done by God in us, is so marred by our corruptions so imperfect and weak through the flesh, that when we lift up our eyes to Him who is "of purer eyes than to behold iniquity," we must be compelled to cry for mercy, to pray that He would graciously look upon our infirmities and pardon our sins. To teach men the necessity of an infusion of the grace of God, or, in other words, influence of the Holy Ghost, as necessary for their perseverance in THE MERIT, that is, on account of the merit, OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST, BY FAITH, that is, through faith, AND NOT FOR, that is, not on account of, OUR OWN WORKS OR DE- SERVINGS. Our works never can have any merit towards pro- curing pardon of our sins, from their own intrinsic worth ; they cannot justify or tend to justify us. Nor has our faith any merit of this kind ; we are not said to be justified propter meritum fidei, or propter fidem but per fidem . . . Upon these grounds our church declares that the merit of OUR OWN WORKS has no share in our justification, in opposition to the papists, who assert that man's inherent righteousness is the meritorious cause of his justification, and that good works ' ad vitam ceternam consequendam vere promereri.' " Tomline. 138 well-doing, is of great importance, but to teach a sinner to look to righteousness wrought out by himself, by virtue of an infusion of grace, is to trifle with terms in matters of the highest moment is to place a sinner on a wrong foundation, and is to bring the ordinances and means of grace into such a state as the Jews, by their similar conduct, brought the holy ordinances in their day, when the Almighty declared that the very ordinances of his own appointment had, by reason of their perversion by his people, become offensive in his sight. In fact, such doctrine is a return to the very same error, from which the Article in question would separate us for ever. It is a return to the worst and most destructive doctrine of the Romish church the doctrine of sacramental justification. " But there are two more material differences between us : it is a tenet in the church of Rome, that the use of the sacra- ments, if men do not put a bar to them, and if they have only imperfect acts of sorrow accompanying them, does so far com- plete those weak acts as to justify us. This we do utterly deny, as a doctrine that tends to enervate all religion, and to make the sacraments, that were appointed to be the solemn acts of religion, for quickening and exciting our piety, and for convey- ing grace to us, upon our coming devoutly to them, become means to flatten and deaden us ; as if they were of the nature of charms, which, if they could be come at, though with ever so slight a preparation, would make up all defects. " The doctrine of sacramental justification is justly to be reckoned among the most mischievous of all those practical errors that are in the church of Rome. Since, therefore, this is nowhere mentioned in all these large discourses that are in 139 the New Testament concerning justification, we have just rea- son to reject it : since, also, the natural consequence of this doctrine is to make men rest contented in low imperfect acts, when they can be so easily made up by a sacrament, we have just reason to detest it, as one of the depths of Satan ; the tendency of it being to make those ordinances of the gospel, which were given us as means to raise and heighten our faith and repentance, become engines to encourage sloth and im- penitence." BURNET. The Tract now before us does set forth the doc- trine of sacramental justification, and is therefore the most dangerous chapter of the whole Tract. It cannot but both prove injurious in itself and also lay the foundation of as many helps, or " after meals" for grace, as the fears or superstition of the sinner may think necessary for the increase of his justification. It wholly removes the idea of justification being a judicial act of the God of grace, and it makes the language of our Article, " we are accounted," or reputed " righteous," a mere nullity. According to the doctrine held forth in the Tract, the reading should be, " We are made righteous before God." We have only to state the Popish doctrine, and the question will be placed in a still clearer light. " There is a glorifying righteousness of men in the world to come: as there is a justifying and sanctifying righteousness here. The righteousness wherewith we shall be clothed in the world to come, is both perfect and inherent. That whereby here we are justified is perfect, but not inherent. That whereby we are sanctified is inherent but not perfect. This 140 openeth a way to the understanding of that grand question, which hangeth yet in controversy between us and the church of Rome, about the matter of justifying righteousness. First : although they imagine that the mother of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ were for his honour, and by his special protection, preserved clean from all sin ; yet touching the rest, they teach, as we do, that infants that never did actually offend, have their natures defiled, destitute of justice, averted from God ; that in making man righteous none do efficiently work with God but God. They teach, as we do, that unto justice no man ever at- tained, but by the merits of Jesus Christ. They teach, as we do, that although Christ as God be the efficient, as man, the meritorious cause of our justice ; yet in us also there is some- thing required. God is the cause of our natural life ; in him we live ; but he quickeneth not the body without the soul in the body. Christ hath merited to make us just ; but as a medi- cine, which is made for health, doth not heal by being made, but by being applied, so by the merits of Christ there can be no justification without the application of his merit. Thus far we join hands with the church of Rome. "Wherein, then, do we disagree? we disagree about the nature and essence of the medicine whereby Christ cureth our disease ; about the manner of applying it ; about the number, and the power of means, which God requireth in us for the effectual applying thereof to our souls' comfort. When they are required to shew what the righteousness is whereby a Chris- tian man is justified, they answer that it is a divine spiritual quality; which quality received into the soul doth first make it to be one of them who are born of God ; and, secondly, endue it with power to bring forth such works as they do that are born of him ; even as the soul of man being joined to his body doth first make him to be of the number of reasonable creatures ; and, secondly, enable him to perform the natural functions which are proper to his kind ; that it maketh the soul amiable and gracious in the sight of God, in regard whereof it is termed grace ; that it purgeth, purifieth, and washeth out all the stains and pollutions of sins; that by it, through the merit of Christ we are delivered as from sin, so from eternal death and condemnation, the reward of sin. This grace they will have to be applied by infusion ; 141 to the end, that as the body is warm by the heat which is in the body, so the soul might be righteous by inherent grace ; which grace they make capable of increase ; as the body may be more and more warm, so the soul more and more justified, according as grace should be augmented ; the augmentation whereof is merited by good works, as good works are made meritorious by it. Wherefore the first receipt of grace in their divinity is the first justification; the increase thereof, the second justification. As grace may be increased by the merit of good works ; so it may be diminished by the demerit of sins venial ; it maybe lost by mortal sin. Inasmuch, therefore, as it is needful in the one case to repair, in the other to recover, the loss which is made ; the infusion of grace hath her sundry after-meals ; for the which cause they make many ways to apply the infusion of grace. It is applied to infants, through bap- tism, without either faith or works, and in them really it taketh away original sin, and the punishment due unto it; it is applied to infidels and wicked men in the first justification, through baptism, without works, yet not without faith ; and it taketh away both sins actual and original together, with all whatsoever punishment eternal or temporal thereby deserved. Unto such as have attained the first justification, that is to say, the first receipt of grace, it is applied farther by good works to the in- crease of former grace, which is the second justification. If they work more and more, grace doth more increase, and they are more and more justified. To such as diminished it by venial sins, it is applied by holy water, Ave Marys, crossings, papal salutations, and such like, which serve for reparations of grace decayed. To such as have lost it through mortal sin, it is applied by the sacrament (as they term it) of penance; which sacrament hath force to confer grace anew, yet in such sort that, being so conferred, it hath not altogether so much power as at the first. For it only cleanseth out the stain or guilt of sin committed, and changeth the punishment eternal into a temporary satisfactory punishment here, if time do serve ; if not, hereafter to be endured, except it be lightened by masses, works of charity, pilgrimages, fasts, and such like ; or else shortened by pardon for term, or by plenary pardon quite re- moved and taken away. This is the mystery of the man of 142 sin. This maze the church of Rome doth cause her followers to tread when they ask her the way to justification. Whether they speak of the first or second justification, they make it the essence of a divine quality inherent, they make it righteousness which is in us. If it be in us, then is it ours, as our souls are ours, though we have them from God, and can hold them no longer than pleaseth Him ; for, if he withdraw the breath of our nostrils, we fall to dust ; but the righteousness wherein we must be found, if we will be justified, is not our own ; there- fore we cannot be justified by any inherent quality. Christ hath merited righteousness for as many as are found in him. In him God findeth us if we be faithful, for by faith we are incorporated into Christ. Then although in ourselves we be altogether sinful and unrighteous, yet even the man which is impious in himself, full of iniquity, full of sin ; him being found in Christ through faith, and having his sin remitted through repentance ; him God upholdeth with a gracious eye, putteth away his sin by not imputing it, taketh quite away the punishment due thereunto, by pardoning it, and accepteth him in Jesus Christ, as perfectly righteous, as if he had fulfilled all that was commanded him in the law ; shall I say more perfectly righteous than if himself had fulfilled the whole law ? I must take heed what I say ; but the apostle saith ' God made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin : that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.' Such we are in the sight of God the Father, as is the very Son of God himself. Let it be counted folly, or frenzy, or fury, whatsoever ; it is our comfort and our wisdom ; we care for no knowledge in the world but this, that man hath sinned, and God hath suffered ; that God hath made himself the son of man, and that men are made the righteousness of God. You see, therefore, that the church of Rome, in teaching justification by inherent grace, doth pervert the truth of Christ, and that by the hands of the apostles we have received otherwise than she teacheth." Hooker. It is, we conceive, a mere insult to Heaven to speak of a sinner being justified by the righteous- ness of our God and Saviour, and then to go about 143 to prove that, after all, that righteousness is the righteousness of our Saviour, only in the same sense in which our lives are his, because we receive them from him, and can hold them only so long as he pleases. The Article was levelled at the Popish doctrine of righteousness, and that doctrine was the fatal one of righteousness, justifying righteous- ness, by an infusion of grace through the sacra- ments. If we come back to the principle, we may as well withdraw our protest against Rome, for the ways by which she would repair grace decayed are, though bad enough, yet but a small item in the account of her guilt in having led astray her mem- bers on the most important question which can interest the human mind the question " How should man be just with God?" We are, then, grieved to find the author of the Tract spending his time and his talents to remove the force of the word " only," where it is said in the Article that we are justified " by faith only," so as to make it appear that we are not only not jus- tified by faith only, but that we are justified by other things as means of justification. In speak- ing of justification now, we are, as the Article compels us to do, speaking of justification in the highest sense, and to resort to any other meaning of this term would not only be beside the ques- tion, but would be unworthy trifling with words 144 with the souls of men, and with the glory of God. Confining ourselves, then, to the highest meaning of justification as a judicial act of the God of grace in favour of rebellious and undeserving creatures confining ourselves to such a view of the question, we are surprised and grieved to find the author of the Tract explaining away the force of the word " only" as applied to faith, and labouring to shew that baptism is not only not excluded from being a mean of justification by the word " only," but that baptism is itself a mean ; thus destroying justification by faith, and establishing sacramental justification in its stead. The foundation of his argument is, that the word " only" does not always so limit as to ex- clude every other thing. Thus we are justified by works ; therefore faith only does not exclude works ; and so we may be said to be justified by faith only, and yet baptism be not excluded. Now, in the question where justification is said to be by works, and such justification not excluded by the words " faith only," the enlargement of the pro- position does not depend on the word " only," but on the difference in the meaning of the term justi- fication. But if our author builds, as he does, his doctrine of baptismal justification on this, that the declaration of our being justified by faith only does not mean what it asserts, but that we are justified by baptism also, then must he be content 145 to try the force of his argument by an examination of the word " only," the word whose occasional enlargement is supposed to destroy its limitation in this particular Article. A short trial will shew the value of his argument. In the same Article it is said, that we are accounted righteous before God, " only" for the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ. Are we to conclude, on the prin- ciples of the Tract, that the word " only" does not only not exclude other means, but that there are other means or merits than those denned and limited by the word "only?" If "faith only" does not exclude nay, but establishes baptism as a mean of justification, then "the merits of Christ only" must, by the same reasoning, prove that other merits are not only not excluded, but are actually established ! The argument on the word " only," therefore proves too much, or it proves that we are justified by other merits, and this idea would esta- blish the Papal system of merits in the plenitude of its power. So much, then, for the argument from the word " only." But how can our author give forth the idea that we are justified by baptism directly or indirectly, or in any way whatever, if we take justification in the sense already more than once defined the sense, too, in which the Article in question uses the word ? The church never baptizes any person without L 146 having a pledge of existing faith. If baptism pre- ceded or generated faith, then there would be room for the author's position for baptismal justifica- tion ; but when we know that faith cometh by other means, then we, by the same rule, know that baptism succeeds faith, and therefore justification. "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by theWord of God." And we require, as the church of God in all ages has done, faith in those to whom we ad- minister baptism nay, even in children we require faith. The way in which it is required or given is not now the question. And was not this the prac- tice of the apostles' time ? ' ' See, here is the water : what doth hinder me to be baptized ? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and he baptized him." This is the very confession required by our church in order to baptism ; and the man who can in sincerity make such confession, is "justified from all things, from which he could not be jus- tified by the law of Moses." Thus the very nature of baptism, and the faith and confession required previously to its administration, prove that it is not a mean of justification, and that "faith only" does mean faith only, to the exclusion of other means. Wherefore, then, serveth baptism? will occur to some minds. With this question we are 147 not now concerned ; our only point is to shew that baptismal, or sacramental justification is not the doctrine of the church of England. But if baptism were a mean of justification, did not the early church err greatly in having had only two festivals in the year for its administration ? It is not a mean, for then it would be inseparable from the end, whereas there might happen a case of a man dying without baptism, and yet that he should be saved where, for instance, baptism was desired but could not be had. But there could not occur such a case as a man dying without faith, being justified and glorified, for " he that believeth not shall be damned." The difference is well stated in the following : " Upon this institution and commission given by Christ, we see the apostles went up and down preaching and baptizing. And so far were they from considering baptism only as a carnal rite, or a low element, above which a higher dispensa- tion of the Spirit was to raise them, that when St. Peter saw the Holy Ghost visibly descend upon Cornelius and his friends, he, upon that, immediately baptized them, and said ' Can any man forbid (or deny) water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?' Our Saviour has also made baptism one of the precepts, though not one of the means, necessary to salvation. A mean is that which does so certainly procure a thing, that it being had, the thing to which it is a certain and necessary mean is also had ; and without it the thing cannot be had, there being a natural connexion between it and the end. Whereas a precept is an institution, in which there is no such natural efficiency ; but it is positively commanded ; so that the neglecting it is a con- tempt of the authority that commanded it ; and, therefore, in L2 148 obeying the precept, the value or virtue of the action lies only in the obedience. This distinction appears very clearly in what our Saviour has said both of faith and baptism < He that be- lieveth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned ?' " Where it appears that faith is the mean of salvation with which it is to be had, and not without it since such a believ- ing as makes a man receive the whole gospel as true, and so firmly to depend upon the promises that are made in it, as to observe all the laws and rules that are prescribed by it, such a faith as this gives us so sure a title to all the blessings of this new covenant, that it is impossible that we should continue in this state, and not partake of them ; and it is no less impossible that we should partake of them, unless we do thus believe. It were not suitable to the truth and holiness of the divine nature to void a covenant so solemnly made, and that in favour of wicked men, who will not be reformed by it; so faith is the certain and necessary mean of our salvation, and is so put by Christ; since upon our having it we shall be saved, as well as damned upon our not having it. " On the other hand, the nature of a ritual action, even when commanded, is such, that unless we could imagine that there is a charm in it, which is contrary to the spirit and genius of the gospel, which designs to save us by reforming our natures, we cannot think that there can be anything in it that is of itself effectual as a mean ; and therefore it must only be considered as a command that is given to us, which we are bound to obey, if we acknowledge the authority of the command. But this being an action that is not always in our power, but is to be done by another, it were to put our salvation or damnation in the power of another, to imagine that we cannot be saved with- out baptism ; and therefore it is only a precept which obliges us in order to our salvation ; and our Saviour, by leaving it out when he reversed the words, saying only, ' He that believeth not,' without adding, and is not baptized, shall be damned, does plainly insinuate that it is not a mean, but only a precept, in order to our salvation." Burnet. The second division of this chapter of the Tract is thus expressed : 149 " 2. Next, we have to inquire in what sense faith only does justify. In a number of ways, of which here two only shall be mentioned" " First, it is the pleading or impetrating principle which consti- tutes our title to justification ; being analogous among the graces to Moses lifting up his hands on the Mount, or the Israelites eyeing the brazen serpent, actions which did not merit God's mercy, but asked for it. A number of means go to effect our justification.* We are justified by Christ alone, in that He has purchased the gift ; by faith alone, in that faith asks for it ; by baptism alone, for baptism conveys it ; and by newness of heart alone, for newness of heart is the life of it. " And secondly, faith, as being the beginning of perfect or justifying righteousness is taken for what it tends towards, or ultimately will be. It is said by anticipation to be that which it promises ; just as one might pay a labourer his hire before he began his work. Faith working by love is the seed of divine graces, which in due time will be brought forth and flourish partly in this world, fully in the next. ' We do not consider the above a happy statement of this great truth. Faith neither merits nor asks for justification. To maintain the contrary, would be to establish justification by works, for such doctrine makes faith a work of impetration, or asking, which precedes justification. Faith, even in the smallest degree, will bring a sinner nigh to the God of mercy, solely because faith is the gift of God, and its tendency is to draw the sinner to the fountain whence that gift proceeds. Faith is not nature, for nature leads us to fly from the * "The infusion of grace (writes Hooker, in a passage al- ready quoted) hath her sundry aftermeals." 150 voice of God, as Adam did after his transgression. It is clearly impossible to explain the way in which faith is begotten.* It is by God's Spirit " working in due season." It is true of it that we cannot see it, nor tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth. We trace it in its effects, and the life of faith is not that it expects by its impetra- tion, or asking, to merit justification, but that laying hold, though with but a trembling hand, on "Jehovah our righteousness," it is emboldened to say, though I have not courage to come directly be- fore him yet, " If I may but touch the hem of his garment I shall be whole ;" and with his help I will touch it, for I can now view him as a "just God and yet a Saviour." In the next place, unless we establish a first and second justification, in accordance with the doc- trine of the Council of Trent, and, with the same council, make justification to be grace infused for the purpose of increase in justification, we cannot say that ' c faith is the beginning of perfect or justify- ing righteousness." Faith is the evidence of a Christian's justification ; or, in other words, of the application or communication of an interest in the righteousness of God to his soul. It cannot there- * " And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead," &c. (Ephes. i. 19, 20.) 151 fore be the beginning of perfect or justifying righteous- ness. But faith is the beginning of perfect and justify- ing obedience. We say justifying, not as if that obedience justified ourselves \vho possess faith, but as justifying our faith, and proving before heaven and before men, that our faith is not a dead, but a true and living faith ; and without this faith there cannot be either good or cheerful work. Its nature is to fill the soul with gratitude, and to purify and call forth every good feeling ; con- sequently the difference between the work of the man who has this true faith and the man who is without it, is the difference between the cheerful work of the free man and the grudging work of the hireling or the galley slave. Let a few passages from the " Homilies" con- clude this chapter : " In these foresaid places, the apostle toucheth specially three things, which must go together in our justification. Upon God's part, his great mercy and grace ; upon Christ's part, justice that is, the satisfaction of God's justice, or the price of our redemption, by the offering of his body, and shed- ding of his blood, with fulfilling of the law perfectly and throughly ; and upon our part true and lively faith in the merits of Jesus Christ, which yet is not ours, but by God's working in us ; so that in our justification, there is not only God's mercy and grace, but also his justice, which the apostle calleth the justice of God, and it consisteth in paying our ransom, and fulfilling of the law ; and so the grace of God doth not shut out the justice of God in our justification, but only shuttelh out the justice of man that is to say, the justice of 152 our works, as to be merits of deserving our justification. And therefore St. Paul declareth here nothing upon the behalf of man concerning his justification, but only a true and lively faith, which, nevertheless, is the gift of God, and not man's only work without God. And yet that faith doth not shut out repentance, hope, love, dread, and the fear of God, to be joined with faith in every man that is justified, but it shutteth them out from the office of justifying. So that although they be all present together in him that is justified, yet they justify not altogether : neither doth faith shut out the justice of our good works, necessarily to be done afterwards of duty towards God, (for we are most bounden to serve God, in doing good deeds, commended by him in his holy Scripture, all the days of our life.) But it excludeth them, so that we may not do them to this intent, to be made just by doing of them. For all the good works that we can do be imperfect, and therefore not able to deserve our justification. But our justification doth come freely by the mere mercy of God, and of so great and free mercy, that whereas all the world was not able of themselves to pay any part towards their ransom, it pleased our heavenly Father of his infinite mercy, without any our desert or deserv- ing, to prepare for us the most precious jewels of Christ's body and blood, whereby our ransom might be fully paid, the law ful- filled, and his justice fully satisfied. So that Christ is now the righteousness of all them that truly do believe in him. He for them paid their ransom by his death. He for them fulfilled the law in his life. So that now in him, and by him, every true Christian man may be called a fulfiller of the law, foras- much as that which their infirmity lacked, Christ's justice hath supplied." .... " First you shall understand, that in our justification by Christ, it is not all one thing, the office of God unto man, and the office of man unto God. Justification is not the office of man, but of God, for man cannot make himself righteous by his own works, neither in part nor in the whole, for that were the greatest arrogancy and presumption of man that antichrist, could set up aganist God, to affirm that a man might, by his own works, take away and purge his own sins, and so justify himself. But justification is the- office of God only, and is not 153 a thing which we render unto him, but which we receive of him : not which we give to him, but which we take of him by his free mercy, and by the only merits of his most dearly beloved Son, our only Redeemer, Saviour, and Justifier, Jesus Christ : so that the true understanding of this doctrine, we be justified freely by faith without works, or that we be justified by faith in Christ only, is not that this our own act to believe in Christ, or this our faith in Christ, which is within us, doth justify us, and deserve our justification unto us, (for that were to count ourselves to be justified' by some act or virtue that is within ourselves ;) but the true understanding and meaning thereof is, that although we hear God's word and believe it although we have faith, hope, charity, repentance, dread, and fear of God within us, and do never so many works thereunto, yet we must renounce the merit of all our said virtues, of faith, hope, charity, and all other virtues and good deeds which we either have done, shall do, or can do, as things that be far too weak and insufficient and imperfect to deserve remission of our sins and our justification ; and therefore we must trust only in God's mercy, and that sacrifice which our High Priest and Saviour Christ Jesus the Son of God once offered for us upon the cross, to obtain thereby God's grace and remission, as well of our original sin in baptism as of all actual sin committed by us after our baptism, if we truly repent and turn un- feignedly to him again. So that as St. John Baptist, although he were never so virtuous and godly a man, yet in this matter of forgiving of sin he did put the people from him and ap- pointed them unto Christ, saying thus unto them, 'Behold, yonder is the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world.' Even so, as great and as godly a virtue as the lively faith is, yet it putteth us from itself, and remitteth or ap- pointeth us unto Christ, for to have only by him remission of our sins or justification. So that our faith in Christ (as it were) saith unto us thus, ' It is not I that take away your sins, but it is Christ only, and to him only I send you for that purpose, forsaking therein all your good virtues, words, thoughts, and works, and only putting your trust in Christ." Homily : " Of the Salvation of Mankind" 154 CHAPTER IX. Works before and after Justification The doctrine of the Church of England on the subject Obscure and danger, ous statement of Justification in the Tract Similarity be- tween the doctrine of the Tract and that of the Council of Trent on this subject The doctrine of works as stated in the Tract, and by Bellarmine compared Fallacy of the case of a man being neither in darkness nor light Doc- trine of the church on this subject Danger of the opposite view as seen in the Papal doctrine of attrition All works, either works of the flesh or the fruits of the Spirit- Works of the justified pleasing to God, and entitled to re- ward Ground of that reward. WE have seldom read any piece of theological writing which has more surprised us than has the portion of the Tract now under review. The chapter quotes the twelfth and thirteenth Articles of the church. Those Articles speak of two kinds of works of works before and of works after jus- tification ; or, as otherwise expressed, "The grace of Christ and the inspiration of his Spirit." That the Article speaks of these and only these two kinds of works is self-evident, and is acknowledged by the author of the Tract. " The Article," says 155 our author, ' ' contemplates these two states : one of justifying grace, and one of the utter destitution of grace ; and it says that those who are in utter destitu- tion cannot do anything to gain justification ; and, indeed, to assert the contrary would be pelagianism." This is not a faithful representation of the doctrine of the Article. A reader not conversant with the Article itself would, from such a statement, infer that it is possible " to gain justification ;" only we must not profess to "gain" it by our works so long as we are in utter destitution of grace, or, in other words, so long as our works are the works of nature instead of the fruits of the Spirit. But when or where did ever the church of England use the words " gain justification?" Our Articles, Liturgy, Homilies, all condemn, directly and indi- rectly condemn, such doctrine. And we are only astonished that any clergyman of the church could use, without reprobation, such language. We have, in the former chapter, shewed in what justification consists that "justification is the office of God only" and that he accounts us righteous " solely for the merit of Christ through faith," per fidern, not propter fidem. How such doctrine can be reconciled with the expressions " gain justification," we must leave the author of the Tract to determine. And yet not only in this place, but throughout his whole Tract there is the idea conveyed that justification is of grace infused, 156 by virtue and by exercise of which we attain to or gain final righteousness or justification. This is the doctrine of the Council of Trent. And, as we said before, it signifies little how many aids we call in either to improve grace received or to repair grace decayed, if once we sacrifice the great truth of the gospel, and compromise the office and work of our Divine Redeemer. If we call in our own efforts, we may as well call in the efforts of saints ; if we call in our penances and sufferings here, we may as well call in the sufferings in purgatory hereafter ; for the truth or falsehood of those " sundry aftermeals," by which grace is assisted to " gain justification," is of very little moment indeed when compared with the destructive doctrine which they are brought to establish. If the reader imagines that we are better than the Papacy in this in that we do not profess to do works without the grace of Christ. Neither, we reply, does the Papacy so profess. She holds, as well as we do, that unto anything good no man ever attained but by the grace of God, and that without that grace we are powerless to do any good. The use of that grace, and the account to which they turn those works done by grace viz., making them to " gain justi- fication," is the crowning sin of the Papal church " the mystery," as Hooker terms it, " of the man of sin." 157 But besides the wrong idea conveyed by the words, " gain justification," a reader not familiar with the subject might conclude that it is possible to " gain justification, 7 ' if only we do not profess to do so on the principles of pelagianism that is, if we do not expect to do so by our works done in a state of utter destitution of grace. We do not say how far our author may hold such doctrine as this : with that point we have nothing to do. We only say that he should not convey to any reader such false doctrine, and he should not by such oppose himself to his church and his brethren, who " hold fast the form of sound words," as taught by their mother the church. We now come to the discovery which our author makes of a third state. We call it discovery not disrespectfully, but because at least to us it is a discovery. We find something like it in the writings of Cardinal Bellarmine and in the Council of Trent, and yet not exactly the doctrine of the Tract, for neither Bellarmine nor the Council of Trent, although they admit three kinds of works, speak of the intermediate state mentioned by our author, in which a sinner is described as being in twilight neither in light nor in darkness neither in nor out of a state of grace. The only doctrine in the Papal church which seems to correspond with this idea is the doctrine of attrition. And yet this does not correspond, for attrition is in the 158 church a kind of repentance only a repentance which arises from unworthy motives. Bellarmine speaks of three kinds of works: 1. Those done by our natural strength, which he utterly rejects as of no possible value ; 2. Works proceeding from faith and grace, which dispose a sinner to reconci- liation, or as elsewhere and in the Council of Trent expressed to justification; and, 3. The works of the already justified man. To the last of which they attribute merit. His words are tl Non hoc habet Catholica doctrina, ut partim propter Christum, partim propter opera sua justificentur peccatores. quasi etiam sine Christo ipsa opera aliquid mereantur. Siqui- dem tria distinguimus operum genera. Unum eorum, qua? fiunt ex solis viribus naturae, sine fide et gratia Dei, et de his aperte pronunciamus cum apostolo, quia ex operibus non justi- ficatur homo, sed ex fide, et si ex ejusmodi operibus quis justi- ficaretur. haberet gloriam, sed non apud Deum, ut de Abraham Beatus Paulus dicit ad Roman. 4. Itaque de his operibus nulla est inter nos controversia, tametsi passim impudentissimo men- dacio id nobis tribuitis, quod opera sine Christi fide meritoria esse doceamus. " Alterum est operum genus, quod ex fide et gratia Dei pro- cedit, et ad reconciliationem cum Deo, ac peccatorum remis- sionem disponit, qualia sunt Oratio, Eleemosyna, Jejunia, Dolor de peccatis, et alia id genus. Quae quidem opera non dicimus esse meritoria, ex justitia ipsius reconciliations, sed e contrario potius audiaius Tridentinam Synodum dicentem (Sess. 6, cap. 8,) ideo gratis justificari homines, quia nee fides, nee opera quae justificationem praecedunt, ipsam merentur. nimirum ex justitia, quasi, ejusmodi operibus esset debita justificatio, fate- mur tamen haec ipsa opera, quatenus ex fide, et adjutorio divino proficiscuntur, divina esse opera, et suo modo mereri, hoc est, impetrare peccatorum remissionem. Id enim, etsi vos non con- ceditis, concedit tamen verbum Dei." 159 Then follow some texts of Scripture and some quotations from the fathers, which the cardinal brings forward in proof of his position, but which, as we are not now engaged in the discussion, but only in a statement, of the Romish doctrine, we omit. The cardinal then proceeds " Postremum denique genus operum est eorum, quae a justi- ficato jam homine fiunt, et a Spiritu Sancto inhabitarite cor hominis, et caritatem in eo diffundente procedunt. " Quibis operibus, velitis, nolitis, meritum attribuimus ; non quod remissionem peccatorum, quae praecessit, et quae sub meritum proprie cadere non potest, sed gloriam ac beatitudinem sempiternam, vere et proprie mereantur, alioqui enim quomodo, Paul us. "2, Timoth. 4, diceret : ' Bonum certamen certavi, cur- sum consummari,jidem servavi, in reliquo reposita est mihi corona justitice, quam reddet mihi in ilia die Justus Judexf Si enim vita aeterna non est vere merces operum bonorum, cur earn vocat coronam justitiae, et non potius donum clementiae ? Cur dicit reddendam, non donandam ? Cur a justo Judice, non a liberal! Rege ?" Thus it is evident that Bellarmine takes higher ground than the author of the Tract, although both the cardinal and the author make shipwreck of the faith of the gospel on the fatal rock of jus- tification being the working out of grace infused, and of works under certain conditions, disposing men to the grace of justification. Our author states, that even works before justification may do this ; and yet he terms those works as works done with the Divine aid and in faith ! although before he asserted, that the state in which such a man is 160 found is an intermediate state, in which a man has neither received grace nor is he deserted by God neither in light nor in darkness. The fallacy lies in this in calling that neither light nor darkness which is light, although but the dawn, and although it mayonly.as the prophet says, "rise in obscurity." " The path of the just is as the shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day," until, at length, it makes " its golden set" " And, by the bright track of his fiery car, Gives token of a goodly day to-morrow." But because as it pursues its way it advances in lustre until it attain its meridian splendour, are we to assert that it was not light at first as well as at its meridian height ? It was so, only not in the same degree. Or because God may give one man more light than he gives to another, or may give the same man more than had been his portion at a former period, are we to conclude that what he possessed before was not light ? It may have been darkness in comparison with the display of noon-day brightness, but it was light all the while. In the same way the law of God, holy, just, and good, or the legal dispensation, is said to have had no glory " by reason of the glory that ex- celleth" that is, of the gospel dispensation, but it will not be denied that it was glory. Let us now take one of the author's examples 161 the case of Cornelius. Will any man place the prayer and humiliation of Cornelius and the humi- liation of Ahab on the same level ? Will any man assert that they were the same ? Did God visit or look upon them in the same light, or did He dis- pense to them of his goodness in the same way ? He did, it is true, defer the temporal punishment or judgments because of even the feigned humi- liation of the wicked king, but to Cornelius He sent his angel and referred to his apostle, that Cornelius might learn the way of God more perfectly. Now, as there was a difference in the two cases, who made that difference? of what was it the result in the case of Cornelius ? who made him to differ from the other ? and what had he that he did not receive ? If we maintain that Cornelius made the difference by virtue of the exercise of his natural powers, we embrace a doctrine that even Bellarmine abhors, and we establish a position in direct opposition to our own church, which teaches thus : " The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good works, to faith and calling upon God. Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, that we have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will." Article X. If the works of Cornelius were not done by virtue of his natural powers they were done by the grace 162 of God. Our limited understandings are not able to find out the ways of Him who is wonderful in counsel and excellent in working WHO has HIM- SELF challenged us, c< Canst thou by searching find out God?" Sinners are called by God's Spirit working in due season ; so says our Article " Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ unto ever- lasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to Gods purpose by his Spirit working in due season : they through grace obey the calling : they be justified freely : they be made sons of God by adoption : they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ : they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity." Artick XVII. When God thus calls men he leads them on from grace to grace from strength to strength, until He summons them to appear before himself in Zion. But if we cannot " bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, "nor " loose the bands of Orion," it is no marvel if we cannot control and discern the every step of Him who says, "I will lead the blind by a way that they know not. I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them." All is the working of God gently influencing our cor- rupt wills, and so bringing us from grace to glory. 163 Whereas the doctrine of the Tract keeps the Almighty Saviour in the distance, waiting, as it were, to dispense His justification, when our works, done before it, may move Him and dispose us to receive that grace ! What but this doctrine of men, being thus or in any way disposed to gain or to receive justification, could have given rise to the fatal errors of the Roman School ? The following will shew some of the consequences of such doctrine : " 1st. According to your doctrine, the absolution of the minister is not simply declaratory, but judicial, valid, and bind- ing, so that there can be no doubt but that the person receiv- ing it is absolved ; or, if we entertain any doubt on the subject, we are accursed by the Council of Trent, Sessio xiv. canon 9. The church of England, regardless of the anathema of Trent, maintains the opposite. 2nd. The absolution of the priest, according to the Trent doctrine of the sacraments, is necessary to salvation. The church of England, in doctrine and prac- tice, denies this. 3rd. The absolution of the priest, according to Trent, is of such importance and value, that it can, by some strange process, make attrition contrition, and save a man who has only imperfect repentance, in which there is no love of God. The Lord Jesus Christ says, ' Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish ;' Trent says, ' If ye have even attrition, (i. e., imperfect repentance, arising from base motives, such as fear of hell, &c.) ye shall surely be saved, if only ye can obtain the priest's absolution.' You say that contrition (perfect re- pentance) is indispensably necessary to give efficacy to the absolution. How can you assert this, when your Council of Trent lays down such soul-destroying doctrine as this, that at- trition is sufficient, if the person can obtain the priest's absolu- tion ! This is such awful doctrine, that I shall give your own authorities for what I say, lest any should conclude that I mis- represent your system. The Council of Trent speaks thus : M2 164 ' It declares that that imperfect contrition which is called attri- tion, since it is commonly conceived from a consideration of the baseness of the crime, or from the fear of hell or punish- ment, if it excludes the desire of sinning, with the hope of pardon, not only does not make a man a hypocrite, or more a sinner, but is the true gift of God, and the impulse of the Holy Spirit, not as yet dwelling in him, but only moving him ; with which the penitent being assisted, it prepares the way to justice ; and although of itself it cannot, without the sacrament of penance, lead the sinner to justification, yet it disposes him to receive the grace of God in the sacrament of penance.' The original words are t Ulam vero contritionem imperfectam, qtice attritio dicitur, quoniam vel ex turpitudinis peccati considera- tione, vel ex gehennts et pcenarum metu communiter concipitur, si voluntatem peccandi excludat, cum spe Venice ; dedaratnon solum non facere hominem hypocritam, et magis peccatorem, verum etiam donum Dei esse, et Spiritus sancti impulsum, non adhuc quidem inhabitantis, sed tanturn moventis, quo penitens adjutus, viam sibi ad justitiam parat. Et quamvis sine sacramento pcenitentice per se ad justificationem perducere peccatorem nequeat; tamen cum ad Dei gratiam in sacramento pcenitentice impetran- dum disponit." (Cone. Trent, sessio xiv. cap. 4.) You must now have another statement of this doctrine, from the ' Abridg- ment of Christian Doctrine,' revised by Dr. Doyle. (See the article on penance.) Q. What is attrition ? A. It is imper- fect contrition, arising from the consideration of the turpitude of sin, or fear of punishment ; and if it contain a detestation o. sin with the hope of pardon, it is so far from being itselt wicked, that though alone it justify not, yet it prepares the way to justification, and disposes us, at least remotely, towards ob- taining God's grace in the sacrament. Q. What, if a dying man be in mortal sin, and cannot have a priest? A. Then nothing but perfect contrition will suffice, it being impossible to be saved without the love of God.' So that, according to this impious doctrine, the absolution of the priest supplies the place of the love of God, which is lacking in attrition ! Need I say, that the church of England has too much respect for the character of God, and His truth, not to protest loudly against such a system as this ? 4th. The church of Rome maintains 165 (Trent, sessio vii. canon 11) that the intention of the priest is necessary, when he administers the sacraments ; so that the priest's intention must accompany the absolution. This the church of England abhors, and protests against." Page's Letters to a Romish Priest. We deeply lament to find any member of our pure and holy church setting such doctrine before her children, and we more deeply lament the fine- drawn distinctions made in the Tract. Such fine- spun disquisitions are too well calculated to teach a sinner to speculate in the things that concern his everlasting peace to, in fact, set his " life upon the cast," and to embolden him " to stand the hazard of the die." And now for what pur- pose all this expenditure of thought and time? Was the attempt to establish this third or interme- diate system of works, which go to " dispose men to the grace of justification," designed to correct the church of England for not having more care- fully instructed her children ? The church, leaving it to others to speculate, follows the word of the Redeemer " He that is not with me is against me," and establishes the simple doctrine in con- formity with the Holy Scriptures, that works are either works done before or after the grace of Christ. Does, then, the author of the Tract mean to say, that the church has in these Articles, " the off- spring of an uncatholic age," done injustice to the truth of God, or to any Catholic doctrine, by not 166 requiring her ministers to teach, and her children to believe, that there is a third or intermediate state of which the Tract speaks, and that such state is neither light nor darkness, neither grace nor nature? Has the church, in not enforcing such an idea, neglected the teaching of Catholic doctrine ? If she has, let it be proved against her, and if not, why should the clergy trouble her chil- dren with doubtful dissertations about points which she has not stooped to notice. And how does her silence prove the truth of our author's position ? Thus the church declares that there are two kinds of works works before and after justifica- tion ; and consequently two states one of justify- ing grace, and one of utter destitution of grace ; but she does not say that there is not an interme- diate state. Therefore there is an intermediate state ! Is this sound reasoning ? But we need not to try the matter thus, for the Tract declares, ' ' However, there is an intermediate state of which the Article says nothing, but which must not be forgotten." The silence of the church is a sufficient proof of her ignorance or her condemnation of such doc- trine ; and if we cannot in such cases argue from her silence to her ignorance or condemnation of a doctrine, then there is not a heresy in Christendom the truth of which may not be proved by the same process of reasoning. Thus it is certain that the 167 church asserts the truth of such or such a doctrine, but she says nothing of another particular doctrine, therefore that particular doctrine is true ! There is not, we again assert, a heresy over the surface of Christendom which may not, by such a mode of argument, be established and justified. The Word of God rises above all such " doubt- ful disputations," and declares that " that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," and " they that are in the flesh cannot please God." The fruits of the flesh are manifest, and they cannot dispose men to any grace. The fruits of the Spirit are also manifest, and they are pleasing to God. These are the works by which men should be examined and proved here, for these are the works by which their faith and love will be examined and proved hereafter, in presence of the holy angels, before the bar of the Son of Man. The author thus concludes his unhappy chap- ter : "If works BEFORE justification, when done by the influence of Divine aid, gain grace, much more do works AFTER justification. If," says our author, taking for granted that our church has neglected her duty in not having laid down the position, and taking much lower ground than that assumed by Bellarmine, as quoted above " if works before jus- tification, when done by the influence of Divine aid /" Works BEFORE justification, and yet done by the in- 168 fluence of the Divine aid ! ! And stranger still, such works gain grace ! or, as he before expressed it, dispose men to receive the grace of justification ! This is worse than the doctrine of the Papal church, and involves us in greater difficulties " If such works gain grace, much more do works done after jus- tification." Now, without interfering with the former clause, we may agree with the Tract in asserting, in ac- cordance, too, with our Article, that works of the justified are pleasing to God, and He abundantly rewards them, not because any works deserve a reward, but because God, of his grace, promises them a rich reward, according to the exclamation of Augustine Dignaris, quoniam in seculum misericordia tua est, iis quibus omnia debita dimit- tis promissionibus tuis debitor fieri. "Thou dost vouchsafe, O Lord for thy mercy endure th for ever by THY promises, to become debtor to those to whom thou dost remit all debts." 169 CHAPTER X. The visible Church Definition of, by the Church of England Explanation of that definition Objections answered The terms Church, Unity, and Catholicity Barrow, Pearson, and Taylor, on. THE nineteenth and twenty-first Articles of the church are next brought under our notice in this Tract for the Times. The former of the Articles referred to gives us this definition of the visible church of Christ : " The visible church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacra- ments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same." On the subject of this definition the author of the Tract remarks : " This is not an abstract definition of A church, but a descrip- tion of THE. actually existing one holy catholic church diffused throughout the world." To prove that the church is, as the Article so 170 defines, a ccetus Jidelium, or assembly or society of the faithful; that is, of "men joined to each other by a right faith and by the sacraments," there are upwards of twenty authors quoted in the Tract. These quotations, as is declared in the Tract, shew that the phraseology of the Article is, " not laying down any logical definition of what a church is, but is describing and, as it were, pointing to the Catholic church diffused throughout the world ; which being but one, cannot possibly be mistaken, and requires no other account of it beyond this simple and majestic one." Ther ecannot be any doubt (so at least we think) respecting the intention of the Article. The inten- tion was to give a definition of the Catholic church of that body to which our creeds refer " the holy Catholic church," and " I believe one Catho- lic and apostolic church," and for which we thus intreat the favour of Heaven "More especially we pray for the good estate of the Catholic church." When our Article defines the visible church of Christ, " a congregation of faithful men," we are not to understand that every member of that church is really faithful, if we use the word to signify loyal, obedient, pious. In such case the definition would cease to be correct, and would but give en- couragement to the folly of those who trifle away their brief existence in endeavours to establish a pure and spotless church upon earth. The word 171 " faithful " must therefore mean a congregation of men professing the faith of Christ. Some years ago we gave this reply to one of our clergy who had departed from the church, and who, while he allowed the correctness of the definition given in the Article, would, by the same definition, have proved the church of England an apostate church ! " His leading argument, (to prove the church of England apostate,) when gathered up, is this " That the church of England proclaims "the church of Christ a congregation of faithful men ;" that when he refers to this congregation "he is sent back again" to (t dead articles," which can- not "constitute a church;" that as "the Jews had the oracles of God committed to them, yet were apostate, so the church of England is not redeemed from the charge by having sound articles to appeal to, for these are made void by the au- thorized perversions of Mant and Tomline ;" " that whoever calls the church of England part of the visible church of Christ, virtually proclaims all her members to be faithful in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, and the mass of heresy which is dissemi- nated from her pulpits to be the pure word of God ; when these marks are wanting she ceases to be a church, and is condemned out of her own mouth." " The sum of all this is, The church of England calls the church of Christ a congregation of faithful 172 men ; but all her members are not faithful, there- fore she is apostate ! ! Pray, reader ! connect the conclusion with the premises, for I cannot. Why confound the terms church of England and church of Christ ? The church of England's definition of the church of Christ is one thing, her claim to be part of this church quite another. Again ; does it follow that, because she thus defines the church, therefore all her members must necessarily be "faithful in Christ Jesus, and called;" or, that if all be not, she, by her own confession, ceases to be a church, and is apostate ? " Let us now apply Mr. M.'s principle to himself. He establishes a church, and has certain articles of faith, (whether written or not is of no consequence.) Suppose, what is very probable, that in this church are found some who are not really " faithful in Christ Jesus, and called," how can he deliver his church from the charge of apostasy? Will his appeal to his confession of faith avail ? No (to use his own words) " similarly the church of Mr. M. is not redeemed from the charge of apostasy, if otherwise proved against it," by having his confes- sion to appeal to. But how is it otherwise proved against his church ? By his leading proof of the church of England's apostasy, that whoever calls Mr. M.'s a part of the visible church of Christ, virtually proclaims all her members to be faithful in Christ Jesus ; and when these marks are want- 173 ing, she ceases, by her own confession, to be a true church, and is therefore apostate ! "Further; the apostles would have given a similar definition of the church of Christ, for Mr. M. admits that it (the church of England's definition) is agree- able to Scripture. But there was, in this apostolic church, one of even twelve not faithful, and who did, notwithstanding, partake of the Lord's supper. Must we conclude (according to Mr. M.'s logic) that the church of Christ was then apostate ? To prevent cavilling, it matters not whether there was then, or be at any time, one in twelve, or whether such be detected or not the question is, the existence of any member in the visible, or part of the visible church of Christ, who is not " faithful in Christ Jesus, and called." Hence it follows that Mr. M.'s leading point proves nothing ; or that not merely his own is, but that the apostolic church of Christ was, apostate ! !"* This may serve to shew, that, by her definition of the visible church of Christ, the church of England does not pledge herself that every member of her own communion, or of the visible church, is per- sonally interested in the blessings of the faithful, or that it is necessary for the correctness of the definition that such should be the case. On the contrary, the church has many, too many, erring * Page's Anatomy of a " Protest" entitled " Is the Church of England Apostate ?" 174 and rebellious sons and daughters ; and she would teach us and them, that mere privileges or ordi- nances do not confer a title to everlasting glory ; nay, that they are of value only so far as they bring us into union and communion with the God of ordinances, and that it is as true now as it was in former times " They are not all Israel which are of Israel ; neither because they are of the seed of Abraham are they all children." So we may say, neither because they are the seed of any particular branch of the visible church, are they all children of God. Many duly baptized persons walk, " who are enemies of the cross of Christ whose end is destruction whose god is their belly who glory in their shame who mind earthly things." The following passages give clear views of the term church, and of the leading notes of the church its unity and catholicity : " The word church is ambiguous, having, both in holy Scrip- ture and common use, divers senses, somewhat different. For " 1st. Sometimes any assembly or company of Christians is called a church ; as when mention is made of the church in such a house, (whence Tertullian saith, where there are three, even laics, there is a church.} " 2nd. Sometimes a particular society of Christians, living in spiritual communion and under discipline ; as when the church at such a town ; the churches of such a province ; the churches, all the churches, are mentioned : according to which notion St. Cyprian saith, that there is a church where there is a people united to a priest, and a flock adhering to their shepherd ; and so Ignatius saith that without the orders of the clergy a church is not called. 175 " 3rd. A larger collection of divers particular societies com- bined together in order, under direction and influence of com- mon government, or of persons acting in the public behalf, is termed a church ; as the church of Antioch, of Corinth, of Jerusalem, &c., each of which, at first, probably might consist of divers congregations, having dependencies of less towns an- nexed to them ; all being under the care of the bishops and presbytery of those places ; but, however, soon after the apostle's times, it is certain that such collections were, and were named churches. " 4th. The society of those who at present, or in course of time, profess the faith and gospel of Christ, and undertake the evangelical covenant, in distinction to all other religions, par- ticularly to that of the Jews, which is called the synagogue. " 5th. The whole body of God's people that is, ever hath been, or ever shall be, from the beginning of the world to the consummation thereof, who, having (formally or virtually) be- lieved in Christ, and sincerely obeyed God's laws, shall finally, by the meritorious performances and sufferings of Christ, be saved, is called the church." Barrow, on the Unity of the Church, The same question is thus treated by Pearson in his masterly work on the Creed : " For the understanding of the true notion of the church, first we must observe that the nominal definition or derivation of the word is not sufficient to describe the nature of it. If we look upon the old English word now in use church, or kirk, it is derived from the Greek, and first signified the house of the Lord, that is, of Christ, and from thence was taken to signify the people of God meeting in the house of God. The Greek word used by the apostles to express the church, signifieth a calling forth, if we look upon the origination ; a congregation of men, or a company assembled, if we consider the use of it. But neither of these doth fully express the nature of the church, what it is in itself, and as it is propounded in our belief. " Our second observation is, that the church hath been taken 176 for the whole complex of men and angels worshipping the same God ; and again the angels being not considered, it hath been taken as comprehending all the sous of men believing in God ever since the foundation of the world. But being Christ took not upon him the nature of angels, and consequently did not properly purchase them with his blood, or call them by his word ; being they are not in the Scriptures mentioned as parts or members of the church, nor can be imagined to be built upon the prophets or apostles ; being we are at this time to speak of the proper notion of the church, therefore I shall not look upon it as comprehending any more than the sons of men. Again ; being, though Christ was the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world, and whosoever, from the beginning, pleased God, were saved by his blood ; yet, because there was a vast differ- ence between the several dispensations of the law and gospel, because our Saviour spake expressly of building himself a church when the Jewish synagogue was about to fail, because Catho- licism, which is here attributed unto the church, must be un- derstood in opposition to the legal singularity of the Jewish nation, because the ancient Fathers were generally wont to dis- tinguish between the synagogue and the church, therefore I think it necessary to restrain this notion to Christianity. '* Thirdly, therefore, I observe, that the only way to attain unto the knowledge of the true notion of the church, is to search into the New Testament, and from the places there which men- tion it, to conclude what is the nature of it. To which purpose it will be necessary to take notice that our Saviour first spake of it, mentioneth it as that which then was not, but afterwards was to be ; as when he spake unto the great apostle, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; but when he ascended into heaven, and the Holy Ghost came down when Peter had converted three thousand souls, which were added to the hundred and twenty disciples, then was there a church, (and that built upon Peter, according to our Saviour's promise,) for after that we read, The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. A church, then, our Saviour promised should be built, and by a promise made before his death ; after his ascension, and upon the preaching of St. Peter, we find a church built or constituted, and that of a nature capable of a daily in- 177 crease. We cannot, then, take a better occasion to search into the true notion of the church of Christ, than by looking into the origination and increase thereof, without which it is impossible to have a right conception of it. " Now, what we are infallibly assured of the first actual ex- istence of a church of Christ is only this. There were twelve apostles with the disciples before the descent of the Holy Ghost, and the number of the names together were an hundred and twenty. When the Holy Ghost came,' after a powerful and miraculous manner, upon the blessed apostles, and St. Peter preached unto the Jews, that they should repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins ; they that gladly received his word were bapfized, and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. These being thus added to the rest, continued steadfastly in t the apostle's doc- trine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers ; and all these persons so continuing are called the church. What this church was is easily determined, for it was a certain num- ber of men, of which some were apostles, some the former dis- ciples ; others were persons which repented and believed, and were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and continued hear- ing the word preached, receiving the sacraments administered, joining in the public prayers presented unto God. This was, then, the church, which was daily increased by the addition of other persons received into it upon the same conditions, making up the multitude of them that believed, who were of one heart and one soul, believers added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and But though the church was thus begun, and represented unto us as one in the beginning, though that church which we pro- fess to believe in the creed be also propounded unto us as one, and so the notion of the church in the Acts of the Apostles might seem sufficient to express the nature of that church which we believe, yet because that church was one by way of origination, and was afterwards divided into many, the actual members of that one becoming the members of several churches ; and that church which we believe, is otherwise one by way of complexion, receiving the members of all churches into it ; it will be neces- sary to consider, how at the first those several churches were 178 constituted, that we may understand how in this one church they were all united. To which purpose it will be farther fit to examine the several acceptions of this word as it is diversly used by the Holy Ghost in the New Testament; that if it be possible, nothing may escape our search, but that all things may be weighed before we collect and conclude the full notion of the church from thence. " First, then, that word which signifies the church in the ori- ginal Greek, is sometimes used in the vulgar sense, according as the native Greeks did use the same to express their conventions, without any relation to the worship of God or Christ, and there- fore is translated by the word assembly, of as great a latitude. Secondly, it is sometimes used in the same notion in which the Greek translators of the Old Testament made use of it, for the assembly of the people of God under the law, and therefore might be most fitly translated, the congregation, as it is in the Old Testament. Thirdly, it hath been conceived that even in the Scriptures it is sometimes taken for the place in which the members of the church did meet to perform their solemn and public services unto God ; and some passages there are which seem to speak no less, but yet are not so certainly to be under- stood of the place, but that they may as well be spoken of the people congregated in a certain place. Beside these few dif- ferent acceptions, the church, in the language of the New Tes- tament, doth always signify a company of persons professing the Christian faith, but not always the same latitude. Some- times it admitteth of distinction and plurality ; sometimes it reduces all into conjunction and unity ; sometimes the churches of God are diversified as many ; sometimes, as many as they are, they are all comprehended in one." Pearson, then, thus states the grounds on which we give the " affections" of unity and catholicity to the church : " From whence it appeareth that the first unity of the church, considered in itself, beside that of the head, which is one Christ, and the life communicated from that head, which is one 179 spirit, relieth upon the original of it, which is one ; even as a house built upon one foundation, though consisting of many rooms, and every room of many stones, is not yet many, but one house. Now there is but one foundation on which the church is built, and that is Christ : for other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ which is the unity of origination. " Secondly. The church is therefore one, though the members be many, because they all agree in one faith. There is one Lord and one faith, and that faith once delivered to the saints, which whosoever shall receive, embrace, and profess, must ne- cessarily be accounted one in reference to that profession . . . And this is the Unity of Faith. " Thirdly. Many persons and churches, howsoever distinguish- ed by time or place, are considered as one church, because they acknowledge and receive the same sacraments, the signs and badges of the people of God And this is the Unity of the Sacraments. " Fourthly. Whosoever belongeth to any church is some way called, and all which are so are called in one hope of their call- ing : the same reward of eternal life is promised unto person, and we all, through the Spirit, wait for the hope of righteousness by faith And this is the Unity of Hope. " Fifthly. They which are all of one mind, whatsoever the number of their persons be, they are in reference to that mind but one ; as all the members, however different, yet being ani- mated by one soul, become one body And this is the Unity of Charity. " Lastly. All the churches of God are united into one by the unity of discipline and government, by virtue whereof the same Christ ruleth in them all. For they have all the same pastoral guides appointed, authorized, sanctified, and set apart by the ap- pointment of God, by the direction of the Spirit, to direct and lead the people of God in the same way of eternal salvation : as therefore there is no church where there is no order, no minis- try ; so where the same order and ministry is, there is the same church And this is the Unity of Regiment and Dis- cipline." N 2 180 The grounds on which the note of catholicity rests are also stated by Pearson ; and we would quote them here, although we propose to give, in another place,* a separate treatise on the term Catholic. " The most obvious and most general notion of this Catho- licism consisteth in the diffusiveness of the church, grounded upon the commission given to the builders of it Go, teach all nations, whereby they and their successors were authorized and empowered to gather congregations of believers, and so to ex- tend the borders of the church unto the utmost parts of the earth " Secondly. They called the church of Christ the Catholic church, because it teacheth all things that are necessary for a Christian to know, whether they be things in heaven or things in earth, whether they concern the condition of man in this life, or in the life to come. As the Holy Ghost did lead the apostles into all truth, so did the apostles leave all truth unto the church, which teaching all the same, may well be called Ca- tholic, from the universality of necessary and saving truths re- tained in it. Thirdly. The church hath been thought fit to be called Catholic, in reference to the universal obedience which it pre- scribeth, both in respect to the persons, obliging men of all conditions, and in relation to the precepts, requiring the per- formance of all the evangelical commands. "Fourthly. The church hath been yet further called or reputed Catholic, by reason of all graces given in it, whereby all diseases of the soul are healed, and spiritual virtues are disseminated, all the works, and words, and thoughts of men are regulated, till we become perfect men in Christ Jesus." We shall conclude this chapter with an extract from the works of Jeremy Taylor, in which that truly * See Appendix B. 181 learned and pious bishop and divine well draws the distinction between the church as a mere cor- poration or visible community, and the church as a body of true Christians. 1. " It ought to be known and agreed upon what is meant by this word church^ or ecclesia. For it is a TroXvarj^ov ; and the church cannot be a rule or guide, if it be not known what you mean when you speak the word. Suiyua lavrov rr\v (.KK\T)triav KaXe'i 6 Xptoroc, said Suidas His body viz., mystical, Christ calls his church. Among the Greeks it signifies a convention or assembly met together for public employment and affairs ; avvaym^rjv '6y\ov ; so Aristophanes understands it. E(o;Xj<7td & ov^l Sta TOVTOV yivETai ; is there a convocation, or an assembly, called for this Plutus ? Now, by translation, this word is used among Christians to signify all them who out of the whole mass of mankind are called and come, and are gathered together by the voice and call of God, to the worship of God through Jesus Christ, and the participation of eternal good things to follow : so that the church is a company of men and women professing the saving doctrine of Jesus Christ. This is the church in sensu forensi, and in the sight of men ; but because glorious things are spoken of the city of God, the professors of Christ's doc- trine are but imperfectly and inchoatively the church of God ; but they who are, indeed, holy and obedient to Christ's laws of faith and manners, and live according to his laws, and walk by his example these are truly and perfectly the church, and they have this signature God knoweth who are his. These are the church of God in the eyes and heart of God. For the church of God are the body of Christ; but the mere profession of Christianity makes no man a member of Christ ; neitlier circumcision nor uncircumcision availeth anything in Christ Jesus, nothing but a new creature ; nothing but a faith ivorking by love, and keeping the commandments of God. Now they that do this are not known to be such by men ; but they are only known to God ; and therefore it is in a true sense the invisible church; not that there are two churches, or two 182 societies, in separation from each other; or that one can be seen by men, and the other cannot ; for then either we must run after the church, whom we ought not to imitate, or be blind in pursuit of the other, that can never be found ; and our eyes serve for nothing but to run after false fires. Xo, these two churches are but one society, the one is within the other, they walk together to the house of God as friends, they take sweet counsel together, and eat the bread of God in common ; but yet though the men be visible, yet that quality and excellency by which they are constituted Christ's members, and distinguished from mere professors and outsides of Christians, this, I say, is not visible. All that really and heartily serve Christ in abdito, do also profess to do so ; they serve him in the secret of the heart, and in the secret chamber, and in the public assemblies, unless by an intervening cloud of persecution they be for a while hid, and made less conspicuous; but the invisible church ordinarily and regularly is part of the visible, but yet that only part that is the true one ; and the rest but by denomination of law, and in common speaking, are the church : not in mystical union, not in proper relation to Christ ; they are not the house of God, not the temple of the Holy Ghost, not the members of Christ ; and no man can deny this. Hypocrites are not Christ's servants, and therefore not Christ's members, and therefore no part of the church of God, but improperly and equivocally, as a dead man is a man ; all which is perfectly summed up in these words of St. Austin, saying, that the body of Christ is not bipartitum, it is not a double body : ' Non enim revera Domini corpus est, quod cum illo non erit in sternum? All that are Christ's body shall reign with Christ for ever. And therefore they who are of their father the devil, are the synagogue of Satan, and of such is not the kingdom of God : and all this is no more than what St. Paul said, They are not all Israel, who are of Israel, and he is not a Jew that is one outwardly, but he is a Jew that is one inwardly, Now if any part of mankind will agree to call the universality of professors by the title of the church, they may if they will ; any word by consent may signify anything ; but if by church we mean that society which is really joined to Christ, which hath received the 183 Holy Spirit, which is heir of the promises, and the good things of God, which is the body of which Christ is head ; then the invisible part of the visible church, that is, the true servants of Christ only, are the church ; that is, to them only appertains the Spirit, and the truth, the promises, and the graces, the pri- vileges and advantages, of the gospel ; to others they appertain, as the promise of pardon does ; that is, when they have made themselves capable." 184 CHAPTER XL The Church represented by General Councils The Prince's right over all estates within his realm Councils not to be assembled without his consent Burnet on this subject The fallibility of councils The promises of the Church do not prove the infallibility of councils Vain reasoning of the Tract on this subject Gregory Nazianzen on councils The Canons of the Church of England on the authority of synods. FROM the question of the church we pass on to that of the church represented by general councils. The Twenty-first Article of the church of England thus speaks : " General councils may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of princes. And when they be gathered together, {forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the spirit and word of God,) they may err, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Where- fore things ordained by tliem as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they are taken out of holy Scripture." Here are two important positions. The first, the indirect assertion of the prince's right of 185 control over all estates of men within his realm, so that no bodies of men should be gathered together in his kingdom, not even for ecclesias- tical purposes, without his knowledge and consent. Holy Scripture and the necessity of the case alike render it absolutely necessary that the prince should have and exercise such power within his do- minions. Burnet thus well states the matter : , " Clergymen are subject to their princes according to these words ' Let every soul be subject to the higher powers :' if they are then subject to them, they cannot be obliged to go out of their dominions upon the summons of any other ; their persons being under the laws and authority of that country to which they belong. "This is plain, and seems to need no other proof. It is very visible how much the peace of kingdoms and states is concerned in this point ; for if a foreign power should call their clergy away at pleasure, they might be not only left in a great destitu- tion as to religious performances, but their clergy might be practised upon, and sent back to them with such notions, and upon such designs, that, chiefly supposing the immunity of their persons, they might become, as they often were in dark and ignorant ages, the incendiaries of the world, and the disturbers and betrayers of their countries. This is confirmed by the practice of the first ages, after the church had the protection of Christian magistrates : in these the Roman emperors called the first general councils, which is expressly mentioned, not only in the histories of the councils, but in their acts ; where we find both the writs that summoned them, and their letters, some- times to the emperors, and sometimes to the churches, which do all set forth their being summoned by the sacred authority of their emperors, without mentioning any other. In calling some of these councils, it does not appear that the popes were much consulted ; and in others we find popes, indeed, suppli- cating the emperors to call a council, but nothing that has so 186 much as a shadow of their pretending to an authority to summon it themselves. " This is a thing so plain, and may be so soon seen into by any person who will be at the pains to turn to the editions of the first four general councils made by themselves, not to men- tion those that followed in the Greek church, that the confi- dence with which it has been asserted, that they were sum- moned by the popes, is an instance to shew us that there is no- thing at which men, who are once engaged, will stick when their cause requires it. But even since the popes have got this matter into their own hands, though they summon the council, yet they do not pretend to it, nor expect that the world would receive a council as general, or submit to it, unless the princes of Christendom should allow of it, and consent to the publication of the bull. So that by reason of this, councils are now become almost unpracticable things." The next point is the fallibility of general councils when gathered together. And in reference to this we have a most amusing distinction without a dif- ference. It is admitted in the Tract, that " bodies of men deficient in this respect" (that is, not in- fluenced by the Spirit of God) "may err, unless, indeed, they be favoured with some divine superintend- ence, which has to be proved before it can be admitted." General councils, then, may err, unless in any case it is promised, as a matter of express supernatural privilege, that they shall not err ; " a case" (the writer adds) " which lies beyond the scope of this Article, or, at any rate, beside its determination." Now what does all this mean ? " Bodies of men may err, unless they be favoured with divine superin- tendence ;" and " general councils may err, unless it 187 is promised that they shall not err /" We know not what can be intended by such mystery about a very simple statement in the church article. How much an easier and shorter a way of stating the question, to have convinced the reader, by the rules of reasoning that a thing may be unless it cannot be ! general councils may err unless they can not err ! and thus this deeply important proposition, so self-evident if not cumbered with elaborate proof, is disposed of in a moment ! But, adds the Tract, " Such a promise," (that is, of inerrancy, as a Romish priest of some distinc- tion once so termed it to us ; or, as we generally say, of infallibility,) " however, does exist in cases when general councils are not only gathered together ac- cording to ' the commandment and will of princes,' but in the name of CHRIST, according to our LORD'S promise. " Now we may ask these few questions of the writer. In the first place, where is the promise to which he so confidently appeals, when he says, " Such a promise, however, does exist ?" Would it not have been much better to have either quoted or referred his readers to the promise in question? We suspect that the promise is like the vain pre- tence of papal infallibility which it is designed to support impossible to find its seat, or have access to it for any practical difficulty. In the second place, what is the meaning of 188 " councils not only gathered together according to ' the commandment and will of princes,' but in the name of Christ, according to our Lord's promise" ? There is much stress laid on the words, " in the name of Christ," and so a wide distinction drawn between the council called by the commandment and will of princes and in the name of Christ ; and we are told that " the Article contemplates the human prince, not the King of Saints." We ask again, what is the meaning of this ? Or for what reason is the church of England thus debased, as to suppose that she ever contemplated a Christian council not called " in the name of Christ," but merely fixed the minds of her children on an earthly prince to the forgetfulness, and, in heavenly things, of " the King of Saints" ? Or, when and where did ever such a thing occur, as a council of the Christian church whether called by emperors, or princes, or popes called in any other than the name, and for the work, of Christ ? The sincerity or the purity of those who called councils is not now the question, but merely that all Christian councils, whether called by princes or popes, have been called, professedly so at least, in the name, and for the work, of Christ. What, then, does this strange declaration mean ? We cannot discover. Longinus, if we remember correctly, gives as a note of the true sublime, that the writer should say only just so much as to give some idea of his meaning, and to leave the reader much 189 to conceive. And truly we have here fallen upon a practical illustration of Longinus' sublime. And as to the promise of Christ, which is given to councils assembled in his name (promise of not erring in vision nor stumbling in judgment) where is that promise ? Here, indeed, we are upon tender ground ; and we strongly suspect that many persons who make use of the promises of Christ to His church for the purpose of proving the infallibility of the decisions of councils, do not see to the end of the question before them ; and even the author of the Tract may not have seen, that, in forcing the promises of Christ, he would but furnish the Jew with a good excuse for his rejection of our Messiah, and would establish church inerrancy, or infallibility, on the ruins of the Redeemer's king- dom. This, we repeat, is tender ground. But we shall reserve our view for a future portion of this work.* In the last place, we are told that " while councils are a thing of earth, their infallibility, of course, is not guaranteed; when they are a thing of heaven, their deliberations are overruled, and their decrees authorita- tive. In such cases they are Catholic councils." We do not want to know of decrees being authorita- tive ; we want the means of settling all these nice points in an unerring way that is, when councils are a thing of earth and when they are the contrary ; * Appendix B. " Treatise on Infallibility of the Church." 190 and we want to have proved, not that the decrees of councils may be authoritative, but that they are infallible. All this the Tract considers that " it is not neces- sary to determine." It was, it would appear, very necessary to fill the mind of an inexperienced reader with doubts or with amazement at sentences and statements literally " signifying nothing," or the mind of a more experienced reader with pity, if not with indignation ; but it was not at all necessary to determine anything, or do more than confuse the truth, or obscure the simple beauty of the Articles of the church of England. But, after all, this very point, which the author of the Tract does not find it "necessary here to deter- mine," is determined in favour of the papacy. Thus, "some have included among those conditions" (of a council gathered in the name of Christ, and therefore, according to the Tract, infallible) " the subsequent reception of its (a council's) decrees by the universal church; others, a ratification by the Pope !" This is the easy way in which the question is set- tled ; not to clear up any difficulties in the English churchman's mind, but to leave him, and unas- sisted, to all the noisy pretensions and cunning sophistry of the advocates of papal usurpation ! But the Tract itself is such a wonder, coming as it does from a clergyman of the church of England, that particular portions, such as those now quoted, cannot furnish any ground of surprise. 191 In the conclusion of the author's observations on this subject, we have another instance of this want of certainty or fixed purpose, either as to the point to be proved, or as to the proof itself. The fol- lowing is the passage, and it affords a curious specimen of the reasoning adopted in the Tract : " St. Gregory of Nazianzen well illustrates the consistency of this (the Twenty-first) Article, with a belief in the infallibility of oecumenical councils, by his own language on the subject on different occasions" Now for the language of St. Gregory, by which he both condemns and yet deifies councils by which he proves them worse than nothing and yet infallible. " My mind is, if I must write the truth, to keep clear of every conference of bishops, for of conference never saw I good come, or a remedy so much as an increase of evils. For there is strife and ambition, and these have the upper hand of reason. " Yet, on the other hand, [the Tract informs us,] he [St. Gregory] speaks elsewhere of the Holy Council of Niccea, and that band of chosen men whom the Holy Ghost brought to- gether." Well, what does this prove ? All conferences of bishops are useless, indeed, worse than useless they "increase evils:" But " the Council of Nicsea," though it consisted of many bishops, was " a band of chosen men whom the Holy Ghost brought together:" Therefore, in the opinion of Gregory, general councils are infal- lible ! Now, although the opinion of Gregory may have but little weight, certainly no more than the opinion of any good man, yet this kind of reason- 192 ing, to prove that, because Gregory called the " Council of Nicsea that band of chosen men whom the Holy Ghost brought together," therefore he professed his faith in the infallibility of general councils, is certainly most extraordinary. It is childish logic to conclude thus worse than childish, to conclude, as such sentiments go to do, every good man, or body of men, whom the Holy Ghost may influence, or send, or bring to any place, to be endowed with infallibility in his or their decisions. Cornelius was influenced by the Holy Ghost to send for Peter. The Holy Ghost set his seal to the message " Go with them nothing doubting, for I have sent them." And yet, what was Cornelius' first resolve and act? to, in accordance with pagan notions, offer worship to Peter, which resolve and act Peter rebuked, with " Stand up ! I myself also am a man." And yet, according to this logical reasoning respecting infallibility of councils, Cor- nelius must have been infallible : or Peter made a mistake in correcting his idolatrous act. But why all this ambiguous and mysterious writ- ing about such questions this saying and yet not saying this "yea and nay" mode of scattering doubts and firebrands ? If the author of the Tract thinks that the councils which established the idolatry of image worship, or that any other of the councils which, under papal influence, established " false doctrine, heresy, and schism," were general councils, and therefore infallible in their decisions, 193 why does he not boldly and honestly stand forward and say so in plain language, about which there can be no mistake? Or, if he will not act thus, why does he teaze and offend the loyal churchman and English subject with such illogical reasoning and with such mischievous writing ? We shall conclude this point with the doctrine of the church of England in reference to synods, which will shew that we do not profess to require the sanction of the Pope for the holding of a council or synod in England, nor the ratification, by any foreign bishop or potentate, of our pro- ceedings. " AUTHORITY OF SYNODS. " A National Synod, the Church Representative. " Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that the sacred synod of this nation, in the name of Christ, and by the king's authority assembled, is not the true church of England by representation, let him be excommunicated, and not restored until he repent and publicly revoke that his wicked error." Canon 139. " Synods conclude as well the absent as the present. " Whosoever shall affirm, that no manner of person, either of the clergy or laity, not being themselves particularly assembled in the said sacred synod, are to be subject to the decrees thereof in causes ecclesiastical, (made and ratified by the king's majesty's supreme authority,) as not having given their voices unto them, let him be excommunicated, and not restored until he repent, and publicly revoke that his wicked error." Canon 140. 194 CHAPTER XII. The papacy's assumption of the prerogatives of Heaven Im- portance of this question Generally avoided by the advo- cates of the papal church Curious and incorrect reasoning of Tract No. 90, on the church of England's condemnation of Romish doctrines Purgatory Image worship Saint worship Archbishop Wake's reply to Bossuet. WE have in the preceding chapters reviewed the leading and more dangerous points of this Tract for the Times which has occupied so much of public attention. In the course of our review we have stated the position and doctrine the high position and pure doctrine of the church of England, as to her freedom from the least taint of schism, and as to her confessions of faith and her standards of appeal. These points once settled, all others, how- ever important in themselves, are but of secondary consideration. For example, the particular doc- trines of the papal church, though most opposite to Christianity, and though most destructive in their nature, are, notwithstanding, minor questions when compared with the crowning sin of the 195 papacy the usurpation of the sole prerogative of Heaven the right to lay down a new standard of appeal, and the right to promulgate and impose new articles of faith. This assumed right is, we repeat, the crowning sin of the papacy, and it is of the utmost import- ance that every true churchman, or, in other words, every true Catholic, should rightly understand and view this daring presumption on the part of Rome. A correct view of this question decides, and at once puts an end to, all controversy. No sophistry can stand before this view of the great question in dispute between us and Rome. The advocates of the papal church, or the volunteers of the Pope's army, will fight and debate, and debate and fight, about particular points, and, as in the Tract before us, enter into most learned disquisitions between Anglicanism and Popery between Romish pur- gatory or saint- worship, or any other of the errors of that fallen community, and the primitive or some other view of such important trifles nay, in one sense, worse than trifles, most destructive heresies ; but these men, whether home-born ad- vocates or unsolicited allies, will not meet the ques- tion, when placed before them in the view to which we now refer. For many years we have not only watched these defenders of the papacy, but we have had expe- rience of some of them, and we have found all o2 196 alike in entertaining the reader with elaborate dis- sertations on new doctrines, instead of proving their right to assume the power and the privileges of Heaven. On one occasion, a Roman-catholic priest had before him the very offensive doctrine of saint-worship as laid down and practised in the church of Rome ; and how did he reply ? He en- tered upon a long and curious dissertation about three kinds of genuflection ! Well, we replied, "They hatch cockatrice' eggs and weave the spider's web;" we do not desire to know anything respecting the various kinds of genuflection, we desire to know your right to term such offensive doctrine Chris- tianity ; and then, your authority to force the same on the consciences of men under pain of excommu- nication here, and of damnation hereafter." Thus we replied ; and this case is but one of the many which have come under our own notice, and but one of the many instances in which those main- tainers of a new and corrupt faith have been com- pelled, when pressed on this subject, to retire from the field. Having, then, reviewed the more important points of controversy suggested by the Tract before us, we would not enter upon those separate and several articles of so called Christian faith, which are the necessary results of unsound views of Christianity, and of false standards of appeal. Thus we shall not enter upon the merits of the 197 doctrine of purgatory, of pardons, of images, of relics, or of invocation of saints. We take for granted that all these doctrines are what our church describes them " fond things, vainly invented and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture," but " repugnant to the word of God." We view them as heresies and idolatries, and we only wonder that any man who has ever read the revelation of the living and true God could for a moment dignify them, in any form whatever, with the name of Christianity. We leave, then, to others the fine-spun distinc- tions between the Romish doctrine and the primi- tive doctrine of image or saint worship that is, in plain language, between Romish and primitive idolatry ; and we would content ourselves with the selection of a few specimens of the reasoning of this Tract for the Times in its endeavours to de- fend the papal church from the force of our protest against her corruptions of the Catholic faith. " The first remark [writes the author of the Tract] that occurs on perusing this Article is, that the doctrine objected to is the ' Romish doctrine' For instance, no one would suppose that the Calvinistic doctrine conceining purgatory, pardons, and image- worship, is spoken against. Not every doctrine on these matters is a fond thing, but the Romish doctrine"! Again the author writes, " And further, by ' the Romish doctrine is not meant the Tri- dcntine doctrine, because this Article was drawn up before the decree of the Council of Trent." 198 The author of the Tract then goes on to assert, that, in fact, our church, in the Article before us, " by anticipation approves" of the Tridentine doc- trine and merely condemns the Romish doctrine ! But what was the work and result of the Council of Trent? That council selected from the mass of heresy which had spread to such an extent over Christendom, these doctrines, embodied them into a confession of faith, and forced them upon men under pain of damnation. But our author seems to have been deceived by the fair speeches of the Council of Trent, and he would have us suppose that our church anticipated that council in the con- demnation of the mere abuses of those doctrines, but that the doctrines themselves, instead of being heresies, were pure doctrines of the Catholic church parts of the religion of the Son of God ! And to carry out this strange idea, the author has taken the trouble to quote, in no less than eighteen pages, the Homilies and leading divines of our church, to shew that they only condemned the corrupt view of those pure and mpst Christian heresies ! but all the while professed their faith in the doctrines themselves. To all this new method of reasoning we may return a very short answer, and that, as we before said, without entering upon the merits of those doctrines, without wasting time in the discussion of such points, and without in- 199 suiting the true churchman with proof that these doctrines condemned in our Articles are not any part of the religion of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. By this fanciful mode of reasoning a sinner may justify any sin or species of vice, if only he com- fort himself by merely saying, " Not every view of this sin or this vice is condemned, but only the one as practised in such or such a place ;" for vice has its changes and fashions as well as doctrines. In the New-Testament epistles we find sins marked out by name, and mentioned as peculiar to the church to which the apostle wrote. Well, how easily any sinner of another church might have remained at ease in the indulgence of sin, by say- ing, " Not every sin of this nature is condemned, but the Corinthian or the Galatian view." And so they might all have gone on in their sins, if only they did not adopt the precise opinions or mode of indulgence in that sin as practised in other places. We never met more extraordinary reasoning ; it is mere trifling ; it is perversion of reason. But we pass by this view, and would shew that our author has not been in all instances very happy in the selection of his authorities in support of his discovery. We take only a few instances. In reference to purgatory, he quotes the Council of Trent and Bishop Taylor, to shew that the natural results of that doctrine, as exhibited in 200 Christendom, were mere abuses, but that the doc- trine itself was quite true. The Council of Trent and its catechism, and the creed of Pius IV., all give the doctrine in such terms as to shew that any bad results may follow from the teaching of the doctrine itself. But what says Jeremy Taylor ? Did he mean, in the long extracts quoted in the Tract, to merely express his abhorrence of such shocking abuse of a sound doctrine ? And did he pour out his pious lamen- tations over such corruptions of the wholesome doctrine of purgatory ? Hear the good bishop's own words as to this doctrine, and then let our author account as he can for his insult to the memory of our great and good divine. " The doctrine of purgatory, [writes Jeremy Taylor, not the Romish doctrine of purgatory, nor the primitive, nor the Tri- dentine, nor any other view of the heresy, but] The doctrine of purgatory is the mother of indulgences, and the fear of that hath introduced these ; for the world happened to be abused like the countryman in the fable who being told he was likely to fall into a delirium in his feet, teas advised for remedy to take the juice of cotton. He feared a disease that was not, and looked for a cure as ridiculous." And yet Bishop Taylor is quoted as if he only condemned the abuses of the doctrine, and not as if he was shewing the natural fruit of such a doc- trine, and thereby most powerfully arguing against purgatory in every form and under any name. Then, as to image-worship, we are to conclude that the Council of Trent has as much horror of 201 that doctrine as the Article of the Church of England could by any words express ? ' ' Due honour (states the decree, as quoted by the Tract) and veneration is to be paid unto them, not (the italics are from the Tract) that we believed that any divinity or virtue is in them for which they should be worshipped (colendae) &c." But is it not a pity, when our author took so much trouble on this point, that he did not go a little farther, and shew us what the Council of Trent meant by " due honour," on which he lays so much stress ? He might, perhaps, have seen, that, in the absence of proof from the Word of God to support this pure article of the Catholic faith ! this image- worship, we are referred by the Council of Trent to the second Council of Nice ; and if the reader wishes to carry out this distinc- tion between the Tridentine and the Romish doc- trine, we can give him, from that Council of Nice, both the doctrine, and a most pious prayer, and a most kind and charitable hint to take heed that we do not reject this most essential part of Christianity image- worship. " Nay, farther, the Council of Trent enjoins the degrading worship of images, and refers to the decrees of the second Nicene Council; thus setting its seal of infallibility to that council which, after such divisions and wars, fully established this idolatry. Now, how is image-worship laid down in the Nicene Council ? And here let me say, that however the Ro- manist may writhe under the lash when his doctrine on this subject is stated, yet let him not be displeased, but either calmly 202 view and defend this subject in the light of Scripture, or cast his idols to the moles and to the bats, by renouncing a creed which enforces such practices, but let him not call me a slan- derer, for I have most carefully copied the extracts from the edition of the councils by the famous Jesuits, Labbe and Cos- sart. ' I acknowledge and receive, embrace and adore chiefly the immaculate image of our Lord Jesus Christ our true God, and the image of the mother of God, fyc. In like manner I receive and adore the images of the holy and worthy apostles, prophets, and martyrs, and fathers, and eremites, not, however, as gods,* that be far from us .... In like manner also I adore, and honour, and embrace, the relics of the saints, as of those who have fought for Christ, and received grace from him to effect cures, heal diseases, and expel devils, like as the church has received from the holy apostles and fathers, even to our time.' We should have been very thankful had this council kindly pointed out where this doctrine is taught by the holy apostles : but we must not ask any questions on this head. Let us now give the mild and charitable language in which all is summed up. " ' Anathema (i. e. " let them be separated to destruction," see Parkhurst on the word) to those who do not adore. To those who dare to defame them or call them idols, anathema. To those who do not diligently teach all the Christ-loving people to adore the venerable images, Sfc., anathema' ! 2 Nice, Act 1, Labbe et Cossart, vol. vii. p. 60. Paris, 1671. Adrian I. Pope. " And, in conformity with this doctrine, the same council teaches this solemn act of worship. ' We adore thy cross, O Lord, and the spear which opened the life-giving side of thy blessedness.' Ibid. vol. vii. p. 583. In the Romish Breviary, too, in which the priest is bound to read each day, we are taught to pray, * O cross, more splendid than all stars, save this multitude assembled here in thy praise' " * We never accused these men of worshipping their images as God. They magnify the charge against themselves that they may refute it. They build up a man of straw and shew their valour in throwing him down. But their excuse would nofonly have freed Israel from idolatry, but even the very heathen who never looked upon the image as God. 203 Now we may, I think, ask our author what doctrine of image-worship he would have us con- demn or adopt ; and we may ask him for some little proof of what he asserts. Not every doctrine of image-worship is condemned, " but the Romish doctrine;" and as "the Romish" is not, accord- ing to his view, " the Tridentine doctrine," and as the Tridentine, which, by anticipation, our church Article approves, commands us to give due worship to images ; and further, as we learn some definition of the word " due" from the Council of Nice, to which that of Trent refers us, does he mean that the church of England in any way approves such doc- trine, or that her children may, with a safe con- science, dishonour themselves and their Maker by receiving and practising this fearful idolatry of the Councils of Nice and Trent. One instance more. The reader must also un- derstand, that in reference to the doctrine of saint- worship the argument is the same " Not every doctrine of saint-worship is condemned, but the Romish doctrine." And as the Romish is not the Tridentine, we must ascertain what doctrine of saint-worship the Article of the church of England "by anticipation approved," and what kind of saint-worship has obtained at and since the Council of Trent, and consequently what kind of saint- worship we may adopt, if only we do not practise the " superstitious use of invocations." 204 We would, then, first state that the Council of Trent and creed of Pius IV. decree saint- worship as an article of the Catholic faith. The catechism of the Council of Trent goes a little farther, and gives us some insight into the reasons for the adoption of such Christianity, and into the way in which we should reverently practise this wor- ship. " Jure autem sancta Dei ecclesia hinc gratiarum actione preces etiam et implorationem sanctissimae Dei Matrix ad- junxit, qua pie atque suppliciter ad earn confugeremus, ut nobis peccatoribus sua intercessione conciliaret Deum, bonaque turn ad hunc, turn ad aeternam vitam necessaria impetraret. Ergo nos exules, filii Evae, qui hinc lacrymarum vallem incolimus, assidue misericordiae matrem, ac fidelis populi advocatam in- vocare debemus, ut oret pro nobis peccatoribus, ab eaque hac prece opem et auxilium implorare, cujus et praestantissima merita apud deum esse, et suminam voluntatem juvandi huma- num genus, nemo, nisi impie et nefarie dubitare potest." For the benefit of the English reader we give the translation of the passage now quoted. " But rightly has the holy church of God joined to this action of thanks prayers and supplication of the most holy mother of God, by which we would piously and suppliantly fly to her, that by her intercession she might conciliate God for us sinners, and obtain for us as well the good things for this life as well as those things which are necessary for eternal life. Therefore we exiles, offspring sons of Eve, who inhabit this vale of tears, ought most assiduously to invoke this mother of mercy and ad- vocate of the faithful, that she would pray for us sinners, and implore from her by this prayer help and assistance, whose merits are most powerful with God, and whose greatest desire of assisting the human race, no one, unless impiously and wickedly, can doubt." 205 This is a very good ground to work on in the advancement of the unscriptural doctrine of saint- worship. To all such we might reply It is very well to set forth the excellence of this system, and the suitableness of it to the inhabitants of this vale of tears, but where is the necessity and where the command to fly to the assistance of any crea- ture for deliverance from the wrath of an offended Creator, or for protection from the difficulties and dangers of time ? Although not engaged in the discussion of the merits of this kind of religious worship, yet we would say, that it appears rather too dangerous to fly to mediators whom our God has not ordained, to the forsaking or dishonouring of that only One whom he has, in condescension to our wants and infirmities, appointed. But we would now give a passage from a work which we sent forth some years ago, in reply to the fine-drawn sophistry by which a doctor, now a bishop, of the church of Rome, would have be- guiled the uninformed Englishman and church- man. "We are also commanded by the same authority, under pain of the same awful penalty, to worship our fellow-creatures and fellow-sinners ; and the present Roman pontiff teaches the matter and manner of this worship thus : ' We select for the date of our letter this most joyful day, on which we celebrate the solemn festival of the most blessed Virgin's triumphant assumption into heaven, that she who has been, through every great calamity, our patroness and protectress, may WATCH OVER us writing to you, and LEAD OUR MINDS (reader, observe how the Holy Spirit is 206 here set aside, and his glory given to the creature !) BY HER HEAVENLY INFLUENCE into those councils which may prove most salutary to Chris? s flock.' . . . . ' But that all may have a suc- cessful and happy issue, let us raise our eyes to the most blessed Virgin Mary, who alone destroys heresies, who is our greatest hope, YEA, THE ENTIRE GROUND OF OUR HOPE.'* " Other authentic papal documents inculcate the same religion, but the above is to be preferred, coming at this time from the pretended vicar of Christ. The reader will excuse my giving one other specimen. Costerus, a D.D. of the Society of Jesuits, in his ' De vita et laudibus Deiparce Mari