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<z Virginis 
 Meditationes Quinquaginta,' now before me, thus laments the 
 troubles of the church, and the havoc made of it by the Apo- 
 calyptic dragon ' He has rooted out the faith from the hearts of 
 many of the faithful .... And lest anything should be wanting 
 to Jill up the cup of sorrow, he hath taken care that all worship 
 of the saints should be abolished, and he chiefly endeavours to 
 obscure, and take away, the honour of the Virgin Mother of God? 
 The reason given by these orthodox divines (for this work is 
 published by authority, 'permissu superiorum') for the devil's 
 assault upon saint-worship is, that 'he well knows both how 
 great the authority of such a queen of the heavens is with God the 
 Son, and how great her compassion towards men, who, being in- 
 voked, always hears and assists the wretched, breaks the malice of 
 the enemy, and BRUISES THE HEAD OF THE SERPENT !' In another 
 place he informs us that the Virgin is well compared to the star of 
 the ocean, to which, when tossed upon the stormy deep, you may 
 look, and fly, according to the advice of Bernard Respice stellam; 
 voca Mariam ' Look to the star; call upon Mary!' Indeed, 
 the writer has heard a Romish bishop in Bath so preach upon 
 this subject, and repel the idea of worshipping saints with such 
 indignation as would lead me to call the above, gross idolatry. 
 But why refer to what we have heard? let his written sermon 
 speak : But do we not worship and pray to the saints f We 
 worship no creature whatever, and therefore not the saints. 
 
 * My translation of this well-known passage from the Pas- 
 toral of the present Pontiff is taken from the Romish " Laity's 
 Directory."
 
 207 
 
 ' But at least we pray to them.' Yes, my Christian brethren, 
 just as St. Paul prayed to his own converts, or I pray to 
 you !"* (See Bishop Baines' sermon on '' Faith, Hope, and 
 Charity," p. 5.) 
 
 Having exposed the dissimulation of the advo- 
 cates of the new and corrupt articles of the Papal 
 creed, we thus concluded 
 
 " Now what have we here 1st. The inculcation of the, to 
 God, most insulting, and to man, most debasing idolatry ; and 
 2ndly. The enforcement of this upon men's consciences, under 
 threatened pain of damnation. There are here no slanders, but 
 plain, stubborn facts. These, reader, are part and parcel of 
 that * true Catholic faith out of which no man can be saved' ! 
 If, then, Mr. Brown adheres to his own declaration, ' that no 
 one article of Catholic belief is proposed by the Council of Trent, 
 which is not professed by Catholics all over the world ; and tlwt 
 no one rule of conduct is prescribed by the Catholic church to its 
 followers on the continent, which is not admitted by the Catholics 
 of this country' if, I say, he adheres to this, then is he con- 
 strained to believe that this stupid idolatry is Christianity, and 
 that we, poor Protestants, who refuse to dishonour our Maker 
 by practising it, are rightly consigned by his church to eternal 
 damnation. But if in this country, where the desire of popery 
 is to be as enlightened and charitable as possible, Mr Brown 
 shrinks from such idolatry and want of charity, must we not 
 class him amongst those ' who do not go the full length of the 
 Council of Trent but who rub down some of its asperities, and 
 cover some of its deformities.' ' Utrum horum mavis accipe.' 
 Let Mr. Brown choose which he will, he is entangled, for by 
 his own creed and declaration, as above, is he bound to believe 
 and TEACH all these ; or professing to believe, does still reject 
 them. The only alternative in this matter is idolatry and 
 schism, or hypocrisy." 
 
 An extract from Archbishop Wake's reply to the 
 
 * " Catholic Truth not Assailed," a reply to the Rev. T. J. 
 Brown, Downside College, by Rev. J. R. Page.
 
 208 
 
 intriguing efforts of Bossuet to perplex and seduce 
 the English churchman of his day will well con- 
 clude this chapter, as it will, in few words, shew 
 the triumphant position of the church of England 
 in the Catholic world. 
 
 " Be it, therefore, allowed to be as great a calumny as Mon- 
 sieur de Meaux can suppose it to accuse men of consequences 
 obscure and disavowed; the opinions we charge the church of 
 Rome with are plain and confessed, the practice and prescrip- 
 tion of the chiefest authority in it. And to refuse our charge 
 of them is in good earnest nothing else than to protest against a 
 matter of fact; a plea, which even justice itself has told us may 
 without calumny be rejected as invalid. 
 
 " However, thus much at least we have got by this reflection, 
 that it directs us to the true state of the controversy between 
 us ; and shews that we, who have been so often charged by the 
 church of Rome, as innovators in religion, are at last, by their 
 own confession, allowed to hold the antient and undoubted 
 foundation of the Christian faith ; and that the question between 
 us therefore is, not whether what we hold be true ? which is on all 
 hands agreed, but, whether those things which the Roman church 
 has added as superstructures to it, and which, as such, we reject, 
 be not so far from being necessary articles of religion, as they 
 pretend, that they indeed overthrow that truth which is on both 
 sides allowed to be divine ; and upon that account ought to be 
 forsaken by" them ?"
 
 209 
 
 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 supre- 
 macy 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. 
 
 WE have now, we conceive, examined all the im- 
 portant points respecting the position of our 
 church, which a perusal of the Tract before us has 
 suggested to our minds. The chapters of the 
 Tract which follow are of comparatively little im- 
 portance ; not that the subjects discussed are 
 unimportant in themselves, but that the mode of 
 reasoning by which the Church of England is made 
 to not only not condemn, but even to at least 
 tacitly approve, the corrupt doctrines of the papacy, 
 is so extraordinary that we need not, after all that 
 has been said, dwell more on this subject. It is 
 therefore only necessary to state the heads of the 
 p
 
 210 
 
 remaining chapters, and, with perhaps one or t\vo 
 exceptions, dismiss their contents with a very few 
 ohservations. 
 
 Thus the twenty-fifth Article of the Church is 
 brought before us. 
 
 " Those five commonly called sacraments that is to say, 
 Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unc- 
 tion, are not to be counted for sacraments of the gospel, being 
 such as have grown, partly out of the corrupt following of the 
 apostles, partly from states of life allowed in the Scriptures, 
 but yet have not like nature of sacraments, with baptism and 
 the Lord's supper, for that they have not any visible sign or 
 ceremony ordained of God.' 1 
 
 This is certainly a very plain statement. There 
 is in it no room for any kind of doubt or mistake. 
 The five new sacraments of the church of Rome are 
 not sacraments of the gospel is the language of the 
 article. It would, then, remain with the church of 
 Rome to prove her right to add to the religion of 
 the Saviour five new sacraments, which He never 
 ordained either as sacraments necessary to salva- 
 tion, as sacraments for the conveyance of grace, 
 or as sacraments of His church in any sense what- 
 ever. 
 
 But, says the Church of England apologist for 
 the papal see, 
 
 " This Article does not deny the Jive rites in question to be 
 sacraments, but to be sacraments in the sense in which baptism 
 and the Lord's supper are sacraments ; < sacraments of the 
 gospel,' sacraments with an outward sign ordained of God.''
 
 This is, assuredly, a novel mode of proving the 
 church of England's, we suppose, " approval by 
 anticipation" of the very things which she rejects 
 and condemns. The rejection of all these new 
 sacraments would have been sufficient condemna- 
 tion of them ; but our church goes farther, and 
 cuts them up root and branch. She denies and 
 protests against their right to be "sacraments of 
 the Gospel." What more could any unsought 
 apologist of the Romish system require ? It was 
 the business of the church of England to separate 
 the chaff from the wheat to reject the chaff and 
 gather the wheat into the garner of Christ's church 
 to define what were, and what were not, sacra- 
 ments of the gospel. 
 
 This she has nobly done, and by her act she has 
 thrown back into the regions of error all those new 
 sacraments, which, in ages of darkness and tyranny, 
 had been forced upon the Christian religion. But, 
 by the reasoning of the Tract for the Times, her 
 act was merely an approval of those sacraments, 
 only not as sacraments of the gospel ! Why, the 
 very heathen of any country might come forward 
 with the same system of logic to prove that the 
 church of England does not condemn their sacra- 
 ments. The ancient Romans, from whom we 
 derive the word sacrament,* might, were they to 
 
 * l< It (sacrament, sacramentum) also implied the oath of 
 fidelity, which was taken by soldiers to their commanding 
 
 p 2
 
 212 
 
 rise up from the grave, bring in the church of 
 England as approving of their sacraments, if only 
 they were excluded from being the "sacraments 
 of the gospel !" As we said before, we now 
 repeat such a mode of writing, we will not term 
 it reasoning, is the greatest possible trifling with 
 common sense, and seems to go upon the not very 
 complimentary idea, that all its readers were to be 
 fools. 
 
 On one of those new sacraments we shall dwell 
 for a few moments, and shall give its practical 
 tendency, and some insight into the way in which 
 it is used by the priests of Rome to the injury " of 
 souls, who were the purchase and price of Christ's 
 blood."* 
 
 officer, (Pliny, Ep. I. x. 97. Scheller, Latin Lexicon, sub voce ;) 
 and under this idea it was first adopted into the language of re- 
 ligion, as affording a convenient terra for an assemblage of 
 ideas, which no single scriptural word would exactly express. 
 In the earlier ages of Christianity, its ecclesiastical meaning 
 was verv indefinite ; and we find it used by the writers of the 
 Latin or western church, in order to denote anything mysteri- 
 ous in religion. (Bingham, Antiquities, book xii. ch. i. s. 4.) By 
 degrees, however, it obtained a more confined and definite sig- 
 nification." Encyclopaedia Metropolitans. 
 
 * Jeremy Taylor, contemplating the sad effects of the false 
 doctrines of the papacy on the social condition, thus piously and 
 beautifully writes : 
 
 " I was troubled to see under what spirit of delusion these 
 poor souls do lie, how infinitely their credulity is abused, how 
 certainly they believe in trifles, and perfectly rely on vanity, 
 and how little they regard the truths of God, and how they 
 drink not at all of the waters of salvation. For the numerous
 
 213 
 
 The following extracts from a reply given some 
 years ago to a Romish priest, will suffice for our 
 present purpose : 
 
 " As to extreme unction What have I said on this subject 
 to incur your charge of ' immense ignorance' ? In one part of 
 my former letter I spoke thus: ' Do you not know that the poor 
 people, whom you profess to teach the truth of CHRIST, firmly 
 believe, that if they can obtain absolution from you, receive ex- 
 treme unction, and have masses said for their souls, their en- 
 trance into heaven is certain ?' And in another part, ' that 
 you teach the people to believe, that extreme unction remits 
 their sins, and keeps away evil spirits in that trying hour.' Now, 
 is this your doctrine, or is it not ? Do you teach this, or do 
 YOU not? If you do, why accuse me of ignorance on the sub- 
 ject? If you do not, you act contrary to your oath ; for, as I 
 have shewn, you are sworn to teach the Trent doctrine, and 
 this is exactly it, as I shall now prove. What keeps men out of 
 
 companies of priests and friars amongst them take care they 
 shall know nothing of religion but what they design for them. 
 
 I speak that which I know to be true by their own 
 
 confession, and unconstrained and uninvited narratives; so that 
 it is certain that the Roman religion, as it stands in distinction 
 and separation from us, is a body of strange propositions, hav- 
 ing but little relish of true primitive and pure Christianity, (as 
 will be made manifest if the importunity of our adversaries ex- 
 tort it;) so it is here (in Ireland) amongst us, a faction and a 
 state party, and designed to recover their old laws and manner of 
 living, a device to enable them to dwell alone, and to be populus 
 unius labii, a people of one language, and unmingled with 
 others. And if this be religion, it is such a one as ought to be 
 reproved by all the severities of reason and religion, lest the 
 people perish, and their souls be cheaply given away to them 
 that make merchandise of souls, who were the purchase and 
 price of Christ's blood." The good bishop was well versed in 
 books but he had the advantage of having also studied the 
 Romish system in the book of experience.
 
 214 
 
 heaven but sin ? I hope, then, you will grant, that if men's 
 sins be wiped out and remitted, their entrance into heaven is 
 certain. Now the Council of Trent says, that ' extreme unc- 
 tion wipes away crimes, if any remain to be expiated, and the 
 remainder of sin' and is not this all that I said in my last letter, 
 or that I want to prove ? The words are, ' cujus unctio delicta, si 
 quae sint adhuc expianda, et peccati reliquias abstergit' Council 
 of Trent, sessioiv. caput 2. And in the same chapter it is said, 
 ' that it (extreme unction) more easily resists the assaults of the 
 devil' ' et tentationibus daemonis calcaneo insidiantre facilius 
 resistit" And in the same sessio, xiv. canon 2, there is a curse 
 pronounced against any one who shall say that extreme unction 
 does not confer grace, and remit sin ' Si quis dixerit, sacram 
 infirmorum unctionem non conferre gratiam, nee remittere pec- 
 cata, &c., anathema sit I' The quotation made by you from 
 the rubric of a book of common prayer in use in the reign of 
 Edward VI., is not of any service to you, neither is the quota- 
 tion from Calvin. The quotation only proves, that if the person 
 wished to be anointed with oil, (which some might have wished, 
 as the people then were only emerging from the darkness of the 
 church of Rome,) that the minister was to use oil, and pray, 
 'that as his body was anointed with oil, so may our heavenly 
 Father, ALMIGHTY GOD, grant that his soul might be anointed 
 by the HOLY GHOST, and to pardon him all his offences,' &c. 
 This is all the quotation proves. There is a wide difference 
 between this use of oil and prayer, and your doctrine of extreme 
 unction. And the quotation will never serve you until you can 
 prove these four things : 1st. That the Reformers believed, 
 that by the bare receiving of the sacraments, grace is conferred. 
 (' Ex opere operate.') 2nd. That the Reformers believed, that 
 extreme unction is a sacrament instituted by CHRIST. 3rd. 
 That the Reformers believed that extreme unction wipes away 
 the remainder of sin, remits sin, and resists the assaults of the 
 devil. And 4thly. That they believed that any person denying 
 these things is to be accursed. Such is your doctrine, as I have 
 shewn from the canons, and decrees of the Council of Trent, 
 and you will prove nothing by quoting the rubric of the prayer- 
 book in use in the reign of Edward VI., or by quoting any 
 other of their works, until you prove that the Reformers be-
 
 215 
 
 lieved, and followed your doctrine, as laid down in Trent; and 
 it will take you some time to do that, for hear how the Re- 
 formers speak on the subject in'the Twenty-fifth Article of the 
 church of England : ' Those five commonly called sacraments 
 that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and 
 EXTREME UNCTION, are not be counted for sacraments of the gospel, 
 being such as have grown partly out of the corrupt following of 
 the apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures, 
 but yet have not like nature of sacraments with baptism and the 
 LORD'S Supper ; for that they have not any visible sign or cere- 
 mony ordained of GOD.' The book you have quoted from is 
 not in use in the church of England : and even if it were in use, 
 it would neither serve you, for the reasons given above, nor 
 would it rectify my erroneous notions on the Catholic doctrine 
 of extreme unction' The Articles are in use, and are the autho- 
 rized documents of our church, and you see how they speak of 
 your new sacrament of extreme unction. So you will never 
 prove anything, until you make the principles and doctrines of 
 the church of England and the Council of Trent agree on this 
 subject ; and you will find it easier to turn the sun from his 
 course and make light darkness. The Council of Trent refers 
 to two passages of Scripture to prove this new sacrament of ex- 
 treme unction one in Mark, vi. 13, ' And they cast out many 
 devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and HEALED 
 THEM.' Now, what is there in these words to prove your sacra- 
 ment of extreme unction ? These words speak of the persons 
 that were anointed being healed. Your Council of Trent says, 
 the person is not to be anointed until past recovery, and there- 
 fore there is no chance of his being healed, sessio xiv. cap. iii. Be- 
 cause the words, * they anointed with oil,' are used in this pas- 
 sage, you must forthwith conclude that it speaks of the Trent 
 sacrament of extreme unction ! Your council was certainly 
 resolved on making this new sacrament, and then catching at 
 anything to prove it. 
 
 " The next passage is that in James, v. 14, 15, Rhemish ver- 
 sion : ' Is any sick among you ? let him bring in the priests of 
 the church ; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil 
 in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save 
 the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up ; and if he be in sins,
 
 216 
 
 they shall be forgiven him.' This passage also speaks of the 
 sick person, anointed and prayed over, being RAISED UP. How, 
 then, do you prove a sacrament of extreme unction from unc- 
 tion not extreme, not to be used, as Trent says, on those past 
 being raised up, but on those that were to be raised up, ' and 
 the LORD shall raise him up?' Again, how can you promise 
 remission of the sick man's sin, when you cannot promise the 
 sign of it viz., the recovery of the sick person? Two ques- 
 tions more. If extreme unction confers grace, wipes away and 
 remits sin, and resists the assaults of the devil, as Trent says, 
 why do you not give it to criminals about to die ? Is it because 
 they have no need of what this sacrament professes to give ? 
 Surely they have more need than other persons. Again ; if ex- 
 treme unction remits sin and wipes away the remainder of sin, 
 why is it necessary that those who receive this sacrament should 
 have masses said afterwards for the release of their souls from 
 purgatory, where they are supposed to be detained until all 
 their sins be wiped away ? If unction be effectual to do all 
 that Trent says, why send those to purgatory who receive this 
 unction ? If it be not effectual to the wiping away the re- 
 mainder of sin (as Trent says it is) in the dying person, of what 
 use is it?" 
 
 In another letter to the same priest, the subject 
 was treated in these words : 
 
 " Extreme unction is the last point of doctrine in your letter. 
 I must give your own words : ' His frivolous objections against 
 extreme unction are the only part of his letter now to be replied 
 to. He denies it to be a sacrament. The falsehood of this denial 
 shall immediately appear, even from the definition of a sacrament 
 according to the Protestant church catechism, from the fifth 
 chapter of St. James. In the Protestant church catechism a sa- 
 crament is defined, " an outward and visible sign of an inward 
 and invisible grace, given to us, ordained by Christ himself, as a 
 means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us 
 thereof." From this definition of a sacrament it shall appear, 
 from the following passage from St. James, that extreme unction 
 has all the essential conditions and characters of a sacrament :
 
 217 
 
 " Is any man sick among you ? let Jdm bring in the priests of the 
 church ; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in 
 the name of tJie Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the 
 sick man, and the Lord shall raise him up ; and if he be in sins, 
 they shall be forgiven him." This passage shews it to have the 
 first condition required, which is an outward and visible sign, 
 " the anointing with oil;" the second condition, instituted by 
 Christ, it has also, " if any one be sick, let the priests of the 
 church be called ;" and the third condition it has, it confers 
 grace, " and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.'' ' 
 You here charge me with falsehood, for denying extreme unc- 
 tion to be a sacrament. How do you prove this falsehood ? 
 First, by shewing that it has an outward and visible sign ! Will 
 this prove a sacrament ? if it does, then everything that has an 
 outward and visible sign is a sacrament, and we shall have an 
 infinite number of sacraments ! Secondly, that this is a sign of 
 an inward grace, and that it is ordained by Christ himself; but 
 here you beg the question, that your Trent doctrine is true ; 
 though, in my last, I proved that the Trent sacrament, and the 
 use of oil spoken of in St. James, are as distinct and opposite 
 as any two things can be. I shall here quote the words of my 
 last letter : ' The Council of Trent refers to two passages of 
 Scripture, to prove this new sacrament of extreme unction ; the 
 one is, Mark, vi. 13 * And they cast out many devils, and 
 anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them.' Now, 
 what is there in these words to prove your sacrament of ex- 
 treme unction ? These words speak of the persons that were 
 anointed being healed; your Council of Trent (sessio xiv. 
 cap. 3) says, the person is not to be anointed until past recovery, 
 and therefore no chance of his being healed. Because the 
 words, ' they anointed with oil,' are used in this passage, you 
 must forthwith conclude that it speaks of the Trent sacrament 
 of extreme unction. Your council was certainly resolved on 
 making this new sacrament, and then catching at anything to 
 prove it! The next passage is that in James, v. 14, 15, (Ilhe- 
 rnish version,) ' Is any sick among you ? let him bring in 
 the priests of the church ; and let them pray over him, anointing 
 him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of 
 faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up ; and
 
 218 
 
 if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.' This passage also 
 speaks of the sick person, anointed and prayed over, being raised 
 up!' 
 
 " I asked, in my last, four questions on the subject of extreme 
 unction : you made a desperate effort to answer one of them, 
 but took no notice of the other three. I shall lay them again 
 before the public ; and now call on you to answer fairly the 
 arguments put forth, and not evade them by heaping abuse on 
 me. In arguing against the exposition of James, v. 14, 15, by 
 the Council of Trent, I proved that Trent and St. James dif- 
 fered altogether. The gift of healing attended- the use of oil 
 spoken of by St. James ; according to Trent, the unction is 
 not to be used until the person is past recovery, and therefore 
 no prospect of his being healed. From this I drew a few ques- 
 tions. How, then, do you prove a sacrament of extreme unc- 
 tion from unction not extreme, not to be used, as Trent says, on 
 those past being raised up, but on those that were to be raised 
 up, ' And the Lord shall raise him up' ? Again ; how can you 
 promise remission of the sick man's sin, when you cannot pro- 
 mise the sign of it viz., the recovery of the sick person? And 
 why not give extreme unction (if it remits sin) to criminals 
 about to die ? Is it because they have no need of it ? You 
 made an attempt to answer this last relative to criminals, by 
 saying, that Christ commanded it only to the sick. This is 
 very good ! Surely the question is, whether Christ commanded 
 it at all. You maintain that Christ did institute and command 
 this new sacrament. I say that he did not only not institute or 
 command this Trent sacrament of extreme unction, but that it 
 and the blood of Christ cannot stand together. If extreme 
 unction does all that Trent says, the blood of Christ is super- 
 fluous. To say that the blood of Christ is superfluous is blas- 
 phemy. Therefore I lay the charge of blasphemy on your 
 council for making a new sacrament, which derogates from the 
 sufficiency of Christ's blood, and destroys the soul, by leading 
 men to lean on a rotten reed. I now ask another question Why 
 do you continue to use oil, and, as you say, according to the com- 
 mand in James, v. 14, 15, when you do not pretend to have the 
 gift of healing which always accompanied the use of the oil ? But 
 the question of my last letter, which I was most anxious to have
 
 219 
 
 answered, is this ' If extreme unction remits sin, and wipes away 
 the remainder of sin, (as Trent says it does,) why is it necessary 
 that those who receive this sacrament should have masses said 
 afterwards for the release of their souls from purgatory, where 
 they are supposed to be detained until all their sins be wiped 
 away ? If extreme unction be effectual to do all that Trent 
 says, why send those to purgatory who receive this unction ? 
 If it be not effectual to the wiping away the remainder of sin 
 (as Trent says it is) in the dying person, what use in it?' You 
 have altogether evaded this question. Since you will not an- 
 swer it, I now ask Is it fair to take money from the poor people 
 for extreme unction in their dying hour, and afterwards send 
 them to purgatory, until more money is paid for the release of 
 their souls by masses ? Is this fair dealing? Why charge them 
 for extreme unction and for masses, when both extreme unction 
 and masses are for the same purpose viz., the taking away the 
 remainder of siu ? It is a remarkable fact, that the doctrines 
 of the church of Rome, against which we protest, are mostly 
 all money-making doctrines, for which the people are obliged 
 to pay dearly. You say that I admit the effects produced by 
 extreme unction in healing spiritual disorders and corporeal 
 infirmities. Why do you slander me so? Do you think by 
 this to add anything' to your cause? Besides, it was strange 
 to assert this concerning me, when all my arguments are to 
 prove, that your sacrament of extreme unction is a gross im- 
 position, contrary to the word of God, highly insulting to the 
 blood of Christ, and destructive to the souls of those that trust 
 in it."* 
 
 So much, then, for the papal sacrament of ex- 
 treme unction ! 
 
 The next point brought under consideration in 
 the Tract is the doctrine of " transubstantiation." 
 In every shape or disguise that doctrine is, as 
 Archbishop Tillotson well described it, "a mill- 
 stone about the neck of Christianity;" and the 
 * Page's Letters to a Romish Priest.
 
 220 
 
 author of the Tract, or any other person who may 
 desire to soften down the difficulties of the papal 
 doctrines, will find it no easy task to prove that, 
 directly or indirectly, the church of England ap- 
 proves the opinions of the Council of Trent on this 
 important question. To condemn the papal doc- 
 trine of transubstantiation was the Article written 
 and published, and with imaginary deductions the 
 Article has no sympathy whatever. 
 
 The subject of "The Romish Mass" is next 
 brought before us. The Article is, as in the former 
 instances, quoted, and then most violently wrested 
 from its true meaning, and is actually forced to 
 speak what it never entertained. 
 
 " The sacrifice of masses, in which it was commonly said, that 
 the priests did offer CHRIST for the quick and the dead, to have 
 remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables and danger- 
 ous deceits/' Article XXXI. 
 
 Now, reader, you are not to suppose that the 
 church of England ever thought, in this Article, of 
 condemning " The Mass" as set forth in the creed 
 of the Roman church. No such thing ! We are, in 
 this Tract, taught, what might otherwise have 
 escaped our observation, that, tacitly approving the 
 doctrine of the Roman creed, our Article condemns 
 that which was not which had, in fact, no ex- 
 istence ! Burnet is quoted to prove that the mass 
 is not condemned by the Article, but only solitary 
 or private masses, or masses which taught " that
 
 221 
 
 there is a sacrifice for sin other than Christ's death, and 
 that masses are that sacrifice." 
 
 Let our readers study Burnet on the twenty- 
 second and on the thirty-first Articles, and he will 
 see that Burnet deals with the mass itself, and 
 speaks of it as the source of the greatest corruptions. 
 
 " Here, (writes Burnet,) without going far in tragical expres- 
 sions, we cannot hold saying what our Saviour said upon an- 
 other occasion, ' My house is a house of prayer, but ye have 
 made it a den of thieves !' A trade was set up on this founda- 
 tion." . 
 
 And another of our divines* thus treats this 
 question of the mass : 
 
 " The sacrifice of the mass is the most considerable part of 
 worship in the Roman church ; it is their juge sacraficium, their 
 daily and continual offering, and the principal thing in which 
 their religion does consist ; it is, they tell us, of the greatest 
 profit and advantage to all persons, and I am sure their priests 
 make it so to themselves, for by it a great number of them get 
 thr-ir livings, by making merchandise of the holy sacraments, 
 and by selling the blood of Christ at a dearer rate than Judas 
 once did : the saying of masses keeps the church of Rome more 
 priests in pay than any prince in Christendom can maintain 
 soldiers; and it has raised more money by them than the richest 
 bank or exchequer in the world ever was owner of. It is, in- 
 deed, the truest patrimony of their church, and has enriched it 
 more than anything else. It was that which founded their 
 greatest monasteries and their richest abbeys, and it had well- 
 nigh brought all the estates of this kingdom into the church, 
 had not the statutes of mortmain put a check on it." 
 
 But where can be proved the fanciful idea, that, 
 even in the worst of times, the masses ever set 
 
 * See Gibson's Preservative, &c.
 
 222 
 
 aside Christ, so as to have insisted on other sacra- 
 fice for sin than His blood ? The Article expressly 
 speaks of masses in which the priests pretended 
 " to offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to 
 have remission of pain and guilt." In fact, so far 
 from masses being set up independently of Christ, 
 the pretence of offering up Christ in them was, and 
 is, the foundation of the blasphemy and idolatry 
 which our church rightly attributes to this new 
 article of Romish faith. 
 
 The marriage of the clergy comes next under 
 our notice. 
 
 " Bishops, priests, and deacons, are not commanded by God's 
 law, either to vow the estate of single life, or to abstain from 
 marriage.'' Article XXXII. 
 
 " There is [the Tract remarks] literally no subject for contro- 
 versy in these words, since even the most determined advocates of 
 the celibacy of the clergy admit their truth. The duty of clerical 
 celibacy is grounded, not on GOD'S law, but on the church's rule 
 or on vow" 
 
 It would be idle to speak of the celibacy of the 
 clergy being "grounded on vow," when we know 
 that the vow has its foundation and necessity deep 
 laid in " the church's rule." 
 
 And how the papacy exalts " the church's rule" 
 in this, as in other instances, to not merely equality 
 with, but even supremacy over, the word of God, 
 the following quotation may in some degree point 
 out. 
 
 " The first subject of which I shall treat is, your allusion to 
 the marriage of ' Protestant ecclesiastics' Now, in the Bible, I
 
 223 
 
 read that the priests, under the old dispensation, were married, 
 and that the high priesthood passed from father to son. And 
 in the New Testament, that St. Peter, whom you call your first 
 pope, (though you are not his successor, in either doctrine or 
 practice,) was a married man ; ' And when Jesus was come into 
 Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a 
 fever,' (Matt. viii. 14 ;) and Paul says, * Have we not power to 
 lead about a sister, a wife, as well AS OTHER APOSTLES, and 
 as the brethren of the Lord, and CEPHAS?' 1 Cor. ix. 5. I 
 read, moreover, in the directions given by God to the bishops 
 and deacons, these words : ' A bishop then must be blameless, 
 THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE, one that ruleth well his own 
 house, having his children in subjection, with all gravity ; for 
 if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he 
 take care of the church of God?' ' Let the deacons be THE 
 HUSBANDS OF ONE wivz, ruling their children, and their own 
 houses well.' 1 Tim. ii. 2, 4, 5, 12. And in the epistle to 
 the Hebrews (xiii. 4) it is written, < Marriage is honourable 
 IN ALL, and the bed undefiled ; but whoremongers and adul- 
 terers God will judge,' But the Word of God informs us 
 ' that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith,' (as 
 your church did, when it commanded Pope Pius the IVth's 
 creed to be taught and believed as necessary to salvation,) that 
 one of the marks by which this apostasy shall be known is, 
 'forbidding to marry.' 1 Tim. iv. 1. 3. Whether, then, this 
 mark of the apostacy better fits us, who are married, than 
 you, who forbid and condemn marriage in the clergy, and have 
 besides set up monasteries and nunneries, let the people judge. 
 
 " But I must give another instance of your church's contempt 
 of God's word : In 1 Tim. iii. 2, it is said, ' a bishop then must 
 be BLAMELESS, the husband of one wife;" and in Heb. xiii. 4, 
 ' Marriage is HONOURABLE in all.' Why does the church of 
 Rome condemn marriage of the clergy ? Her own Council of 
 Lateran must speak, Because it is UNWORTHY that they should 
 be the slaves of CHAMBERING and UNCLEANNESS.' I shall now 
 give the decree in the words of Lateran Decernimus etiam ut 
 ii, qui in ordine subdiaconatus, et supra, uxores duxerint, aut 
 concubinas habuerint, officio, atq. ecclesiastico beneficio careant. 
 Ciim enim ipsi templum Dei, vasa Domini, sacrarium Spiritus
 
 224 
 
 Sancti debeant esse, et dici : INDIGNUM est, eos CUBILIBUS, et 
 IMMUNDITIIS deservire.' 2 Concil. Lat. Labbei, vol. x. p. 1003, 
 canon vi. Here, then, is Lateran against the word of God, and 
 yet, according to you, the Council of Lateran was infallible ! 
 Before this council, Pope Gregory the Vllth had condemned 
 the marriage of the clergy, in the 13th can. of the first Roman 
 council, in A. D. 1074, (Labbei concil., vol. x. p. 326 328.) 
 Gregory had, besides, assembled councils, or synods, in other 
 places, to condemn the marriage of the clergy. The English 
 clergy opposed this in a very determined manner; and when 
 Gregory's decree was published in Germany, the clergy ap- 
 pealed to the word of God, and charged the pope with contra- 
 dicting St. Paul. But Gregory was more than a match for the 
 bishops and clergy ; and he, who deprived kings of their king- 
 doms, and trampled them under foot, easily prevailed, after 
 some time, against the clergy. 
 
 " The public must now have a specimen of your church's 
 consistency, contradiction, and extraordinary doctrine, on the 
 subject of matrimony. The church of Rome calls marriage a sa- 
 crament ! (one of the five new sacraments that she herself made) 
 and, according to the Trent doctrine, the sacraments confer 
 grace, justifying grace. Luther maintained that ' the sacra- 
 ments of the new law do not confer justifying grace upon those 
 who do not place a bar in the way.' This is the first of the 
 'plurima Lutheri /uereses' condemned by Pope Leo X. (Labb. 
 and Coss. vol. xiv. 5 Cone. Lat. p. 392.) Marriage, then, ac- 
 cording to your doctrine, confers justifying grace. But what 
 would this sacrament confer on you ? Pollution and damna- 
 tion ! This is most excellent ! ' Doth a fountain send forth 
 at the same place sweet water and bitter?' James, iii. 11. 
 Your object in alluding to the marriage of the Protestant eccle- 
 siastics seems to be to prove, that they, having families to at- 
 tend to, cannot be either learned or sanctified men : and then 
 the inference is plain and easy ; Mr. Hughes and the priests of 
 Rome are not married, and therefore they are most learned, and 
 most holy in all manner of life and conversation ! But this 
 would prove as strongly against St. Peter, and yet he was a 
 great Divine, and a sanctified, though married man." * 
 
 * Page's Letters to a Romish Priest.
 
 225 
 
 The next chapter or section of the Tract we do 
 not understand. The thirty-fifth Article, on the 
 subject of the Homilies, is brought forward, and 
 then follows a goodly array from the Book of 
 Homilies, of sixty-seven quotations, which, after all 
 the pains taken in producing them, prove nothing. 
 The first of them is the portentous declaration 
 " the great clerk and godly preacher, St. John Chrys- 
 ostom," and the last the equally ominous decla- 
 ration *' the saying of the holy martyr of GOD, St. 
 Cyprian. 1 " And between the first and the last of 
 this long line of quotations we have a large col- 
 lection of important nothings or worse than 
 nothings just enough to teach churchmen to cavil, 
 quibble, and find out some cause of discontent or 
 quarrel with their church, with the " mother that 
 brought them forth, and the nurse that feedeth 
 them." 
 
 Well ! without entering into such points, we 
 may, we hope, fearless of contradiction or any 
 kind of controversy, conclude in the words of 
 our Article, 
 
 " The second Book of Homilies doth contain a godly and 
 wholesome doctrine, and necessary for these times, as doth the 
 former Book of Homilies." 
 
 We now come to the last of the deeply-injured 
 Articles of the church of England, which is noticed 
 in this much famed " Tract for the Times" the 
 Article which concerns the jurisdiction of the
 
 226 
 
 Roman pontiff, and we must say that the chapter 
 of the Tract now before us has not left on ou? 
 minds the most favourable impression. 
 
 The thirty- eighth Article is the subject " The 
 Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm 
 of England." 
 
 We are not disposed to enter upon an ex- 
 amination of this chapter of the Tract in the 
 way in which we have discussed other portions 
 of that offensive publication. We may, however, 
 dwell on the manner in which the extravagant 
 claims of the Pope are not only not condemned, 
 but indirectly maintained. 
 
 For instance 
 
 " Anglicans maintain that the supremacy of the Pope (the supre- 
 macy !) is not directly from Revelation, (not directly from Re\ r e- 
 lation ! no word about its being contrary to Revelation,) but an 
 event in Providence." 
 
 And how we ought to feel and conduct ourselves 
 under the " event in Providence" is thus explained : 
 
 " We find ourselves, as a church, under the King noio, and we 
 obey him; we were under the Pope formerly, and we obeyed 
 him." 
 
 Is this satisfactory language ? Can such senti- 
 ments produce any other impression than this : 
 We obey our Queen now, because she has power to 
 maintain her rightful supremacy over all estates 
 within her realm ; but if only we can indirectly, by 
 undermining that faith which is the foundation of
 
 227 
 
 her authority and our allegiance, or directly, by 
 upholding and propagating the faith of the Pope 
 of Rome, set up his authority, what then ? 
 We will obey the Pope, and cast to the idle winds 
 our vows and our loyalty to our true and law r ful 
 sovereign ! 
 
 Let us not be told that we are unfair in thus 
 speaking for the Tract. Many persons are most 
 cowardly when brought in contact with the work 
 of their own minds, and when compelled to see the 
 rising and fatal consequences, or, as some would 
 say, the " development" of their own theories ; but 
 the only way to try the soundness of a doctrine or 
 principle is by its practical application. Besides, 
 no allowance can be made for any Englishman, or 
 churchman, or clergyman of our church in such a 
 matter. Any tampering with the question of the 
 Pope's supremacy or jurisdiction within the realm 
 of England, or any free discussion of such a point, 
 must proceed either upon such ignorance of the 
 article of supremacy (by the papal party exalted 
 into an article of Christian faith !) as to wholly 
 unfit a man to be a leader of a party : or upon 
 notions of allegiance, which should be far from the 
 breast of a loyal subject of the crown of this em- 
 pire. Neither let us be told of " the saintly 
 piety" of the writer of the Tract. We have 
 nothing to do with his piety or his personal cha- 
 racter. We do not deny nay, we willingly yield
 
 228 
 
 him the respect to which his character may justly 
 entitle him ; but our question is with his writing, 
 and with the we really may term it, for it is in 
 our mind almost treasonable language of this 
 "Tract for the Times." 
 
 We know that by His prophet God commanded 
 the Jewish people on this wise : " And seek the 
 peace of the city whither I have caused you to be 
 carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for 
 it : for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace." 
 We revere this principle ; but there is a wide, a 
 very wide difference between such a principle and 
 that which is, by the objectionable work before us, 
 presented to the mind. The Tract seems to make 
 very light indeed of the sovereign's right to our 
 allegiance, for the Queen's right cannot consist with 
 the right of the "Pope, and the Tract hinges all on 
 what is so conveniently termed " an event in Pro- 
 vidence!" 
 
 But surely true loyalty, and such as used to be 
 the fashion of Englishmen in former days, was not 
 built upon such contingencies. Neither should 
 we now regulate our allegiance by the power or 
 weakness, the smile or frown, of the Queen or the 
 Pope. We obey our most gracious Queen from 
 far different motives, and we abhor and renounce 
 the claims of the Pope of Rome, because his claim 
 is usurpation, contrary to revelation and to all 
 sound notions of justice, and because the govern-
 
 229 
 
 ment of the Papacy was, and where powerful is, 
 the most intolerable tyranny with which the Al- 
 mighty, in his mysterious dealings, ever, perhaps, 
 afflicted the family of man. 
 
 Is it then becoming in a church of England 
 clergyman to speak thus on this subject? Is it 
 well for him to suggest to his readers the suspen- 
 sion of their loyalty on a mere contingency ? We 
 are not called upon to say what we would do ; and 
 if we were, we could not boast of human infirmity ; 
 but this we do know, that it would be the duty of 
 every true Englishman to die at the stake rather 
 than allow the crown of England to be brought 
 into subjection to the Pope of Rome. The familiar 
 lines, sound though amusing, are not out of place 
 here 
 
 " Loyalty is still the same, 
 Whether it win or lose the game ; 
 True as the dial to the sun, 
 Although it be not shined upon." 
 
 But, alas ! loyalty is too much at a discount in 
 the present day, and the reason is, because the 
 sound principles of the church, the only foundation 
 of all genuine loyalty, are either too much lost 
 sight of, or too much reviled and cast down by 
 Romish and other sectaries, or too much betrayed 
 by even professed churchmen, who would shudder 
 were any one to question their loyalty, but who, 
 by the support which they give to false 'principles,
 
 230 
 
 strengthen the policy of those who, if true to their 
 own principles, would, with professions of loyalty 
 on their lips, wrest the sceptre out of the fair hand 
 of our Queen, to break it in solemn mockery over 
 the grave of her altar and her throne. 
 
 A quotation from William Sherlock's sermon, 
 preached before the House of Commons on the 
 coronation of James II., will well explain our views 
 on this subject. 
 
 " And therefore, to conclude, I would desire you to observe, 
 that it is a church-of-Enffland loyalty I persuade you to. 
 This our king approves, commends, relies on, as a tried and ex- 
 perienced loyalty, which has suffered with its prince, but never 
 yet rebelled against him ; a loyalty upon firm and steady prin- 
 ciples, and without reserve. And, therefore, to keep us true to 
 our prince, we must be true to our church and to our religion. 
 It is no act of loyalty to accommodate or compliment away our 
 religion and its legal securities ; for if we change our religion 
 we must change the principles of our loyalty too, and I am 
 sure the king and the crown will gain nothing by that; for there 
 is no such lasting and immoveable loyalty as that of the church 
 of England. I deny not, but some, who are papists, in some 
 junctures of affairs, may and have been loyal ; but I am sure the 
 popish religion is not ; the Englishman may be loyal, but not 
 the papist ; and yet there can be no security of those men's 
 loyalty whose religion in any case teaches them to rebel."* 
 
 * In using the word " Papist," as quoted from Sherlock, we 
 would say, that there is not anything farther from our uiind than 
 to give offence to respectable members of the church of Rome, 
 so many of whom, at the present day, keep at a distance from 
 those of their communion who are engaged in disturbing the 
 peace of these realms. We repeat what we have before said 
 that we have -no unkind feelings towards any men our warfare 
 is with the fearfully destructive principles of the Papacy.
 
 231 
 
 We cannot entertain the nice distinctions between 
 the loyalty which we may render as a church and 
 as individuals, and therefore we again protest 
 against such a mode of treating a baneful and 
 usurped tyranny. " We find ourselves, as a church^ 
 under the King now, and we obey him ; we were under the 
 Pope formerly , and we obeyed him." Any person may 
 draw the inference made by us above. We will 
 obey the Pope again when we help him to that 
 consummation that " event in Providence" the 
 supremacy over the church and the crown of 
 England. 
 
 And to those members of our church, and more 
 especially those of our profession, who appear to 
 have such sympathy with the Papacy in her lamen- 
 tations over the loss of her dear England, we would 
 give some little advice, in the words of another, and 
 which advice we give, not in any spirit of bigotry 
 or unkindness to those who differ from us, for, as 
 we have already said, we do not war with men, 
 neither in the spirit of one haunted with fears 
 about Popery or the Inquisition, but yet in a spirit 
 of warning to those who are so fond of the papal 
 see, and who labour so unceasingly, though in 
 some cases indirectly, to advance its interests 
 within the realm of England. 
 
 " This (a Treatise on Papal Tyranny) will serve to arm our 
 ENGLISH ISRAEL against the flattering insinuations of some 
 popish books, which would persuade us that the Pope is the
 
 232 
 
 kind father of all Christians, and the principle of unity in whom 
 they all should meet to enjoy the blessings of peace and com- 
 fort in that church out of which there is no salvation ; to her 
 they invite us even with tears of compassion. But we ought 
 not to look to their weeping eyes, but to their cruel tyranny. 
 By other good books we are taught to reject their errors, by 
 this, to beware of their actions ; and to judge what Popery would 
 do by what it has done."* 
 
 * Du Moulin's Papal Tyranny.
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 WE have now finished our proposed examination 
 of the position of the church of England, as sug- 
 gested by a perusal of this well-known " Tract for 
 the Times." Our examination has, we hope, been 
 conducted with every feeling of respect for the 
 author of the Tract, though with deep regret be- 
 cause of its tone and contents. We could write 
 much more on such a theme, but this is not the 
 place, neither do we feel ourselves entitled to offer 
 advice on such subjects. It would not, however, 
 be very difficult to suggest some means by which 
 the interests of our church might be more 
 effectively advanced, and by which many of our 
 fellow subjects, who are entangled in the snares of 
 schism, might be brought within the pale of the 
 church established in these realms. 
 
 But while we refrain from stating the means by 
 which, in our opinion, such good might be effected,
 
 234 
 
 we may, without travelling beyond our proper 
 sphere, say, that no good can be done by lowering 
 the standard of our faith to meet the errors and 
 corruptions of the Papacy ; or by manifesting a 
 harsh spirit towards those who have been brought 
 up from their infancy in strong prejudices against 
 the church, and who have constantly before them 
 its faults in days past, or, possibly, something even 
 at the present time, which may tend to confirm 
 those prejudices, and which, though by no means 
 sufficient to excuse, yet may be more than suffi- 
 cient to account for, the existence of schism in the 
 land. 
 
 It is not, we repeat, by lowering the standard of 
 the church in the least degree, neither is it by any 
 personal unkindness towards the separatists from 
 our communion, that those who are now removed 
 from us may be brought into " unity of the Spirit 
 and the bond of peace" with the church of Eng- 
 land. 
 
 And, finally, it is not by lowering our standard 
 of faith, or accommodating it to in any way suit 
 the superstitions, or to favour the least of the Papal 
 pretensions, that the government of our Most Gra- 
 cious Sovereign can be sustained. 
 
 This is not a question of party politics. This 
 is essentially a Christian and an English question. 
 We are not, we cannot be, ignorant of the oppo- 
 sition which the maintainers of the Pope's autho-
 
 235 
 
 rity give to the progress of good and peaceful 
 order in the empire. We are not ignorant of the 
 devices by which every effort of our rulers to do 
 good is opposed or undermined by the advocates 
 of the see of Rome ; and it may possibly be found 
 that the words which the good Bishop Bedell wrote 
 from Ireland, upwards of two centuries ago, are 
 pregnant with truth even in the present day " His 
 Majesty is now, with the greatest part of this 
 country, as to their hearts and consciences, King, 
 but at the Pope's discretion." And after having, 
 more than once, repeated the same statement, the 
 bishop concluded " In this state of this kingdom, 
 to think the bridle of the amy may be taken 
 away, should be the thought, not of a brainsick, 
 but of a brainless man."* 
 
 * In reference to the way in which the interests of the Papal 
 see are advanced by excesses in our church, it is recorded of 
 Bedell : " He had also another principle, which was not very 
 acceptable to some in power; he thought conformity was an 
 exact adhering to the rubric; and that the adding any new rite 
 or ceremony was as much nonconformity as the passing over those 
 that were prescribed ; so that he would not use those bowings or 
 gesticulations that grew so much in fashion, that men's affections 
 were measured by them. He had too good an understanding not 
 to conclude that these things were not unlawful in themselves ; 
 but he had observed, that when once the humour of adding new 
 rites and ceremonies got into the church, it went on by a fatal in- 
 crease, till it had grown up to that bulk to which we find it swelled 
 in the church of Rome. And this began so early, and grew so fast, 
 that St. Austin complained of it in his time, saying, that the con- 
 dition of Christians was then more uneasy by that yoke of obser- 
 vances, than that of the Jews had boon. And, therefore, Bedell
 
 236 
 
 Has not the pious bishop given a true picture of 
 the present state of that portion of our Sovereign's 
 dominions in which the papal emissaries exercise 
 such a baneful influence ? And why is it that the 
 agents of the papal kingdom act such a part before 
 the wondering eyes of all the loyal subjects of the 
 crown of England ? Is it because they are in any 
 way different from their fellow-men ? No ! they 
 are the same flesh and blood, but the principles of 
 
 thought the adhering to established laws and rules was a certain 
 and fixed thing; whereas superstition was infinite." 
 
 And yet, such was the gentleness and devoted piety of this 
 good, though, in his principles, firm and unbending, bishop, that 
 he won the good will even of his persecutors, the Irish rebels, to 
 whose misguided zeal and reckless fury he fell a victim. It is 
 thus related : " The Irish did him unusual honours at his burial, 
 for the chief of the rebels gathered their forces together, and with 
 them accompanied his body from Mr. Sheredin's house to the 
 churchyard of Kilmore, in great solemnity ; and they desired Mr. 
 Clogy to bury him according to the office prescribed by the 
 church; but though the gentlemen were so civil as to offer it, 
 yet it was not thought advisable to provoke the rabble so much 
 as perhaps that might have done ; so it was past over. But the 
 Irish discharged a volley of shot at his interment, and cried out in 
 Latin, ' Requiescat in pace ultimus Anglorum ' May the 
 last of the English rest in peace;' for they had often said, that 
 as they esteemed him the best of the English bishops, so he 
 should be the last that should be left among them." And, again, 
 it is recorded " Bishop Bedell had a tenant (a Popish priest), his 
 name Edmund Ferrily ; he was fond of the man, and for his good 
 qualities and agreeable conversation had him frequently at his 
 table ; they often chose religion for their topic, and the argu- 
 ments made use of by the bishop had such influence on the priest, 
 that he was heard to say at the bishop's interment ' O sit anima 
 mea cum Bedello !' "
 
 237 
 
 the Papacy bind them down to the course which 
 they invariably pursue. It is because their vows 
 to their sovereign Lord the Pope limit their alle- 
 giance to the Queen of England to her compliance 
 with their own demands. 
 
 And is it well to strengthen the hands of such 
 men ? Is it seemly in the clergy of the church of 
 England to become pleaders for those false views 
 and superstitions, by which a discontented and dis- 
 affected priesthood not the priesthood of any 
 church of these realms are armed with such ter- 
 rible power to oppress the people, and to trouble 
 the rulers of the empire ? 
 
 If ever this kingdom and church suffer, they 
 will suffer by their own hand. And " when Han- 
 nibal is at the gates," it is a truly miserable spec- 
 tacle to see the watchmen of our land spending 
 their time and strength in " squabbling and jang- 
 ling" about things which are no profit nay, which 
 are a deadly injury to the church, and, conse- 
 quently, to the true interests of the kingdom. 
 
 If, then, instead of wasting time time that can 
 never be redeemed in such unprofitable con- 
 tention, all orders of men amongst us would con- 
 sider their several duties and responsibilities as 
 Christians, as patriots, and as citizens of the 
 world ; and if they would diligently improve the 
 talents committed to their care, we might soon 
 expect to see the church of England in that posi-
 
 238 
 
 tion which her principles so justly entitle her to 
 assume. She would be a still greater blessing to 
 her own country, to all parts of the empire, and a 
 guide and example to all nations and churches 
 upon earth. 
 
 But we cannot shut our eyes to the fact, that 
 our unhappy divisions corrupt and impair her 
 health and strength. If our church did not pos- 
 sess such advantages as it is her high privilege to 
 enjoy, we might hold our peace ; but when we 
 consider how abundantly she enjoys the means of 
 enriching the human race, and then see her so 
 distracted by wretched and vain contentions, we 
 cannot but complain. 
 
 When we picture to our mind what might be 
 done to more and more exalt our church, we feed 
 on the prospect which imagination brings before 
 us, and we enjoy it exceedingly; but when our 
 eye turns upon the sad state of things, of which 
 we may justly complain, then ours is indeed but 
 as the " dream of the night vision," even the 
 " dream of the hungry man." 
 
 Why should it be thus ? Why all this " break- 
 ing in" and " going out," this " complaining 
 in our streets," this "wasting and destruction 
 within" our "borders?" But we still hope for 
 better times ; we trust in God for a remedy.
 
 APPENDIX.
 
 APPENDIX A. 
 
 NOTE 1, PAGE 2. 
 
 SINCE the above was written the author has read two apologies of 
 Mr. Sibthorp for his apostasy from the church of England. Mr. 
 Sibthorp, who appears to have private knowledge of these matters, 
 thus speaks : " But another ground has, within the last few years, 
 been taken by individuals, so devout, so learned, and in every 
 respect so estimable, as to make the novelty of the position they 
 assume yet more startling, from the unquestioned fact of their 
 own Christian conscientiousness. It is this : that the doctrines of the 
 Catholic church, generally considered as denied by Protestants, 
 are not really denied by the Anglican establishment, but that in 
 principle, or tacitly, she admits them all; and that their apparent 
 condemnation by her in the Thirty-nine Articles is no condem- 
 nation, except of certain practical abuses of them which existed 
 in the sixteenth century. It is, I say, maintained by many, and 
 that publicly, of whose integrity and piety, no more than of their 
 learning and talents can the least question be raised by all who 
 have the privilege to know them, that the Anglican church is 
 truly Catholic as it respects these doctrines, and that no one who 
 subscribes the Thirty-nine Articles is called on to reject purgatory, 
 transubstantiation, invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of 
 the saints, the efficacy of the sacrifice of the mass as defined by the 
 Council of Trent, &c. In other words, he may be a Tridentino 
 Catholic at heart, and an Anglican clergyman by profession."
 
 242 APPENDIX. 
 
 " This is a startling position, and, as might he supposed, has 
 startled the established church throughout her length and breadth, 
 from Berwick-upon-Tweed to the Land's End. A sound has 
 gone forth from Oxford, which has troubled alike the Metropo- 
 litan at Lambeth, and the humble curate in the Welsh moun- 
 tains. It has penetrated the British senate, peradventure it may 
 not be unheard in another council chamber ; it certainly has not 
 been unheard in the Vatican. That the Anglican established 
 church is, in her doctrines, essentially one with Rome, seems one 
 of the surprising discoveries of this age of discovery. But such is 
 the purport of the celebrated No. 90." 
 
 Mr. Sibthorp, in another work, adds, in reference to this point 
 " I find not the slightest reason to alter this judgment. One of 
 my opponents declines to give any opinion of the Tract, but the 
 other condemns mine in very strong terms. Yet, what has he 
 brought forward to prove it erroneous ? Really nothing. The 
 protestations against Rome which preface the Tract cannot be 
 allowed to weigh against the distinct language in favour of Tri- 
 dentine Catholicity which follows. There is an endeavour 
 throughout it to establish the assumption that there is a Roman 
 doctrine distinct from the Tridentine. Suppose this granted, but 
 my assertion, which was, that the Tract sought to reconcile the 
 Thirty-nine Articles with the latter, is not affected by any 
 protestation against or condemnation of the former. Besides, 
 if there is a real inconsistency in the Tract, of the one part 
 with the other, I am not chargeable with misstatement, 
 because I declare its plain meaning in this other part. Observe 
 such passages as these. On the Twenty-second Article, the 
 Tract says * The Homily, and therefore the Article, does not 
 speak of the Tridentine purgatory.' So respecting the invocation 
 of saints ' The Article gains a witness and concurrence from the 
 Council of Trent.' And the main purport of the reasoning upon 
 this Article is directly to shew that it condemned the Romish, 
 but might be held in accordance with the Tridentine doctrine.
 
 APPENDIX. 243 
 
 It is quite the same upon the Twenty-fifth and Twenty-eighth 
 Articles. In the Thirty-first, the Tract says ' Nothing can 
 shew more clearly than the passage, (from the Article itself,) that 
 the Articles are not written against the creed of the Roman 
 church, but against actual existing errors in it.' And further on 
 ' It is conceived that the Article before us neither speaks against 
 the mass in itself, nor against its being an offering for the quick 
 and dead for the remission of sin.' Need I add any comment to 
 prove what I had asserted, that the tendency of the Tract is to 
 shew that a man may subscribe at once the Thirty-nine Articles 
 and the Tridentine Creed." 
 
 NOTE 2, PAGE 17. 
 
 PHILODOX. What ! my old friend Orthodox ! I salute you 
 in the kindest manner, and congratulate your coming into 
 France, the rather because I hope you are passing this way to 
 Rome, as sundry of your fellows and friends have done before. 
 
 ORTHODOX. To Rome, Philodox ! Alas! Quid JKomcefaciam ? 
 mentiri nescio. " What should I do at Rome ? I cannot lie ; I 
 cannot equivocate." Mason on " Orders." 
 
 The deluded man who embraces the strange paths of the 
 Papacy, will, if he be in the least degree jealous for the honour 
 of Christianity, soon find that the doctrine of mentiri nescio will 
 not suit the atmosphere of Rome. There is no middle path : a 
 man must submit himself to error, superstition, and idolatry, or 
 he must be miserable all his days, until, finding no rest for the 
 sole of his foot, he returns to the ark from which he has wan- 
 dered. 
 
 It is already reported we do not pledge ourselves to the 
 fact that the Papal church has found a very froward member 
 in the Rev. Mr. Sibthorp. It is said that he does not feel 
 quite comfortable with the practice of praying to the Virgin
 
 244 APPENDIX. 
 
 Mary, nay, it is alleged that Mr. Sibthorp has refused to 
 comply with this custom. Whether this statement be true or 
 not, we cannot pretend to say but of this we are persuaded, 
 that a man of an amiable and pious disposition such an one as 
 Mr. Sibthorp appears to be cannot easily feed upon the food 
 which Rome provides. How can Mr. Sibthorp reconcile his 
 mind to this doctrine, which, whatever be her faults, the mother 
 that brought him forth and nursed him for many years never 
 taught him ? No ; she never taught him idolatry in any form, 
 much less as part of the Catholic faith. 
 
 Costerus, in his work on the praises of the blessed Virgin, 
 thus accounts for the opposition of the Devil to saint-worship 
 " He (the Devil) well knows how great the authority of such a 
 queen of the heavens is with God the Son, and how great her 
 compassion .towards men, who, being invoked, always hears and 
 assists the wretched, breaks the malice of the enemy, and 
 BRUISES THE HEAD OF THE SERPENT." In another place, he 
 informs us, that " the Virgin is well compared to the star of the 
 ocean, to which, when cast upon the stormy deep, you may 
 look and fly, according to the advice of Bernard ' Eespice 
 stellam; voca Mariam look to the Star; call upon Mary !' " Is 
 this obsolete doctrine the ignorant effusion of a dark age ? 
 Hear the present pontiff: " 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 patro- 
 ness and protectress, may WATCH OVER us writing to you, and 
 LEAD OUR MINDS" (mark, reader, how the Holy Spirit is here set 
 aside, and His glory given to the creature) " BY HER HEAVENLY 
 INFLUENCE into those councils which may prove most salutary 
 
 to Christ's flock " Again : " But that all may 
 
 have a successful 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."
 
 APPENDIX. 245 
 
 So far the present Pope. Now, if this should meet the eye of 
 Mr. Sibthorp, we ask him, was it for such " Catholic faith" as 
 this that he rebelled against his mother the church of England ? 
 Did she starve his soul because she would not teach such 
 idolatry ? because with her martyr of old she exclaims, u No- 
 thing but Christ" ? Does Mr. Sibthorp subscribe to such 
 idolatry ? If he does, God be merciful to him, and guide his 
 feet back into the way of truth.* If he does not, he is a rebel 
 against the church which he has joined ; he is, besides, guilty 
 of hypocrisy in professing to embrace that which he abhors ; 
 and he lends his influence to confirm others, less privileged than 
 himself, in idolatry which must detach them from the only 
 ground of hope the foundation laid in Zion the Lord Jesus 
 Christ. Well, then, may we say, " Quid Romcefaciam, mentiri 
 nescio" What should I or any sinner do at Rome, unless we 
 learn to trust in lying vanities in things that cannot profit or 
 deliver. With all the spirit of prophecy which Jeremiah pos- 
 sessed, he never contemplated such faith or worship as this. 
 When cast upon the ocean of strife and trouble, he exclaims 
 " O Lord Jehovah, my strength and my fortress, and my refuge 
 in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from 
 the ends of the earth, and shall say, 4 Surely our fathers have 
 inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit.'' 
 " Oh, the hope of Israel, the Saviour thereof in time of 
 trouble." This is true religion ; that is idolatry : the former, 
 the Church of England faithfully teaches the latter, she as 
 faithfully rejects and condemns. 
 
 To shew some of the practical difficulties of the question now 
 under consideration, we would, even at the expense of extending 
 this note to too great length, add a letter which ten years ago 
 we published in a public magazine. 
 
 * It is, we believe, quite certain, that since the above remarks were 
 written, Mr. Sibthorp has separated himself from all connexion with the 
 Papal communion.
 
 246 APPENDIX. 
 
 The " Proselytos" of the Roman-catholic Magazine and the 
 Litany of Loretto. 
 
 TO THE EDITOR OF THE " PROTESTANT JOURNAL.'' 
 
 SIR, In our schoolboy days, we have all read the fable 
 of the Fox and Goat in the well. Old Reynard having fallen 
 into it, persuaded the goat to come down, that, he might 
 ascend upon his horns. The goat was caught in the snare ; 
 and Reynard, after he had escaped, left his dupe to perish, 
 while he, laughing, exclaimed, " You old fool ! if you had as 
 much brains as beard, you would not have ventured into the 
 well without considering how you were to get out !" From this 
 amusing fable is taken the proverb, " Look before you leap;" 
 the force of which has been, at this time, brought to my mind 
 by a circumstance related in the last number of the Birming- 
 ham Popish Magazine, and which might raise a smile upon the 
 lips, did it not concern an immortal soul, which has been led 
 away from Christ, and united to Popery, " the mother of har- 
 lots," whose " house inclineth unto death, and her paths unto 
 the dead." It appears that some simple Protestant was in- 
 duced to leave his religion for that of Rome. He, no doubt, 
 believed all the fair speeches of those wily Jesuits, who are 
 roaming " about seeking whom they may devour;' 5 and who, 
 in the widest sense, " become all things to all men, if, by any 
 means, they may gain some ;" men who gloss over all those 
 things in Popery which offend Protestant ears. Seduced by 
 such, he forsook his church ; and soon he, who was not con- 
 tent with the comforts of home, was obliged to feed upon the 
 husks that the swine did eat. He asked his new mother for 
 bread, and she gave him a stone ; for a fish, and she gave him 
 a serpent I He went to the Popish chapel, expecting to enjoy 
 all the promised blessings upon which his imagination had 
 already feasted ; but it was " as when a hungry man dreameth, 
 and behold he eateth ; but he awaketh. and his soul his empty."
 
 APPENDIX. 247 
 
 Instead of having the bread of life broken for him, he was 
 treated with " the Litany of our Lady of Loretto" ! I,! His 
 soul, accustomed to something more solid and nourishing, 
 loathed such food. The poor man went away sick at heart, 
 and applied to some of his new brethren for relief. He first 
 mentioned his scruples to a friend, who kindly informed him 
 that " the peculiar expressions in the Litany of Loretto pleased 
 the taste of the age in which they were composed" ! ! Such an 
 answer did but ill satisfy a soul searching after truth ; so he 
 resolved to apply elsewhere, and accordingly addressed to the 
 Editor of the Popish magazine a modest letter, signed PROSE- 
 LYTOS, in which he describes his horror at hearing the " Litany 
 of Loretto," and asks if some reformation in this point of faith 
 and practice might not be introduced ? " It (the Litany) never 
 can (says he) be understood by the people, and must require 
 much ingenuity in the learned to give these titles of the Blessed 
 Virgin anything like a rational meaning; they ought to be 
 excluded from the public service, because they cannot fail to 
 offend the more correct taste of the present age.'' And, now, 
 what answer did this poor convert receive ? First, LAURETA- 
 NUS starts up, then PASTOR, and then HIERONOMOS, for " the 
 preservation of revered usages, and the castigation of upstart 
 novelty" ! I PASTOR excuses his warmth, by stating that " the 
 subject justified indignation" I ! and, by the words of Aristotle, 
 " They who are not angry when there is a worthy occasion, 
 seem to be stupid." " And did not (he continues) the first 
 letter of Proselytos furnish such an occasion? He came, a 
 proselyte, confessing himself untrained to the habits of thought 
 and the nicety of language of the thorough-bred Catholic ; and, 
 instead of the modest reserve which became him on these 
 accounts, because he himself was shocked before his conversion 
 at what he did not at first hearing comprehend, he, a layman 
 and proselyte, must stand up to censure a custom, venerable, 
 from long-established use, in every country upon earth where
 
 248 APPENDIX. 
 
 Catholicity is known. If the friend whom he consulted could 
 allege no better argument for the peculiar expressions in the 
 Litany of Loretto than that they pleased the taste of the age 
 in which they were composed, I must still repeat my strong 
 and indignant censure on his unceremonious wish to exclude 
 them altogether from the public service. His friend could 
 allege no better reason ; but did it follow that no one else 
 could ? Is the impression on the mind of an untrained Neo- 
 phyte to be thrust upon us as the conviction of a thorough-bred 
 Catholic ? Or is the flippant censure of an indiscreet prose- 
 lyte to disturb a practice so long followed, under the eye and 
 with the concurrence of so many zealous and enlightened pre- 
 lates and pastors ':" 
 
 Proselytos dropped an unfortunate expression "that he 
 would give a dozen of them (i. e. Lorettos) for some other 
 Litany ;" so that it was no easy matter to soothe those wor- 
 shippers of the creature ; although, in another place, poor Pro- 
 selytos declares that '* his only crime is, in having given a faith- 
 ful description of his feelings when he was present at the recit- 
 ing of the Litany of Loretto ; and that he described it solely 
 for the purpose of drawing the attention of Catholic ministers 
 to this important question, whether, in this Protestant country, 
 it would not be better to abstain, in the public services, from 
 the use of a form of devotion, which, of its very nature, must 
 confirm the prejudices of strangers, and indispose their minds 
 for the reception of Catholic doctrines." 
 
 All this apology was of no avail, for they set upon Proselytos 
 until they drove him from the field and silenced his impiety. 
 I cannot discover, from the magazine, what has become of Pro- 
 selytos non est inventus. I pity his fate from my heart ; and 
 do sincerely hope that he may be cured of his rambling dispo- 
 sition, and led to " ask for the old paths, and where is the good 
 way, that he may walk therein and find rest for his soul." 
 
 From this interesting occurrence we may draw a few remarks.
 
 APPENDIX. 249 
 
 1st. The folly of Englishmen who leave their own church for 
 that of Rome is very plainly set forth here. The poor simple 
 man above, thought, no doubt, that all was very beautiful in 
 the Papal system ; but how soon he found it to be like the 
 beauty of the whited sepulchre ! and in what condition was he 
 placed, or is he placed, if he has not been brought back ? He 
 must either subscribe in his heart to the idolatry which offended 
 him, and thereby bring himself under the curse denounced 
 against any worship of the creature : or he must profess to do 
 so, while, in his heart, he thinks differently, and thus become 
 guilty of hypocrisy in religion. There is not any alternative 
 than idolatry or hypocrisy. Silly man ! he thought that Rome 
 would immediately alter a point of her faith to please him, not 
 considering that her " pretence to infallibility makes her errors 
 incurable ;" and that the command to worship the Virgin is 
 one of those which the Council of Trent declares must be re- 
 ceived with equal reverence as Holy Writ ; and that the Pope's 
 supremacy, and all the peculiar notions of the Papal system, rest 
 upon precisely the same authority and foundation as the worship 
 of the Virgin Mary does ; and yet Proselytes thought that for 
 him they would immediately remove one, and that a chief, stone 
 of their building ! But as this would lead to a general tumbling 
 down, these gentlemen were too wise or too wary to allow this 
 convert to proceed in his career of infidelity. " The question 
 is," says Hieronomus, " do Catholics receive their faith on trust 
 from their parents or pastors only ?" There, sir, is the point. 
 The church has decreed saint worship : Who, then, is he that 
 will dare to gainsay her command ? Oh that, in this liberal day, 
 poor sinners, who are beset by these Jesuits, would look be- 
 fore they plunge into this idolatrous system. 
 
 2ndly. The beauty and superiority of the religion of English 
 churchmen. " The Bible, and the Bible alone," said the great 
 Chillingworth, " is the religion of Protestants." We require 
 no support from the inventions of a superstitious age. We have
 
 250 APPENDIX. 
 
 no Litanies of Loretto to offend the ear. We worship the 
 ever-blessed Trinity in unity alone, and in the spirit and the 
 truth of the good old Catholic doctrine ; and we have not any 
 schismatical system of saint-worship to be ashamed of or to 
 prop up. Let our enemies revile us as they may, all the good 
 they have is what they hold in common with us ; the evil they 
 derive from every source but the Word of God. " Nay, more," 
 says Sir H. Lynde, in his Via Tttta, " the church of Rome does 
 not only acknowledge those things which we hold, but the most 
 ingenuous members of it are ashamed also of those additions of 
 theirs which we deny. ****** And, what is remarkable 
 and comfortable to all believing Protestants, we charge them 
 with flat idolatry in the adoration of the sacrament, of relics, OP 
 SAINTS, of images ; and, however they excuse themselves in 
 distinguishing their manner of adoration, yet, I say. to our end- 
 less comfort be it spoken, they cannot charge us, in the doc- 
 trine of our church, no, not with the least suspicion of idolatry." 
 Believe me, yours faithfully, 
 
 JAMES R. PAGE. 
 
 Sept. 1844. 
 
 NOTE 3, PAGE 28. 
 
 " But you unadvised, or rather ill-advised, ita ferentibus fatis, 
 being necessary that the prophecies should be fulfilled in their 
 due time, 
 
 Dividitis muros, et moenia panditis urbis, 
 Et licet Utero sonitum quater arma dedere. 
 
 Nothing regarding either the advertisements of the apostles, the 
 counsel of the fathers of the church, or the suspicions that it 
 gave of itself : But 
 
 Instantes operi immemores caecique furore, 
 Hoc monstrum infcelix sacrata sistitis arce. 
 
 From thenceforward be put all to fire and sword in the city, ran-
 
 APPENDIX. 251 
 
 sacked the church, polluted the holy things, left nothing un- 
 touched with the infectious hands of his harpies, poured out of 
 that fatal horse all manner of superstitious services in the church, 
 calling this horse (although a mark of the Greeks) the Trojan 
 horse : These superstitious, Catholic, orothodoxall, because con- 
 secrated and hallowed (these are their own words) by the popes, 
 though from their beginning they were heathenish and idola- 
 trous. 
 
 "Now in the midst of this fire, this universal confusion, thy. 
 neighbour's house being on fire nay thine own nay thy beard 
 being singed, thou gapest and stretchest thyself as if thou were 
 half asleep, thou cavillest and disputest where it first took fire, 
 where it began, and in the meantime thou burnest thyself. 
 Wise Antenor, devout Eneas, did not so ; but breaking through 
 the Grecian troops, got themselves out of the city with their fel- 
 lows, gathered together what they could, and to sea they go, and 
 putting themselves into the first ships they met with, hoist up sails 
 to seek a new country, and find it, and there they settle: being 
 still Trojans whithersoever they went, in what place soever they 
 rested, carrying with them their household gods and the ensigns 
 of their country : being still Christians, professors of the Catholic 
 faith, carrying with them the word of God, untouched by the 
 fire of the Greeks, keeping the sacraments of our Lord sound and 
 pure. The Grecians are no Trojans though they hold the place 
 and possess it, whatsoever title they allege ; neither art thou, that 
 hast yielded thyself, forsaken thy country, a true Christian, since 
 the enemy is where Troy was, antichrist where Christ was, furious 
 in the midst of the temple, as once Antiocbus was sacrilegious 
 even between the altars, the sacrifices." Mournay's Papacy. 
 
 NOTE 4, PAGE 35. 
 
 " As there is but one God, so there can bee but one true religion : 
 either the reformed church must be in the right, or the Romane ;
 
 252 APPENDIX. 
 
 therefore no halting between them both. Beware, therefore, 
 deare brethren, of the agents of Rome, who go about to withdraw 
 you from the love of your country, your allegiance to your prince, 
 and, what is worst of all, from the true and pure worship of God. 
 If stealing away the bodies of your sonnes and daughters be so 
 hainous a crime, that many conceive it better to deserve the gal- 
 lowesthan stealing of a horse or sheep, what punishment doe you 
 suppose doe they deserve who steal away their souls from God 
 and their hearts from you ? If you account them as capitall 
 enemies who seek the ruine of your estate, can you esteem other- 
 wise of them who seek the utter ruine and overthrow of your 
 souls? Pliny writeth ofcertaine serpents in Tyrinth and snakes 
 in Syria, which never touch the inhabitants, or if they bite them 
 never hurt them, but sting foreiners in such sort that they put 
 them to insufferable paine, and greatly endanger their life. It 
 may be some may have such an opinion, that the priests and 
 Jesuits, and other papists of their own country which they meet 
 withal in these parts, have no will or power to hurt them ; and 
 therefore I see many boldly converse with them, because their 
 outward behaviour is faire and company delightfull : but I be- 
 seech them to consider that the panther hideth her oughly visage, 
 which would terrify any other beast to come near her, that she 
 may the better allure them by the sweet smell of her body; but 
 as soon as they come within her clutches, she maketh a prey of 
 them. Take heed how ye enter into the house of Rimmon ; 
 ye cannot be present there, but either you must give great offence 
 or commit a greater ; give great offence if yee doe not as they 
 doe, or commit a greater if yee joyne with them in their super- 
 stitious rites." Featly, Sermon on "One God one true Reli 
 gion." 
 
 NOTE 5, PAGE 48. 
 
 " For the Pope (as B. Jewell hath told you) being forsaken 
 of the four principal patriarchs of the world, appointeth out four
 
 APPENDIX. 253 
 
 of his ordinary chaplains, (or other prelates whom it pleaseth 
 him,) and giveth them the names of four patriarchs ; the first for 
 Constantinople, the second for Alexandria, the third for Antioch, 
 the fourth for Jerusalem : and thus having these four at com- 
 mand, in this pleasant fancy he ruleth and governeth the whole 
 world. In such a solemn bravery the great Cham of Tartary at 
 this day, after he hath dined himself, soundeth out a trumpet, and 
 giveth all the emperors and kings of the world leave to go to 
 dinner ; in which imagination and jollity he continueth his claim 
 to the possession of the world." Mason on English Orders. 
 
 NOTE 6, PAGE 114. 
 
 *' Thus have we cast off your dilemma, and broken both the 
 horns of it. But now my retortion lies heavy upon you, and will 
 not be turned off. For, first, you content not yourselves with a 
 moral certainty of the things you believe, nor with such a degree 
 of assurance of them as is sufficient to produce obedience to the 
 condition of the new covenant, which is all that we require. 
 God's spirit, if he please, may work more, a certainty of adhe- 
 rence beyond a certainty of evidence ; but neither God doth, nor 
 man may, require of us as our duty, to give a greater assent to 
 the conclusion than the premises deserve : to build an infallible 
 faith upon motives that are only highly credible, and not infal- 
 lible, as it were a great and heavy building upon a foundation that 
 hath not strength proportionable. But though God require not 
 of us such unreasonable things, you do ; and tell men they can- 
 not be saved, unless they believe your proposals with an infallible 
 faith ; to which end, they must believe also your propounder, 
 your church, to be simply infallible. Now, how is it possible for 
 them to give a rational assent to the church's infallibility, unless 
 they have some infallible means to know that she is infallible ? 
 Neither can they infallibly know the infallibility of this means, 
 but by some other, and so on for ever ; unless they can dig so
 
 254 APPENDIX. 
 
 deep as to come at length to the rock, that is, to settle all upon 
 something evident of itself, which is not so much as pretended. 
 But the last resolution of all is into motives, which, indeed, upon 
 examination, will scarce appear probable, but are not so much as 
 vouched to be any more than very credible. For example : If I 
 ask you, why do you believe transubstantiation ? what can you 
 answer, but, because it is a revelation of the prime verity. I de- 
 mand, again, How can you assure yourself or me of that, being 
 ready to embrace it if it may appear to be so ? And what can you 
 say, but that you know it to be so, because the church says so, 
 which is infallible ? If I ask, What mean you by your church ? 
 You can tell me nothing, but the company of Christians which 
 adhere to the Pope. I demand then, further, Why should I be- 
 lieve this company to be the infallible propounder of Divine re- 
 velation ? And then you tell me, that there are many motives 
 to induce a man to this belief. But are these motives, lastly, in- 
 fallible ? No, say you, but very credible. Well, let them pass 
 for such, because now we have not leisure to examine them. 
 Yet, methinks, seeing the motives to believe the church's infalli- 
 bility are only very credible, it should also be but as credible that 
 your church is infallible ; and as credible, and no more, perhaps 
 somewhat less, that her proposals, particularly transubstantiation, 
 are divine revelations." Chillingworth. 
 
 "We reply, that we even then place reason on the bench when 
 we seem to dethrone it, and at the same time make it an umpire 
 when we make it a captive ; but, in the last place, to come nearer 
 our present purpose, and to shew the Romanists as well as we do 
 at last appeal to their private reasons. If my inquiry were, 
 whether the Roman church or the reformed churches were the 
 true church ? here neither the Romish church, nor ours, must be 
 judge, seeing they both pretend to it, and both are the purest to 
 themselves. How, then, shall I know which is really so ? Only 
 by examining both their pleas, and then that which I judge to be 
 purest, do I adhere to. When Mr. Cressy renounced the Pro-
 
 APPENDIX. 255 
 
 testant communion to join with the Roman church, he either 
 did it upon motives of reason, or not ; if not, it was a brutish, un- 
 reasonable act; but if he did, then did he enter into the Roman 
 communion, because his own reason judged it to be the purest 
 church ; and when he believes his church infallible, he either 
 hath reason for his belief or he hath not ; if he hath not, then, 
 again, is his belief irrational, uncertain, and absurd ; if he hath, 
 then he believes his church infallible, because his reason judgeth 
 it to be so, and so the church is beholden to the judgment of his 
 private reason for his belief of her infallibility ! And hath not 
 Mr. C. given us his reasons (such as they are) why he judgeth 
 and believeth the church infallible ? To what purpose, if reason 
 be so unfit a judge ? And let him do what violence he can to his 
 rational faculties, unless he become a mere brute, his own private 
 reason will rule him, and, in spite of Pope or council, keep the 
 chair. And I dare challenge all the Romanists in the world to 
 demonstrate, that unless every man's reason be his guide, he must 
 follow chance and uncertainty. Before I pass hence, (to avoid 
 captious mistakes,) be pleased to note, that when I make every 
 man's reason his guide, I do not exclude the guidance of the 
 Divine Spirit, but rather imply it; because that doth not move us 
 by irrational and violent impulses, but by discovering to our rea- 
 sons a fuller evidence or farther connexion of truths, than without 
 its illumination we could have discerned, and so forceth our 
 assents by a stronger conviction of our reasons, which is the cri- 
 terion whereby we difference the impressions of the Divine Spirit 
 from delusory and false inspirations; in that these black vapours 
 darken and blast our reasons, and act us by illiterate and brutish 
 phantasms, whilst the spirit of God clarifies our understandings 
 and leads us by the rules of reason and sobriety. And, therefore, 
 our enthusiastical sectaries are in part Romish proselytes ; for 
 their folly is the same, though not in the same instance viz., of 
 quitting the surer conduct of their reasons, to entrust themselves 
 to more uncertain guides, and such as they cannot know (unless
 
 256 APPENDIX. 
 
 from their reasons, which they dare not trust) but may be mere 
 delusions and impostures. 
 
 Now the only exception which Mr. Cressy, following his prede- 
 cessors, urgeth against this supreme authority of reason, is, that it 
 is fallible, and so may deceive and misguide us. But 
 
 1. If this impeachment be valid, then let us renounce our rea- 
 sons, and, with one consent, turn sceptics; how shall I be assured 
 that twice two make four ; that the whole is more than a part ; 
 that the same thing cannot at the same time exist and not exist ? 
 I must not trust the judgment of my reason, for that may deceive, 
 saith Mr. Cressy. What, then, must I confide in ? Must I appeal 
 to a general council, whether two and two make four ? 
 
 2. Can you bring me to a surer guide than reason ? Yes, 
 you will answer, to the church ; but if my reason, being fallible, 
 may misguide me, why may it not, when it conducts me to 
 the church ? especially when yourselves profess to believe the 
 church's infallibility upon prudential motives ; if I may not trust 
 my reason, why should 1 trust it here ? Again : If my confidence 
 in the church's infallibility be built upon my reason, (and I have 
 no certainty of it but from my reason,) then cannot I have more 
 assurance in the church's guidance, than in the conduct of my 
 reason ; for the superstructure cannot be stronger than the foun- 
 dation; if then my reason be too weak to trust to, much more 
 that which is built upon it. 
 
 3. What is your meaning, when you object that reason is fal- 
 lible ? Is it this : that it is possible we may be deceived by it ? But 
 then, 1 . Is it not possible the church may deceive us too ? 2. As 
 long as we follow reason's true rules, it is impossible to err, be 
 cause they are certain and infallibly true. But if men will abuse 
 their reasons and bend them to their interests, they may so, and 
 so they may the church's authority. And may not the church 
 abuse her authority ? Will Christ violently force her into truth ? 
 Give us a guide that cannot be abused by w*icked and unreason- 
 able men, or else upon that account reject not this. Divine reve-
 
 APPENDIX. 257 
 
 lations are abused by some to undermine our faith ; shall they, 
 therefore, not be allowed to be foundations of it ? The question 
 is, what is the surest guide of our faith ? We say, pure and un- 
 prejudiced reason, and that if we will follow its dictates, we are 
 in the safest way to happiness ; and though then we may err 
 about some lesser truths, because not perspicuous, yet not about 
 anything that's a necessary article of faith. But if men will not 
 follow their own guides, but force them into by-paths, and follow 
 the blind guides of interest, prejudice, or passion, then they may 
 perish, not because they follow their free reasons, but because they 
 either stifle or violently divert them. 
 
 4. I would beseech Mr. Cressy and his brethren to beware of 
 strengthening the hands of atheists and sceptics, whilst they en- 
 deavour to weaken ours ; for beside the damages they bring to all 
 religion, it's no small one they bring to their own ; for hereby they 
 shew, that upon the same grounds that a man is a papist he may 
 be an atheist too, and that they cannot build their own religion 
 but upon the ruins of all religion. For, let me ask, will not his 
 exception become an atheist's mouth, and be more serviceable to 
 his cause than to Mr. Cressy's ? What if he should ask Why 
 do you embrace any religion ? Give what account you can, he 
 will inquire what warrant you have that you are not deceived ? 
 What assurance can we give him, if we dare not credit our own 
 faculties ? and how Mr. Cressy, who will not allow us to trust our 
 own reason, will answer him, I understand not. But I am cer- 
 tain, let him reply what he will, the doubt will still return upon 
 him ; for if he take refuge at the church, the query will be, how 
 he is certain that the church doth not deceive him ? And ima- 
 gine he could return an answer, yet unless he at last appeal to 
 his reason, it will serve only to give occasion to a new question. 
 But though Mr. Cressy, by his principles, cannot answer a sceptic, 
 yet by ours we may satisfactorily answer him ; for I know that 
 if my faculties are right, and the common notions of human rea-
 
 258 APPENDIX. 
 
 son are true, that I err not, and I will never desire greater assur- 
 ance that I am in the right, than that my faculties are so ; and 
 if the sceptic will rather reject all certainty than acknowledge his 
 faculties to be true, his fancy is so odd, that upon the same score 
 he may cast himself from a precipice, because it is possible he 
 might only dream that he was there." Whitby.
 
 APPENDIX B. 
 
 No. 1. 
 THE RULE OF FAITH. 
 
 " To the law and to the testimony -, if they speak not according to this word, it is 
 because there is no light in them" ISAIAH, viii. 20. 
 
 THERE is a strong tendency in man to flee from the voice of his 
 Maker. Early mention is made of this, and sad experience 
 proves that it continues to the present hour. We read that im- 
 mediately after Adam had sinned, when he *' heard the voice of 
 the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, he 
 hid himself amongst the trees of the garden." Gen. iii. 8. We 
 have also, in other parts of Scripture, similar instances: thus 
 Elijah, reasoning with the people of Israel, who had been seduced 
 to follow Baal, says, If the Lord be God, follow him : but if 
 Baal, then follow him." 1 Kings, xviii. 21. Again, in 
 2 Kings, i. 3, we learn, that one of the kings had sent, as Saul 
 had done before him, to inquire of another than Jehovah himself, 
 and " the angel of the Lord said to Elijah the Tishbite, Arise, go up 
 to meet the messengers of the king of Samaria, and say unto them, 
 Is it not because there is not a God in Israel, that ye go to in- 
 quire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron ?" 
 
 Now why is this ? Why should any of us be afraid to hear 
 the voice of God, or to have either our principles or our actions 
 s2
 
 260 APPENDIX. 
 
 judged by His word ? The reason is evident; conscience makes 
 us afraid ; it tells us, that neither the one nor the other will square 
 with the divine law. Therefore man forsakes the word of his 
 God, and has recourse to those who will speak to him " peace, 
 peace, when there is no peace." 
 
 The text furnishes another instance of this. You will find, in 
 the 19th verse of the chapter, that there were seducers in the 
 days of the prophet ; and he stands up to recall the people into 
 " the old paths and the good way," that they might walk therein 
 and find rest for their souls. He thus addresses them : " When 
 they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar 
 spirits," as we have already observed that Saul did ; for when 
 men find that God does not speak according to their wishes, they 
 make for themselves a god who will " Seek unto them that 
 have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter : 
 should not a people seek unto their God ? for the living to the 
 dead ?" for the living to seek to dead idols, or to false gods 
 that could tell them no truth ! " should not a people seek unto 
 their God ?" Then he adds the words of our text, as much as 
 to say, " When they call on you to go after their gods, and to 
 take counsel at their mouth, seek to the law and to the testimony ; 
 for if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is 
 no light in them." 
 
 Our subject is, THE RULE OF FAITH, and this is, perhaps, 
 the most important question in the whole range of the Popish con- 
 troversy. It is also a difficult one, not so in itself, for it would 
 be very simple, were it not encumbered by vain deceitful sophis- 
 try ; it is so plain that the wayfaring man might understand it, if 
 he had never seen any of the mists with which it is enveloped. 
 It is an important question ; because, if this position be yielded 
 up, if the written word of God be not the rule whereby to judge 
 of controversies in matters of faith, then we are cast upon the 
 sea of uncertainty, and know not where to anchor. 
 
 The adherents of the Papal church bring forward another
 
 APPENDIX. 261 
 
 rule. Why ? For the same reason that Adam fled from the 
 voice of the Lord. He fled, because he knew that that voice was 
 not about to speak peace to him ; and so these men set up an- 
 other rule than God's written word, in order to support the novel- 
 ties which they themselves have introduced. On account, then, 
 of the difficulties which have been thrown around this simple 
 question, it will be necessary to unfold it before we proceed to 
 furnish evidence in support of our doctrine. 
 
 The question is, The Rule of Faith ;" but in this form it is 
 not very plain, and, therefore, we would thus state it : " The 
 holy Scriptures the only rule whereby to judge of controversies 
 in matters of faith." It is very necessary to bear in mind this 
 definition. The holy Scriptures are the only rule to which every- 
 thing that concerns our faith must be brought ; that what is in 
 accordance with them may be adopted, while that which is con- 
 trary to them may be rejected. Another distinction is also most 
 important, and that is, that the rule has nothing whatever to do 
 with the question of the judge. This distinction must be attended 
 to ; and it is from not observing this that many persons sometimes 
 find themselves a little inconvenienced when the members of the 
 church of Rome assail their religion. The rule is one thing the 
 judge another ; and therefore, when we examine the rule of 
 faith, we have nothing to do with private judgment, neither with 
 the infallibility of the church ; these are all distinct questions. 
 The rule is the rule, whether the judge be blind or not whether 
 the individual who makes use of the rule be wicked or other- 
 wise. His conduct is one thing, and the rule quite another. 
 This distinction is not made by the church of Rome. 
 
 I never yet, in the course of years of controversy, met with one 
 Roman-catholic priest who attempted to bring positive evidence 
 on this subject, or to state our rule correctly. As an instance of 
 this I shall quote from " The End of Religious Controversy," by 
 Dr. Milner, who presided for many years over the Roman- 
 catholic church in this part of the country. He examines our
 
 262 APPENDIX. 
 
 rule of faith, and you will observe that the distinction which I 
 make, and which every fair man ought to make, is not made by 
 him. 
 
 Speaking of the rule of faith he thus writes : 
 "The first consists in a supposed private inspiration, or an im- 
 mediate delight and motion of God's Spirit, communicated to the 
 individual. This was the rule of faith and conduct formerly pro- 
 fessed by the Monatists, the Anabaptists, the family of Love, and 
 is now professed by the Quakers, the Moravians, and different 
 classes of the methodists. The second of these rules is the 
 written word of God, or the Bible, according as it is understood 
 by each particular reader or hearer of it. This is the professed 
 rule of the more regular sects of Protestants, such as the Lu- 
 therans, the Calvinists, the Socinians, the church-of-England 
 men. The third rule is the word of God at large, whether 
 written in the Bible, or handed down fron. vhe apostles, in con- 
 tinued succession, by the catholic church, and as it is understood 
 and explained by this church. To speak more accurately, be- 
 sides their rule of faith, which is Scripture and tradition, Catho- 
 lics acknowledge an unerring judge of controversy, a sure guide in 
 all matters relating to salvation namely, the church." 
 
 " The second of these rules is the written word of God, 
 that is, the Bible, according as it is interpreted by each par- 
 ticular reader." Now, you observe, that he would not state 
 that the second rule is the Bible, but he must also add, "accord- 
 ing as it is interpreted by each particular reader or hearer of 
 it." Now, mark what the Doctor says "The Scripture, ac- 
 cording as it is interpreted by each individual," and for this rea- 
 son, that if he brought positive evidence against the Bible as the 
 rule of faith, he would have found that all his attacks must have 
 been as the biting of the viper against the file. In this chapter, 
 in which Dr. Milner treats of the church-of-England rule of faith, 
 we find not a single argument brought against the Scriptures be- 
 ing the rule, but that all are directed against the interpretations
 
 APPENDIX. 263 
 
 which some men have put upon them, so that he attacks not the 
 rule, but the private and fanatical judgment of individuals. I 
 trust that these observations will be borne in mind. By attend- 
 ing to them we place ourselves altogether beyond the reach of our 
 opponent's weapons. 
 
 Our position, then, is, that holy Scripture the written word 
 of God is the only standard whereby to judge of controversies 
 in matters of faith ; and we now proceed, with the blessing of God, 
 to establish this point. 
 
 That holy Scripture is the only rule of faith is proved by a 
 twofold (negative and positive) line of argument, negative, by 
 denying the claims put forward on behalf of their addition to this 
 rule ; positive, by bringing evidence in favour of the rule itself. 
 
 With respect to the FIRST point the NEGATIVE EVIDENCE 
 that is, the evidence brought against tradition, which is pretended 
 as a supplement to the written word, we shall advance a few par- 
 ticulars. 
 
 1st. The design of God in furnishing His word in writing 
 was to guard us against the uncertainty of tradition, and to 
 lead us, through the truth revealed in that word, to eternal 
 happiness. 
 
 That God never acts without a design is evident. Now, that 
 God has written, and that He commanded His servants to write, 
 cannot be denied. In the 24th chapter of the book of Exodus, 
 you find this proved, as also in many other parts of Scripture ; 
 but that we be not tedious, we confine ourselves to a few proofs. 
 In Exodus, xxiv. 12, we find a declaration that God himself 
 had written : " The Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into 
 the mount, and be there ; and I will give thee tables of stone, and 
 a law and commandments, which I have written." In the 17th 
 chapter of Exodus, you will find God's command to Moses to 
 write, and in the 24th chapter, the declaration, that "Moses 
 wrote all the words of the Lord." You will remember that God 
 could have dispensed with this writing. He could have preserved
 
 264 APPENDIX. 
 
 the world without sin ; and even after that sin had entered, He 
 could have preserved the knowledge of himself, and the profession 
 of true religion ; therefore we have nothing to do with what God 
 could have done, but only with what He has been pleased to do. 
 In condescension to our infirmities, our Maker has provided for us 
 this written word ; and we contend, that as in writing God had 
 a design, so that that design was to guard against the uncertainty 
 of tradition, and to lead us to everlasting happiness by the truth 
 of the written word. In the 31st chapter of Deuteronomy, we 
 find Moses, when about to take leave of the people, giving to 
 them this written law ; and you will observe, that he here dis- 
 tinctly states the end for which he wrote. In the 24th verse of 
 that chapter, it is said it having been previously stated in the 
 9th verse that " Moses wrote this law" " And it came to pass, 
 when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law 
 in a book, until they were finished, that Moses commanded the 
 Levites which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying, 
 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the 
 covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be therefor a witness 
 against thee." In the 30th chapter of the prophecies of Isaiah, 
 and the 8th verse, God directs the prophet to write : " Go, write 
 it before them in a table, and note it in a book." For what rea- 
 son? "That it may be for the time to come for ever and ever." 
 In the prophet Jeremiah, the 36th chapter and the 2nd verse, 
 God commissions the prophet to write his words ; and when the 
 king took the roll on which the prophet wrote, and consigned it 
 to the flames a practice which, we are sorry to say, has not 
 been altogether departed from even in these professedly Christian 
 lands, then God commanded the prophet to write on another 
 roll the words which he had written on the first, and it was done. 
 Now, to pass by other instances, such as that of Habakkuk, 
 whom God commanded to write the vision, and to make it plain, 
 we come to the gospel of St. Luke, in the 1st chapter and 3rd 
 and 4th verses of which we read, that many persons had taken
 
 APPENDIX. 265 
 
 it in hand to set forth in order the history of our Lord ; and St. 
 Luke, moved by the Spirit of God, undertook to write, that 
 " thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou 
 hast been instructed.'' St. Peter, in his 2nd Epistle, 1st chapter, 
 15th and 16th verses, tells us why he wrote. He says " I will 
 endeavour that ye may be able, after my decease, to have these 
 things always in remembrance, for we have not followed cunningly 
 devised fables." With this compare the gospel of St. John, the 
 20th chapter and the 31st verse. There we have distinctly stated 
 one of the ends for which the word was written. The apostle 
 says " And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of 
 his disciples, which are not written in this book;" but he adds 
 " These are written," these, which otherwise must have been 
 lost, are written. To what end ? " That ye might believe that 
 Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God ; and that believing ye might 
 have life through his name." Here is this point abundantly 
 proved, that God had a design in writing, and that this design was, 
 that that which was written might be before us for the time to 
 come, to assure us of the certainty of the things wherein we are 
 instructed, and to lead us, by the written word, to everlasting 
 happiness, through Jesus Christ his Son. 
 
 " From all this we argue, either that God's design has failed, or 
 that it is attained. God's design cannot fail ; and therefore, 
 when He shews us that His design was to lay aside tradition, He 
 proves the completeness and security of the written word. 
 
 In the second place, tradition is an incompetent channel for 
 the conveyance of truth. This might be partly proved by refer- 
 ring to our former argument. God does nothing superfluous ; 
 but God has written, and has commanded His servants to write ; 
 and the design was therefore as we have already established, to 
 shew that tradition is uncertain and incompetent, and that writing 
 was the only secure means of preserving His revelation. 
 
 The history of the early ages proves this point. The lives of 
 two individuals reached from the time of Adam to that of Abra-
 
 266 APPENDIX. 
 
 ham, and they could have conveyed to him that which had been 
 revealed by God to Adam. Yet, at the time of Abraham, what 
 was the state of the world ? What was the language of Joshua 
 when, to humble the people, he addressed them, and pointed to 
 the rock from whence they were hewn ? " Your fathers dwelt 
 on the other side of the flood in old time, even Terah, the father 
 of Abraham, and the father of Nachor : and they served other 
 gods." Joshua, xxiv. 2. Therefore God said to Abraham, 
 " Get thee out of thy country ;" and he thus separated him from 
 his idolatrous race. Why did not tradition, in this favourable in- 
 stance, preserve the knowledge of God ? Again, we find, in the 
 apostolic age, to pass by the intermediate period, that there were 
 sayings of the Lord Jesus Christ, one of which is recorded in 
 Scripture, a delightful idea, brought forward by the apostle Paul, 
 to enforce charitable feelings, " It is more blessed to give than to 
 receive !" St. John says, that " if all the things which Jesus said 
 and did were written, the world itself could not contain the 
 books;" and here is one isolated saying alone preserved, because 
 inserted in the written word of God. It is a notorious fact, that 
 tradition which is pretended as a supplement to the written word, 
 does not report one saying of the Lord Jesus Christ. We chal- 
 lenge our opponents to produce a single truth, a single statement 
 made by Him, that is not contained in the written word. Even 
 this one, " It is more blessed to give than to receive," must have 
 been lost, had it not been quoted by the apostle Paul ; for the 
 gospels do not contain that beautiful sentiment. Here is a simple 
 statement. Again, look at tradition with reference to the Jews. 
 If any man would learn the value of tradition, as a channel for 
 conveying truth, let him read it in the history of that once- 
 favoured people. How was the case with them ? They cast 
 God's written word behind their backs : professing to reverence 
 the letter, they, at the same time, departed from it, by giving 
 heed to their traditions. Their priests and their traditions told 
 them that Jesus was not the true Messiah. Following tradition
 
 APPENDIX. 267 
 
 has been the destruction of the house of Israel. Hence it is, that 
 tradition is an incompetent channel for the conveyance of Divine 
 truth. 
 
 But we go further, and shew, that in all our Lord's discourses, 
 whether to the people, or to his apostles, or in his disputation 
 tcith his adversaries, He never made a single appeal to tradi- 
 tion. No such instance can be produced. Wheresoever we find 
 him and his life was a life of toil whether in teaching or dis- 
 puting, He never makes one appeal to tradition ; but every time 
 that he answers cavillers, or exhorts his disciples, He says, 
 "Have ye not read?" "Is it not written?" "Search the 
 Scriptures." These expressions are numerous ; I need not stop 
 to quote them. 
 
 We go still further, and state, that our Lord not only never 
 appealed to tradition, but that he expressly condemned it, and 
 that in the most unqualified manner. There is no saving clause 
 whatever, in his condemnation of tradition. One instance will 
 suffice. We are informed, in the loth chapter of the gospel by 
 St. Matthew, that the Scribes and Pharisees came to him, and 
 said, " Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the 
 elders ?" the same thing which is objected to us by the church 
 of Rome, though we do not grant that we transgress the tradition 
 of the elders, because what we object to is, the novelties engrafted 
 by them on Christianity. But what was our Saviour's reply? 
 " Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your 
 tradition ?" Then He gives an instance of it, with which, on 
 the present occasion, we have nothing to do. And in winding 
 up, after stating this instance, says, " Thus have ye made the 
 commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." And 
 again : " But in vain they do worship me, teachings/or doctrines 
 the commandments of men." Now the indirect way of overturn- 
 ing the faith of God which these men, whom our Lord reproves, 
 adopted, is the most successful way. If a man comes before us, 
 and denies that which is the faith of the Scriptures, we are armed
 
 268 APPENDIX. 
 
 against him ; we see falsehood upon the face of his statement : 
 but if one comes in a wily manner, and makes it void by his tra- 
 dition, because he assumes the face of a believer, he does in- 
 finitely more mischief than the avowed infidel, and therefore, 
 says our Lord, " Why do ye transgress the commandment of God 
 by your tradition ? But in vain do they worship me, teaching 
 for doctrines the commandments of men." 
 
 This closes our evidence on this head, and shews the nullity of 
 the claims of tradition to be any part of the rule of faith, or rule 
 whereby to judge of controversies in matters of faith. . 
 
 I now proceed, SECONDLY, to the POSITIVE EVIDENCE in favour 
 of the rule itself. 
 
 1st. The Scriptures contain the superstructure that is reared 
 upon faith. They contain exhortations to every possible good 
 word and work. Now, we know that the apprehension of the 
 truth of God, or the faith of Christ, is the mean by which the 
 Holy Spirit unites men to the Lord Jesus Christ, and thus grafts 
 them into His mystical body, even as the branches are grafted 
 into the vine. When that is done, then, Christ says, they bear 
 fruit ; and when it is not done, that is, when they are separated 
 from him, and have no saving faith, they bear no fruit, they can 
 do nothing. Faith, then, is the means, the foundation, the source 
 of every good word and work. As one of our Articles says, 
 " Works done before the grace of Christ received, are not accept- 
 able to God;" and for this reason they proceed from a corrupt 
 fountain. They are not pleasing to God, because they spring not 
 from a lively faith in Jesus Christ" The Scriptures, then, con- 
 tain the superstructure. It is quite evident that not a single state- 
 ment can be made respecting good works, respecting anything 
 calculated to glorify God and to benefit mankind, that is not to 
 be found in this sacred volume. Now, it would be a strange 
 thing that it should contain the superstructure, and yet be defi- 
 cient as to the foundation itself. Again, the Scripture is ad- 
 dressed to all classes, high and low, rich and poor, masters and
 
 APPENDIX. 269 
 
 servants, kings and subjects, to all stations in life. It speaks to 
 them all, and it speaks to this end, that they all might believe in 
 Jesus Christ : that believing they might adorn the doctrine of God 
 their Saviour in all things ; and that they might obtain eternal 
 life. This is the end, and we say that the Holy Scriptures 
 which contain the superstructure, and enter so copiously into 
 everything connected with those works whereby men may adorn 
 the faith of Christ, cannot be deficient in the foundation that is, 
 in containing the faith itself; because the question with the church 
 of Rome is, whether Holy Scripture contains every article of 
 faith, or whether there are not articles necessary to salvation 
 which are not to be found in the written word. Therefore, when 
 those works which spring from the knowledge of the faith are so 
 copiously detailed and enforced, we maintain that the Scriptures, 
 which so abundantly sets forth the superstructure, must likewise 
 contain the foundation, especially when the things necessary to 
 salvation are therein declared to be so few. The more this argu- 
 ment is considered, the more, I am persuaded, will it commend 
 itself to every man's mind. 
 
 But, 2ndly. The Scriptures assert their own sufficiency as a 
 rule. Here we may be challenged with this objection: but 
 Scripture has no right to testify in its own behalf; it has no au- 
 thority until the church gives it such. We know not such doc- 
 trine as this. With respect to the authority of the church of 
 Christ, we cast it not aside ; but we believe God when He speaks 
 in His own word. But if Scripture have no authority to speak 
 in its own behalf, and to testify whether it is the rule of faith or 
 not, who shall give it that authority ? Shall the Pope, or his 
 cardinals and bishops assembled in council ? Is their authority 
 better than the authority of God speaking in His own word ? If 
 Scripture has not authority from God speaking in His own word, 
 surely all that these men say in addition will not bestow it. And 
 if Scripture itself be not credible, when God speaks in it, can it be 
 made so by the decrees of Popes and councils ?
 
 270 APPENDIX. 
 
 In the 19th Psalm, and the 7th verse, we read : " The law of 
 the Lord is perfect, converting the soul." The conversion of the 
 soul and the consequent glorifying of the Lord Jesus Christ is the 
 end proposed by God in revealing His word to man ; and there- 
 fore it is evident that, if this revelation answer its end, it is a com- 
 plete rule. The 119th Psalm abounds with similar expressions, 
 one of which is found in the 105th verse, where the Psalmist says : 
 " Thy word is a lamp unto ray feet, and a light unto my path." 
 That word, if you refer to other parts of the Psalm, you will find 
 to be the law of his God, which was his meditation day and night, 
 and through which, the Psalmist says, he was made wiser than 
 all his teachers. Therefore, says he, " Thy word is a lamp unto 
 my feet, and a light unto my path." Here, again, God's design 
 was to make it a light unto his feet, and a lamp unto his paths, 
 to conduct him to the land of life. Again, our text asserts the 
 sufficiency of Scripture, and the nullity of everything else that 
 pretends to supply its place : " To the law and to the testimony ; 
 if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no 
 light in them." Here, then, is another direct statement to the 
 same effect viz., that the Scriptures are sufficient for the decid- 
 ing of controversy in matters of faith ; that they are the sole 
 standard of appeal. In the 17th chapter of the gospel of St. 
 John, and the 3rd verse, the Saviour says " This is life eternal, 
 that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ 
 whom thou hast sent." The knowledge of this fact comes through 
 the truth of the written word, because our argument is, that what 
 God has revealed to us in this book is all that He has thought 
 needful for the good of his people. He could have preserved his 
 word without writing we have already alluded to that, but the 
 question is, has He done so, and is His word a sufficient rule ? 
 The apostle says: "This is life eternal, that they might know 
 thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." 
 Compare this with the 20th chapter and the 31st verse, which 
 we have already quoted, where the apostle tells us, that he is
 
 APPENDIX. 271 
 
 writing what Jesus said and did for this purpose " That ye 
 might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that 
 believing ye might have life through his name." Here is the end 
 answered, and the sufficiency of the rule established. 
 
 But, 3rdly. Whenever the written word has been laid aside, 
 everything has gone astray; and whenever a reformation hastaken 
 placet all has been restored in accordance with the written icord. 
 We might prove this by many arguments. Let a few suffice. In 
 the time of Manasseh, wickedness abounded ; God's word was 
 thrown aside ; and, concerning the priests, it was testified in those 
 days "They err in vision; they stumble in judgment/' 
 Isaiah, xxviii. 7. " The priest's lips," says Malachi, (ii. 7, 8,) 
 "should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his 
 mouth, for he is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts ; but ye are 
 departed out of the way ; ye have caused many to stumble at the 
 law : ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of 
 Hosts." * But we need not refer to those statements which prove 
 the ignorance and vice that flourished when the written law was 
 laid aside. Take the instance of Josiah, the first to which I shall 
 allude. When this good king ascended the throne, he found 
 idolatry flourishing even in the temple of Jehovah ; wickedness 
 had" forced itself in through the doors of the house of the Lord : 
 Josiah set himself to purify all this ; and when men were en- 
 gaged in the act of cleansing out the temple, the book of the law 
 was found. 2 Kings, xxii. 8. Hilkiah, the priest, brought 
 this book to the king ; and when the king heard the words of it, 
 he rent his clothes and was exceedingly distressed. He sent to 
 inquire at the mouth of the Lord ; and when God had threatened 
 punishment because of the sins that had been committed, and 
 which had crept in by the suppression or throwing aside of the 
 written word, Josiah was spared, because, says the prophet, 
 " His heart was tender, and he humbled himself at the word of 
 God. 2 Kings, xxii. 18 20. 
 
 This book of the law shewed the manifold and great variations
 
 272 APPENDIX. 
 
 from the rule of Heaven. Josiah proceeded to reform this state 
 of things ; and as we have already proved that when the written 
 word was laid aside everything went astray, so we now proceed 
 to shew how the reformation w r as carried on. The particulars 
 are recorded in the 2nd book of Kings, the 22nd and 23rd 
 chapters. The history begins at the 8th verse of the 22nd 
 chapter ; but in the 2nd verse of the 23rd chapter, we read 
 " That the king assembled the priests, and the prophets, and all 
 the people, both small and great : and he read in their ears all 
 the words of the book of the covenant, which was found in the 
 house of the Lord. And the king stood by a pillar, and made a 
 covenant before the Lord." The nature of this covenant was, to 
 come back from their evil ways, to come back from their evil 
 customs, to come back to that which the book of the law en- 
 joined; and, therefore, we read further, in the 21st verse 
 "And the king commanded all the people, saying, Keep the pass- 
 over unto the Lord your God, as it is written in the book of this 
 covenant." Then, again, we read that he did all this " that he 
 might perform the words of the law, which were written in the 
 book that Hilkiah the priest found in the house of the Lord. 
 
 This is self-evident. Take yet another instance the re- 
 establishment of the worship of God after the rebuilding of the 
 temple. When Ezra and Nehemiah came up with the people, 
 everything had, of course, been laid aside. They were not 
 allowed to offer sacrifice in any other place than Jerusalem, and 
 therefore, on their return, there was, in fact, a complete re- 
 establishment. Take the conduct of these men on that occasion. 
 By perusing the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, you will find that 
 everything was done, even the most trifling and secular thing-;, 
 such as assigning the portion to the priests, &c., in accordance, 
 not with any tradition preserved among them, though they had 
 many privileges and many special promises given to the priest- 
 hood, but in accordance with the written word. Things, the 
 most important and the most trifling, were, we maintain, done
 
 APPENDIX. 273 
 
 according as it was written in the book of the law of Moses. 
 Ezra, Hi. 2, 4 ; vi. 18 ; x. 3 ; Neb. viii. 1, 14, 18 ; ix. 3 ; x. 28 
 39; xiii. 1, 10, 15,23. 
 
 Now, I pass, 4thly, to another argument, and that is, that the 
 greatest question which can concern the human race has ever 
 been decided by an appeal, not to tradition, nor to the priesthood, 
 but to the written word. Mark what was said of the Jewish 
 priesthood and this greatly strengthens our position in the book 
 of Deuteronomy : " The man that will do presumptuously, and 
 will not hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there 
 before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall 
 die; and thou shall put away the evil from Israel." Deut. 
 xvii. J2. Here was a large promise, and yet, when the greatest 
 questions came to be examined the greatest that could occupy 
 the attention of man they were decided, not by an appeal to 
 this priesthood, but by an appeal to the written word. If I were 
 treating of the boasted infallibility of the church of Rome, I 
 could shew but we must keep that question separate from this 
 that such questions were not only not decided according to the 
 judgment of the priesthood, but that their judgment, delivered in 
 several councils, was directly contrary to the written word. To 
 select an instance of this : The place where Jesus Christ was 
 born made some noise in the days of Herod. We read, in the 
 second chapter of the gospel of St. Matthew, that when Herod 
 heard of the birth of Jesus he was troubled, and having called 
 for the scribes and elders, demanded of them where Christ should 
 be born. What was his object ? It was to see whether Jesus 
 was, indeed, the Messiah, or whether there might not be found 
 some evidence to prove, from the place of his birth, that be who 
 was then born was not the Messiah. When it was demanded 
 where be should be born, to what was the appeal made ? To 
 the Scriptures ! " In Bethlehem of Judea ; for thus it is writ- 
 ten by the prophet, And thou, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, 
 art not the least among the princes of Judah," &c., &c. Again, 
 T
 
 274 APPENDIX. 
 
 all our happiness here, and hopes for hereafter, are centered in 
 Jesus Christ : if Jesus be not the true Messiah, we are without a 
 Saviour without a daysman between us and God ; and that 
 man must he very hardened indeed, and very ignorant of himself 
 and of his Maker, who thinks that he can draw nigh to God 
 without the blood of sprinkling. " Wherewith shall I come be- 
 fore the Lord," says the prophet, " and bow myself before the 
 high God ? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with 
 calves of a year old ? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands 
 of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil ?" Nay, he goes 
 further " Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the 
 fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" The prophet was a 
 good man the prophet was a wise man and yet he felt, he 
 knew, that if he were to have given, not only a sacrifice of thou- 
 sands of rams, but even of the fruit of his body, such could not 
 qualify him to appear before that God of whom we read that the 
 heavens are not clean in His sight, and that angels, whom he 
 chargeth with folly, veil their faces when they appear before the 
 throne of His exceeding purity and glory. The greatest ques- 
 tion, then, that can concern us is, Whether Jesus is the true Mes- 
 siah ? and I proceed to shew that, not by the judgment of the 
 priesthood, but by the written word, was the question decided. 
 I refer you, in the first place, to our Lord's own practice. John 
 having heard, in prison, of the works of Jesus, sent disciples unto 
 him, saying, " Art thou he that should come, (the Christ,) or look 
 we for another ?" What was the answer of our Lord? We 
 are not now to consider the reasons for which John might have 
 sent, as he himself had previously pointed to Christ as the Lamb 
 of God ; but we confine ourselves to the fact that John did send, 
 and that Jesus returned an answer. Did our Saviour say, " I 
 am he that should come, the Messiah I am the Son of God?" 
 He did not directly assert either the one or the other, but referred 
 John to the word of God to the written word : " Go," says he, 
 to the disciples of John, " and tell John those things which ye
 
 APPENDIX. 275 
 
 do hear and see." What were the things ? " The blind re- 
 ceive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed" that 
 was an evident sign, not only that Jesus was the Messiah, but 
 that he was God. Lepers were cleansed only by God : Jesus 
 cleansed them by his own power : therefore Jesus was God. 
 But to continue ; " The deaf hear, the dead are raised up, 
 and the poor have the gospel preached to them." What was 
 the object in returning such an answer as this? It was not a 
 direct one. It was to refer John to the Scriptures ; as if our 
 Lord had said Let John bring these my actions and my preach- 
 ing to the written word, and he cannot be mistaken ! He will 
 there find whether I am the Messiah or not. Here, then, was 
 the greatest question that could concern the human race. Was 
 Jesus the true Messiah, or was He not? And when Jesus was 
 asked this direct question, He did not return a direct answer, but 
 referred to the things which the prophets had foretold as signs of 
 the Messiah. He desires them to go back and tell John to com- 
 pare these things with the written word, and thereby satisfy him- 
 self as to whether Jesus was the Messiah. 
 
 Again, in the 17th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, and 
 the 3rd verse, you read that Paul reasoned " out of the Scrip- 
 tures,"" " opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suf- 
 fered and risen again from the dead ; and that this Jesus, whom I 
 preach unto you, is Christ." And when Paul went to preach 
 the doctrine of Christ, as recorded in the same chapter, to the 
 Bereans, it is said in the llth verse, " These were more noble 
 than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with 
 all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether 
 those things were so." 
 
 Let one more instance suffice on this subject, and that is in the 
 18th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, and the 27th verse : 
 <l And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren 
 wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him" that is, to receive 
 Apollos, of whom we have mention here " who, when he was 
 T2
 
 276 APPENDIX. 
 
 come, helped them much which had believed through grace : for 
 he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing BY 
 THE SCRIPTURES that Jesus was Christ" 
 
 Now it is here fully established, that the greatest question that 
 can be proposed, that in which the happiness or the misery of 
 every son and daughter of Adam is involved, is decided, not by an 
 appeal to tradition, not by an appeal to the priesthood, to whom 
 such large promises as those which we have quoted were given, 
 but by an appeal to the written word. We have Paul, and 
 Apollos, and Jesus Himself, proving by the Scriptures that Jesus 
 was the Messiah the Christ the Son of the living God. 
 
 And now, is it not too barefaced a thing, that any man should 
 come forward with his vain novelties and superstitious doctrines, 
 and presume to say that Scripture is not a complete rule of faith ? 
 Why ? Because it knows nothing of such things as they tell us. 
 The Scripture is not sufficient to decide, what ? not whether 
 Jesus be the Messiah, but whether the Pope be the vicar of 
 Christ, and whether the false doctrines which the church of Rome 
 has imposed on men be God's truth or not? The Scriptures, 
 which can decide the most important question concerning the 
 race of man, not sufficient to decide about these novelties and 
 vanities of the Pope of Rome ! I speak as unto wise men ; judge 
 ye what I say : is there any reason whatever in this that that 
 which is able to decide the most important question should be 
 totally inadequate to decide inferior ones, to demonstrate that 
 Jesus is the Messiah, aud be incompetent to testify whether there 
 is such a place as purgatory, or whether saints are to be wor- 
 shipped, and such vain things as these ? This pretence of the 
 Papal church carries along with it its own refutation. 
 
 But, 5thly. The denial of this truth that the Scripture is 
 the only rule whereby to judge of controversies in matters of 
 faith, has been the cause of grievous errors, and many heresies* 
 
 * In the note to p. 125, the reader will find this point ably treated in an 
 extract from Jeremy Taylor.
 
 APPENDIX. 277 
 
 I have already given one instance of this in an extract from Dr. 
 Milner's " End of Controversy," in which he speaks of private 
 inspiration. Now I proceed to shew, that false systems have 
 arisen among men, because they have fallen into precisely the 
 error of the Papacy itself. The denial of the truth that Dr. Milner 
 would seek to overturn, has, in fact, been the very cause of the 
 evil of which he complains, when he would assail our rule of 
 faith. 
 
 "The Scriptures (writes George Fox, the founder of Quakerism, 
 as quoted by Dr. Milner) are not the adequate, primary rule of 
 faith and manners, but a secondary rule, subordinate to the spirit, 
 from which they have their excellency and certainty." 
 
 Now what is this but the doctrine of Popery under a new 
 name ? George Fox knew well that the Scriptures would not 
 sanction his proceedings ; therefore he sets them aside " they 
 are not the adequate primary rule." It is exactly so with the 
 Papacy. The Scriptures (say they) are not the rule of faith, and 
 therefore, as Fox brings his spirit to supply their deficiency, and 
 give them " excellency and certainty," so Dr. Milner, following 
 his church, brings in tradition, and his unerring judge, which is 
 just as difficult of access, and has just as much authority as the 
 private spirit of George Fox, to supply the deficiency of the 
 written word, and to give it " excellency and certainty !" And 
 for what end ? That he may establish a system, much of which 
 is as far removed, not only from Scripture, but from common 
 sense, as the fanatical religion of George Fox ! The denial of the 
 sufficiency of the Scriptures as the rule of faith, has, then, been 
 the cause of the errors and heresies of both the Papacy and George 
 Fox ; and, no doubt, the productive source, from which falsehood 
 has, and may at any time, come in like a flood upon the Christian 
 church. 
 
 Lastly. The end for which this new rule is pretended, is, to 
 say the very least, more than presumptive evidence against it, 
 and, consequently, in favour of our rule. What is this end ?
 
 278 APPENDIX, 
 
 It has fallen to my lot, repeatedly, to speak to members of the 
 church of Rome, and I have invariably found them totally igno- 
 rant of their own doctrine. I have always found that when they 
 would justify themselves, they invariably take their stand, not 
 upon the novelties against which we protest, but upon what 
 they hold in common with our own church. To make this 
 plain, and to confine ourselves to the church to which we belong 
 Three out of the four creeds, the Apostles', the Nicene, and 
 Athanasian, are, according to their own confession, ancient, ca- 
 tholic, and apostolic. If, then, we hold three creeds in common 
 with them, or they with us, what makes the difference ? The 
 fourth, the creed of Pope Pius the fourth, which was first pub- 
 lished in 1564; this is the ground of difference. But when they 
 attempt to defend their religion, they forget this, and take their 
 stand upon what they hold in common with us. And if we 
 examine that creed, we shall find that it has no part or lot with 
 us, or with Christianity. 
 
 Now, then, we acknowledge the ancient, catholic, and apos- 
 tolic creeds, those confessedly such, our enemies themselves being 
 judges. We ask not any additional rule of faith to prove that 
 these creeds contain The Truth of God. We hold these three 
 creeds, and we are content with the Scriptures as our Rule of 
 Faith. They bring in, as I have said, a fourth, and I wish to be 
 very guarded ; when 1 say that this creed was first published 
 in 1564, I do not mean to assert that some of the doctrines of 
 that creed were not of older date ; nay, some of them are very 
 old, and were condemned as heresies by the primitive church. 
 For instance, the worship of the Virgin Mary, the burning of in- 
 cense, and the presenting of cakes to the Queen of Heaven. 
 The sects that did this in the early ages were condemned as here- 
 tical. I do not, therefore, mean to assert that these doctrines 
 did not exist before ; but the question is, whether they were 
 published as articles of Christian faith. With the exception 
 of one or two points, the articles of that new creed of the church
 
 APPENDIX. 279 
 
 of Rome were first made Christianity Christianity ! by the 
 decision of the Council of Trent, and subsequently embodied in 
 the new creed. Such is the sole ground of difference between us 
 and the Papal church with respect to the creeds. Now, if we 
 ask what is that creed, the Roman Catholics are generally ignorant 
 of it. Suffice it to mention a few of the articles which it con- 
 tains : the supremacy of the Papacy; the necessity oi allegiance 
 to the Pope ; the exclusive right of the church of Rome to inter- 
 pret God's word ; the doctrine of concomitance, on which they 
 found the right to take away the cup in the Lord's Supper ; the 
 doctrine of transubstantiation, first defined as an article of faith 
 at the Council of Lateran, 1215; the doctrine of purgatory, and 
 that the souls detained there are assisted by the suffrages- of the 
 faithful ; the belief that the saints which reign with Christ are to 
 be invocated and prayed to ; and that their relics are to be vene- 
 rated ; that the images of Christ, and of the Virgin Mother of 
 God, and of other saints, are to be had and retained, and that due 
 honour and worship (venerationein) is to be given to them. We 
 deny, therefore, their right to bring in such articles as these ; and, 
 secondly, their pretence of a new rule to support them. Let 
 these be placed before an indifferent person if such an one were 
 to be found one who is unacquainted with Christianity, and 
 then let him look at what God has revealed in His word, and tell 
 us whether these articles are Christianity ? The Bible does not 
 contain these articles, and they are, therefore, constrained to be 
 indebted for their support to the authority of the church ! We 
 say that there is more than presumptive evidence against them. 
 We have the ancient creeds of the Christian church, and we are 
 content to take the Scripture as the sole judge of controversy in 
 matters of faith. These men first bring in a new system ; and, 
 secondly, they must have a new rule to establish it. This is clear 
 evidence against them ; it shews that they have a tendency, as 
 we said in the beginning of the discourse, to fly from the voice of 
 Jehovah ; and because it speaks not peace to their system, they 
 clamour for a new rule !
 
 280 APPENDIX. 
 
 We have thus stated this question ; have examined it in a two- 
 fold point of view : 1st, negative evidence ; that is, by disproving 
 the claims of that which is brought forward as a supplement to 
 the Holy Scriptures ; and, further, by advancing several points 
 of positive evidence in favour of the written word being the only 
 Rule of Faith. 
 
 I proceed now to notice, briefly, a few objections that are 
 brought against our position ; premising that our opponents 
 should bring positive evidence : for objections are untenable. 
 When we preach any particular doctrine, men may call upon us, 
 and say, " How do you reconcile that with such or such a fact ?" 
 We may reply, that we cannot, and that we are content to re- 
 main in ignorance ; but yet we maintain that the objection must 
 give place before the positive evidence by which that particular 
 doctrine is established. It is not, however, by positive evidence, 
 but by a system of objections, that they attempt to displace us 
 from our sure foundation. 
 
 We will examine three objections. In the first place, I refer 
 to an objection advanced by a Romish priest, some years ago, 
 when in controversy with myself. He observed : " Your Rule 
 of Faith is the Scripture. Now, if the Scripture be your rule 
 of faith, there could be no rule of faith, consequently, no 
 faith, and therefore no salvation, until the canon of Scrip- 
 ture was complete : But for sixty years after the death 
 of Christ the canon was not complete, and, therefore, for 
 sixty years after the death of Christ there could have been no 
 salvation in the church of God." This is plausible; but the reply 
 is simple. We will try the soundness of the argument upon their 
 own principles ; for that is always the best way to prove an argu- 
 ment. If Scripture and tradition be, as they say, their rule of 
 faith, there could not have been a rule of faith until this one was 
 complete. But for sixty years after the death of Christ, accord- 
 ing to my opponent's own position, this rule was not complete, 
 for the canon of Scripture was not closed, and, some of the 
 apostles being then alive, all traditions were not delivered : there-
 
 APPENDIX. 281 
 
 fore for sixty years after the death of Christ there could have 
 been no rule of faith therefore no faith consequently no salva- 
 tion in the church of God ! The argument is as good one way 
 as the other. The sophism lies in this, that, because God may 
 give more light at any particular period, therefore there was no 
 adequate light before ! God may be pleased to enlarge our light 
 exceedingly beyond anything that we can now conceive, but it 
 by no means follows that there was not adequate light before. 
 
 In the second place, it is objected that controversies cannot be 
 determined by our Rule of Faith. But if the word of God be 
 not competent or sufficient to decide controversies, we ask one 
 simple question How, then, shall the controversies concerning 
 the church be determined ? When a man professes the prin- 
 ciples of the church of Rome, he has a reason for so doing, or he 
 has not. If he has not, his conduct is irrational and absurd, and 
 his faith uncertain ; for we may as well believe a lie as the truth, 
 if we have no reason for what we profess. But if he has a rea- 
 son for it, then he adopts that church because, he will say, upon 
 careful examination, his reason satisfies him that it is the true 
 church. But how does he prove this ? They furnish us with 
 " notes," which, they say, prove theirs to be the true church. 
 Without entering into the notes, we ask, how shall the notes 
 themselves be determined ? By the Scriptures. This is arguing 
 in a circle ; the church giving testimony to the Scriptures, and 
 the Scriptures giving testimony to the church ! Such is like, as 
 Stillingfleet observes, one man giving a character to another, and 
 that other giving in return a character to him; or, as Burnet 
 remarks, it is just as if a father did beget a son, and then after- 
 wards was begotten by him ! So we say, if the Scriptures be 
 not sufficient to decide controversies in matters of faith, how shall 
 the notes of the church be determined ? Does the Pope produce 
 no credentials ? Yea; as in the case of Jephthah, " Did not ye 
 hate me, and expel me out of my father's house ? and why are 
 ye come unto me now, when ye are in distress ?" So with the 
 Romish church : she has declared against the sufficiency of
 
 282 APPENDIX. 
 
 Scripture has, in fact " cast it out,"' and yet, in her distress, 
 flies to, and, if need be, tortures it, to compel it to speak according 
 to her mind. If, then, the Scriptures be sufficient for deciding 
 the question of the notes of the church, why not so for determin- 
 ing of other questions ? why not of all ?* 
 
 In the last place, " the Scriptures are (say they) difficult and 
 liable to be misunderstood and perverted." We may say the 
 same respecting Scripture and tradition : they are equally liable 
 to be misunderstood and perverted. ''But," says Dr. Milner, 
 whom I quote, " we have an unerring judge of controversy ;" 
 that is, they bring in the infallibility of their church. " We have 
 an infallible judge of controversy to decide in the matter, and he 
 must be understood." But, we ask, how can he be understood? 
 We must, as Chillingworth remarks, have an infallible interpreter 
 to expound his interpretation, and so on ad infinitum. But, in 
 the first place, this infallible interpreter has never yet spoken. 
 
 '* Besides, (writes Chillingworth,) what an impudence it is 
 to pretend that your church is infallibly directed concerning the 
 true meaning of the Scripture, whereas there are thousands of 
 places in Scripture which you do not pretend certainly to under- 
 stand, and about the interpretation whereof your own doctors 
 differ among themselves. If your church be infallibly directed 
 concerning the true meaning of Scripture, why do not your doc- 
 tors follow her infallible direction ? And if they do, how comes 
 such difference 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 wrap- 
 ped up in napkins? Why sets she not forth infallible commen- 
 taries or expositions upon all the Bible ? Is it because this would 
 not be profitable for Christians, that Scripture should be inter- 
 preted ? It is blasphemous to say so. The Scripture itself tells 
 us, all Scripture is profitable, and the Scripture is not so much 
 the words as the sense. And if it be not profitable, why does she 
 
 * The reader should study Chillingworth on this important subject.
 
 APPENDIX. 283 
 
 employ particular doctors to interpret Scripture fallibly, unless 
 we must think that fallible interpretations of Scripture are pro- 
 fitable, and infallible interpretations would not be so."* 
 
 It is a mere ignis fatuits to deceive the ignorant a cloud of 
 dust to blind the eyes to speak of their rule being simple, and 
 more easy to be understood than ours, because, in the first place, 
 they have never undertaken so to expound it, but have kept the 
 world in darkness to the present hour, not having given an infal- 
 lible commentary, or a single authorized version of the word of 
 God ! 
 
 Then, further, if Scripture be so difficult, the interpretation of 
 the judge is not less so : for the decrees of councils and Popes 
 cannot possibly be more intelligible than those writings which 
 were read in the hearing of men, women, and children ; than the 
 sermons which were addressed by our blessed Lord to the simple 
 and ignorant ; than that word of which we read, that it is so 
 plain that a " wayfaring man, though a fool, shall not err 
 therein." 
 
 If, therefore, the objections which are brought against the 
 Scriptures, on the ground of their difficulty and their liability to 
 be perverted, tell against our rule, they tell with manifold force 
 against their own, and therefore it proves that these are not solid 
 objections, and that they must give place before the positive 
 evidence which has been adduced. 
 
 In conclusion, I would call your attention to the great in- 
 security of those who stand on any other foundation than the 
 word of God. The Bible, although they admit it to a certain 
 extent to be a rule, is not, they contend, the only rule. A man 
 cannot, therefore, rest upon this incompetent and insecure rule ; 
 according to their view, there can be no solid foundation on 
 which the Christian may take his stand. 
 
 * The passage is introduced in p. 20, but as it formed part of this dis- 
 course when delivered, we leave it in its proper place, even at the expense 
 of repeating the passage.
 
 284 APPENDIX. 
 
 Now, with respect to ourselves. Our rule is the written word, 
 and we are neither ashamed of it, nor of anything that we pro- 
 fess. We are willing that everything that we teach should be 
 proved by this standard : that whatsoever is not in accordance 
 with it may be rejected ; and that whatsoever does accord with 
 it may be adopted and cherished by every person. 
 
 Here, then, are great and glorious privileges which we enjoy. 
 We stand on what God has revealed ; we seek no articles of faith 
 beyond those which HE has delivered, and which have been em- 
 bodied in the ancient, catholic, and apostolic creeds of the 
 church. We stand upon this rock ; we embrace this, and find it 
 to be a resting-place for the sole of the foot. Without this, we 
 are in the same position as was the dove which Noah sent forth at 
 the window, that could find no rest till she came back to the ark. 
 So we may break from this rule to wander after tradition, to pur- 
 sue an infallible authority which we can never find, and which 
 they cannot tell us where to discover ; but we shall be wearying 
 ourselves in vain by pursuing that which has no existence, until 
 we come back " to the law and to the testimony;" assured, that 
 if anything which pretends to be Christianity speak not " ac- 
 cording to this word, it is because there is no light in it." 
 
 Therefore, remember, that although we have been confined 
 wholly to argument, yet we have spoken to you a few words by 
 the way, shewing you the great end for which God has revealed 
 His truth, to teach you the knowledge of His Son Jesus Christ, 
 as the only way of access to himself here, and to eternal life and 
 glory beyond the grave. May the truth contained in this rule be 
 blessed by the Spirit of God to all your souls ! 
 
 " And now (in the language of the apostle, Acts, xx. 32) I 
 commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is 
 able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all 
 them which are sanctified." Amen.
 
 APPENDIX. 285 
 
 No. II. 
 
 THE ANTI-CATHOLICITY OF THE CHURCH 
 OF ROME. 
 
 " For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved 
 may be made manifest among you." 1 COR. xi. 19. 
 
 MANY are the difficulties which continually meet the reflecting 
 mind, and which, if not solved, would shake to its very founda- 
 tion the faith of the Christian. Amongst these the existence of 
 heresies and schisms occupies a more prominent place than we 
 are at first inclined to believe. When we consider the nature 
 of the revelation of God, and the way in which He has been 
 pleased to reveal Himself, and connect with this the manifest 
 inability of unassisted reason to discover truth, we might at once 
 conclude that men would thankfully embrace the path of truth 
 and peace, and dwell together, during their pilgrimage on earth, 
 in unity and godly love. But alas ! it is not so ; sad experience 
 blasts our expectation, and annihilates our reasonable conclusion. 
 We find, by a very cursory glance at the state of Christendom, 
 that although the Sun of Righteousness has arisen upon our be- 
 nighted world, and although truth be written as with a sunbeam, 
 so that " he may run that readeth," and although Heaven pro- 
 claim that the truth is one and inseparable, yet, notwithstanding, 
 we see men wandering in the mazes of error ; and the further 
 their departure from the book of truth, the more lofty and as- 
 suming the tone and proclamation, " I am, and none else beside 
 me.'' As to unity, it is wellnigh banished from earth ; and in 
 the absence of this heavenly but ill-treated visitor, we behold the 
 state so graphically described by the sacred historian : '< In 
 those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that 
 which was right in his own eyes." To the reflecting mind this
 
 286 APPENDIX. 
 
 is a very serious difficulty, and, if not satisfactorily solved, would, 
 as we have observed, shake its faith to its lowest foundation. 
 "When I thought to know this," cried a saint of old, when con- 
 templating one of these mysterious difficulties, "it was too painful 
 for me, until I went into the sanctuary of God ; then," but not 
 till then, " understood I their end." 
 
 To that sanctuary would I now conduct you ; so that when 
 we refer to the divided, distracted, carnal, and degraded state of 
 Christendom, we may hear a voice from the sanctuary declaring 
 the reason of all this, and may thereby have our faith not 
 weakened, but considerably strengthened, while we see therein a 
 proof of the unerring finger by which the words of the sacred 
 volume were written. 
 
 Marvel not, then, at these things (t For there must be also 
 heresies" but learn wisdom from the solemn warning, and pray 
 the " good Lord" to deliver you " from all false doctrine, heresy, 
 and schism." 
 
 " For there must be also heresies among you." This neces- 
 sity for heresies does not arise out of any absolute decree on the 
 part of God. Heresies must be, not because of God, or any 
 imperfection in His word, but because of the ignorance, bh'ndness, 
 and pride of foolish men of men who darken "counsel by 
 words without knowledge." The wayfaring man, though a fool, 
 need not, shall not, err in the way of truth. Heresies come 
 into the church through the pride of those who, while they pro- 
 fess themselves to be wise, are but fools ; and this furnishes a 
 good answer to those who would debar the less-informed class of 
 society the privilege of free and open access to the word of God. 
 Now, as these heresies must arise, so God, who ever watches 
 over the interests of His church, turns them to good account, 
 making use of them as a fiery furnace, to prove the purity of His 
 truth, and the constancy of those who embrace it in love. The 
 gold is tried in the fire, and comes forth from the crucible puri- 
 fied seven times. So the existence of heresies and schisms try
 
 APPENDIX. 287 
 
 the church, and it comes forth as the morning " fair as the 
 moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners." 
 Were the church to enjoy peace, all would be accounted faith- 
 ful ; but when heresies and schisms arise, then is made manifest 
 who cleave to the truth, and who stand fast in the unity of the 
 church. So St. Cyprian speaks: " The chaff may be distin- 
 guished from the wheat ; they are but as chaff who are blown 
 away with the wind ; the wheat remains still in the floor of the 
 church." 
 
 These remarks open the way to the full understanding of the 
 all-important, vital, question proposed for our examination 
 " the anti-catholicity of the church of Rome." Before we pro- 
 ceed to an examination of this, allow me to say, that it is with no 
 small degree of pleasure and thankfulness to God, that I enjoy 
 the privilege of addressing you on this subject, than which none 
 can be more vital. I enjoy the privilege, for such I esteem it ; 
 and I enjoy it because I hope to be enabled to approach the 
 question in a spirit far removed from one of strife and contention, 
 and with, I trust, the most sincere desire to convince all before me 
 that we contend not for trifles, but for saving truth not for earth, 
 but for heaven itself; and that, while we contend earnestly, we 
 would so speak the truth in love, as to commend it to the souls of 
 those who differ from us, and persuade them not to count me 
 their enemy because I tell them the truth, and perhaps most un- 
 welcome, because unpalatable, truth. I do hope that the mem- 
 bers of that church, whose catholicity we intend to impugn, will 
 not take offence where none is intended, but that they will lay to 
 heart what they may hear ; and, weighing all in the balances of 
 the sanctuary, decide as beings who have everything at stake, and 
 a very short time to choose. And that we may feel and do these 
 things, I would pray that the Holy Spirit may graciously vouch- 
 safe unto the preacher His assistance, and to the congregation, 
 hearing ears and understanding hearts. 
 
 Our question is the anti-catholicity of the church of Rome ;
 
 288 APPENDIX. 
 
 in treating of which I would call your attention to the following 
 positions : 
 
 I. The meaning of the term catholic. 
 
 II. The way by which the catholicity of a church is to be as- 
 certained, and how any church may separate itself from the 
 church catholic. 
 
 III. That the church of Rome has so separated herself from 
 the catholic church, and is therefore guilty of heresy and schism, 
 and ought to be avoided by all who value their salvation. 
 
 IV. That the church of England is a true branch of the 
 catholic church of Christ ; and that all Englishmen are conse- 
 quently bound to unite in her communion. 
 
 I. The term " catholic" is little understood, and is continually 
 granted to the papal church, which, although not so designed, 
 does, in strictness of language, cede the whole question at issue. 
 The word is used in our liturgy and creeds, but is not to be found 
 in the Scriptures. This is, however, of little moment, as we are 
 not here disputing about the mere word, but about the principle 
 involved in that word. 
 
 The word "catholic" is used by some of the earliest fathers 
 of the church, and signifies universal. It was applied at the first 
 to the church of Christ, as a universal church; but, in a very 
 little time, men began to inquire in what that catholicity or uni- 
 versality consisted, and then it was grounded upon this : First, 
 that the church of Christ is diametrically opposite, in this respect 
 in its diffusiveness to the church of the Jews. "In Judah 
 was God known, and his name was great in Israel;" the name 
 of Jehovah was confined to Jerusalem, as if shut up within its 
 walls. At the crucifixion of Christ, those walls were thrown 
 down, and the name of the Lord went forth throughout the earth ; 
 and that promise began to be fulfilled which was made by the 
 Father to His eternal Son, " Ask of me and I will give thee 
 the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the 
 earth for thy possession." And so when the Lord commissioned
 
 APPENDIX. 289 
 
 His apostles, it was not only to go forth to the lost sheep of the 
 house of Israel, but to go forth throughout the world, and make 
 disciples of all nations. This was the charge of Christ; and in 
 this the catholicity of His church consisted that it was not con- 
 fined to one people, but was to be diffused throughout all the na- 
 tions of the earth. 
 
 Again : the church of Christ was esteemed catholic, because it 
 taught all things that were necessary to everlasting salvation. It 
 was also esteemed catholic, because of the obedience which it 
 demanded of all the sons and daughters of the fall. There are 
 other reasons, which are, perhaps, more curious than satisfactory, 
 and which, as they might be tedious, we will pass by. Now these 
 three reasons give you the meaning of the word " catholic," and 
 shew in what the catholicity of the church consisted. In a very 
 short time heresies and schisms began to spring up in the church ; 
 and then catholicity was used to denote opposition to them, and 
 the person who adhered to the church of Christ was termed a 
 catholic, while he who separated from it was accounted a heretic 
 and a schismatic ; so that catholicity was put in opposition to 
 heresy and schism. A saying of one of the old fathers may 
 throw some light upon this : " Christian," said he, " is my name, 
 and Catholic is my surname. By the former, I am distinguished 
 from heathens ; by the latter, from heretics and schismatics." 
 Such, then, is the origin of the word, and such the way in which 
 it was used to denote the difference between the pure faith of 
 Christ, and the heresies and schisms that sprang up continually in 
 the Christian church. 
 
 I now beg your attention to the second point of our dis- 
 course. 
 
 II. The way by which the catholicity of a church is to be as- 
 certained, and how a church may separate itself from the catholic 
 church. 
 
 Now it is quite evident that we are not to arrive at the catho- 
 licity of a church by its name. A mere name is nothing. Men
 
 290 APPENDIX. 
 
 may assume a name, and call themselves what they please, and 
 at the same time be very far removed from that which the name 
 represents. This is proved by the reason of the thing. It were 
 folly in us to call ourselves philosophers, unless we were really so ; 
 calling ourselves so would not make us such. It were folly in us 
 to usurp some great name, unless we could prove our right to it, 
 and our title to the inheritance with which that name may be in- 
 separably connected. 
 
 Besides, this is further proved not only by reason, but by fact ; 
 for we find, in the earlier ages of the church, that the farther men 
 had gone from the catholic faith, the more presumptuously had 
 they proclaimed themselves catholics. The Arians so called 
 themselves ; the Donatists likewise ; and there has not been any- 
 thing more common than for heretics to call themselves catholics : 
 therefore the name signifies nothing. 
 
 How, then, are we to arrive at the right of any church to be 
 esteemed catholic? In this way : If that church hold the faith 
 " once," or once for all, "delivered to the saints" the inheritance 
 with which the term catholic is inseparably and exclusively con- 
 nected. If it were not so, the false prophet Mahomet, and his 
 followers, might call themselves catholics, because they occupy 
 places where once the truth of Christ was faithfully proclaimed, 
 and the crescent now waves over many a minaret where once the 
 banner of the cross floated triumphant in the breeze. It is there- 
 fore in connexion with the faith that we are to judge of the 
 catholicity of any church ; and this is clearly laid down by some 
 of the old writers. " That church alone (says Lactantius) is 
 catholic that retains the true worship of God." And Augustine, 
 in his dispute with the Donatists " I say this, and thou sayest 
 that; but thus saith the Lord." Thus, those who, in former 
 days, usurped the name catholic, were answered " I say this, 
 and thou sayest that ; but thus saith the Lord." And so would 
 we answer, and ask What saith the Lord ? According to its 
 faith we are to judge of any church ; for its faith is the voice of
 
 APPENDIX. 291 
 
 that church ; and by its authorized voice, and not by any un- 
 meaning assumption, are we to judge. 
 
 There are two ways in which a church may separate itself 
 from the catholic church. The first is by a violent rent or schism, 
 because of some trifling point a causeless separation ; the second, 
 with which we have to do, is the far more dangerous and de- 
 structive way, and that is, by the imposition I beg your especial 
 attention to this point by the imposition of new articles of faith 
 upon the consciences of men under pain of everlasting damnation. 
 These are the two ways in which any body may separate itself 
 from the catholic church the first, by a violent rending from the 
 catholic church : the second, by the teaching of certain things 
 not taught by the catholic church of Christ, and by the imposition 
 of these articles upon the consciences of men under pain of ever- 
 lasting damnation. This latter is the worst description of schism, 
 for it is both heresy and schism. In the other case there may be 
 schism without heresy ; but in this there is heresy, and that 
 heresy, forced upon men, constitutes the schism. This will be 
 made very plain if we consider that a church may so limit its 
 communion as to separate itself from the catholic church ; and 
 those, then, who contend against the imposition of the articles by 
 which such church limits its communion, do not separate them- 
 selves from the catholic church, but return, or rather stand fast, 
 to the primitive and catholic faith and rule. The church of 
 Christ is, as it were, a common field,* and all the inhabitants 
 living around this field have a claim to the rights of the common. 
 Now, if one party were to arise and take upon themselves to 
 make divisions, and to appropriate parts of that common to them- 
 selves, and to say to the others, to the weaker party, ' Unless you 
 consent to our ways, and join with us in making that private 
 which was left public and common, then we will banish you 
 altogether from amongst us ;" now, in that case, which party 
 
 * This point is very fully and ably unfolded by Stillingfleet. " The Re- 
 formation of the Church of England justified." 
 
 u2
 
 292 APPENDIX. 
 
 would be guilty of the schism? Those who plead for their just 
 rights for the rights of the common, and who never did any- 
 thing but merely stand their ground, and who are perhaps driven 
 out by force ? No ! but those who alter the boundaries, who 
 impose terms that did not belong to the nature of the thing, and 
 who then, by an act of tyranny, usurp to themselves what ought 
 to be open to all. It is further to be observed that nothing can 
 separate a body of individuals from a church except something 
 that concerns the being of the church. Now, the being of a 
 church consists in its essential or fundamental points ; and there- 
 fore if persons were to differ from each other in things that were 
 not essential, that of itself would not constitute heresy or schism. 
 I would go further if there were to be a difference in not 
 merely non-essential or accidental, but in important points sup- 
 pose on points involving salvation yet if those points were left 
 scattered over the surface of the church, and were not imposed 
 upon men, there would then be no schism made, and those 
 things would be at best but private opinions ; and then the inha- 
 bitant residing around that common, or being a member of that 
 church, would not yield up one particle of his rights, or violate 
 his conscience in the least degree, because he would not be com- 
 pelled to submit to those things as conditions of communion, or 
 as a title to the rights of the common. This will shew you the 
 way in which we are to arrive at the catholicity of a church ; it 
 will likewise shew you how a church may separate itself from 
 the catholic church, by making an enclosure and appropriating to 
 itself what was the property of all Christians. 
 
 We now come to the important point of our subject. 
 
 III. " That the church of Rome has separated herself from 
 the catholic church of Christ, and that by this act she is guilty 
 of heresy and schism, and that consequently all men are bound, 
 as they value their eternal peace, to forsake her communion." 
 And now I can fancy a smile upon many lips, when we speak of 
 the church of Rome having separated herself from the catholic
 
 APPENDIX. 293 
 
 church. I should not at this moment be a member of the 
 church of England if I could not prove that the church of 
 Rome has separated herself from the catholic church; for, 
 although there never was any obligation upon us in this country 
 to unite with the church of Rome, other than the common bond 
 that ought to unite all Christian churches with each other, yet, 
 because we did once join in communion with her not at all 
 entering into the question whether we were bound to do so 
 yet, because we did once join with her, I should still be found in 
 communion with her, if I could not shew, as clearly as that 
 the sun shines at noon, that she has separated herself from 
 the catholic church, and that therefore she is guilty of heresy 
 and schism ; and that I am bound, in obedience to the com- 
 mand of God, to " mark them which cause divisions and offences 
 contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid 
 them." 
 
 But facts will prove this, however strange it may appear 
 because of the lofty tone in which that church is accustomed to 
 boast, " I sit a queen, and shall see no sorrow," I am the 
 catholic church, and all are heretics besides." These lofty tones 
 will always stagger some. Indeed, it was not until after the 
 Reformation that men began to examine for themselves, and to 
 see whether these assumptions had any foundation in the record 
 of truth ; for, when a man assumes an impudent tone, men are 
 too much inclined to believe that he has truth on his side. But 
 let facts speak. What is the state of the question between us 
 and the church of Rome ? It is this : She teaches certain 
 articles of faith which we reject. Because of our rejection of 
 them, she accounts us heretics, and consigns us to everlasting 
 damnation. This is the simple state of the case. Now, in the 
 first place, what are these articles ? These articles are private 
 opinions. They are at best but private opinions. Nevertheless, 
 though they be private opinions, they have been authoritatively 
 taught ; and the authorized teaching of them is that which con
 
 294 APPENDIX. 
 
 stitutes heresy ; for heresy is the teaching as catholic doctrine 
 that which is but private opinion. 
 
 We must now call attention to the articles themselves. The 
 articles concerning which we differ from the church of Rome 
 are to be found in the new creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, pub- 
 lished in 1564. This creed contains twelve new articles of 
 faith. And suppose that this creed taught nothing but the most 
 harmless doctrines, nevertheless, the heresy is just the same; and 
 for this reason, because the church of Rome has not been con- 
 tent to allow these twelve new articles to remain scattered over 
 the surface of Christendom as private opinions ; but she has 
 taught them publicly ; nay, she has gone further, she has enforced 
 them mark the word, enforced them ! as doctrines necessary 
 to be received under pain of eternal damnation. When I say 
 this, let it not be supposed that I mean to make light of the 
 doctrines embodied in this creed ; far from it. But we first con- 
 demn the daring assumption of the papal church in speaking 
 wickedly and blasphemously for God where He has not 
 spoken, and in enforcing those things which are but private 
 opinions, and which, as a whole, were never so taught and 
 enforced until the sixteenth century, enforcing those things 
 upon the consciences of men under pain of eternal damnation. 
 This is the daring act and chief sin of the papal see. 
 
 But are the doctrines unimportant ? I am not about to 
 trespass on you by repeating all those articles of the creed of 
 Pope Pius the Fourth. I shall select three articles of that 
 creed as proof of our position ; and to shew you how the church 
 of Rome has, by the imposition of those things, in the first place, 
 usurped the prerogative of Heaven ; and, in the next, imposed 
 upon sinners doctrines contrary to the truth of God, and that 
 endanger the salvation of man. 
 
 The first of these doctrines which I select from this creed is 
 the doctrine of transubstantiation. It is said "And I also con- 
 fess, that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist is truly
 
 APPENDIX. 295 
 
 really, and substantially, the body and blood, with the soul and 
 divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ: and that there is made a 
 conversion of the whole substance of the bread into his body, 
 and of the whole substance of the wine into his blood, which 
 conversion the catholic church calls transubstantiation." 
 
 I now bring you to the 13th session of the Council of Trent, 
 and the fifth chapter; in which, concerning this transubstan- 
 tiation, we read something more : " Therefore there is no room 
 left for doubting but that all the faithful in Christ should, 
 according to the custom always (!) observed in the catholic 
 church, reverently pay to this most holy sacrament the worship 
 of Latria, which is due to the true God ; nor is it on this 
 account the less to be adored, because Christ instituted it that it 
 might be eaten ; for we believe that the same God is present 
 in it, of whom the Eternal Father, introducing him into the 
 world, saith, ' Let all the angels of God worship him ; whom 
 the wise men, falling prostrate, adored; and of whom, in fine, the 
 scripture testifies that he was adored by the apostles in Galilee." 
 
 But we have not yet done. In the sixth canon of the same 
 session, we have these very mild and gentle terms, in which we 
 are consigned to eternal damnation for not adoring a piece of 
 bread ! " If any one shall say that, in the holy sacrament of the 
 Eucharist, Christ, the only begotten Son of God, is not to be 
 adored with the worship, even external worship, of Latria ; and 
 that he is not therefore to be worshipped with peculiar festive 
 honour nor to be solemnly carried about in processions, 
 according to the laudable and universal rite and custom of the 
 holy church (!) or that he is not to be publicly proposed to the 
 people that he may be adored or that his worshippers" his ! 
 that is, the host's, the wafer's, worshippers, " are idolaters, let 
 him be accursed !" 
 
 " To whom, then, will ye liken me, or shall I be equal ? saith 
 the Holy One." But here we have this church, in the first place, 
 making the blessed sacrament to contain the real body and blood
 
 296 APPENDIX. 
 
 substantially, with the soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, that 
 is, in fact, that the wafer which the Roman priest consecrates 
 does from that moment cease to he a wafer, and becomes the 
 true God, of whom, when the Father introduced Him into the 
 world, he said, " Let all the angels of God worship him." And 
 then we have an anathema pronounced by the Council of Trent 
 against all who shall not how down to this wafer a thing that 
 may be carried about in the hand may be eaten by a mouse, 
 for there is a canon which says, that if it be eaten by a mouse, 
 that mouse is to be taken and destroyed : and yet it is this thing 
 which cannot deliver itself from a mouse, and which may he 
 carried about, the sport of the winds, it is this that intelligent 
 men, that Christians, are commanded, under pain of eternal dam- 
 nation, to worship with the very same worship which we pay to 
 the Eternal Son at the right hand of God !* I need not enlarge 
 upon such doctrine as this. 
 
 I would now direct your attention to another article of this 
 new creed : " And most firmly I avow, that the images of Christ 
 and the mother of God, always a virgin, and other saints are to 
 be had and retained, and that to them due honour and veneration 
 is to be given." 
 
 * " You say that you do not worship a piece of bread, and that it is not 
 idolatry, because, forsooth, you believe it to be the body, blood, soul, and 
 divinity of Jesus Christ ! This absurd apology would equally avail the most 
 besotted heathens in the worship of their idols. We care not what you 
 believe your wafer to be : we ask, what is it ? a wafer ! and for not wor- 
 shipping this wafer, we must perish ! Well are you reproved in those simple 
 lines, written in days when, in this kingdom, men were put to death for not 
 bowing down to this 'wafer, carried in pompous procession through the streets 
 of England's now happy cities and towns : 
 
 A lasse poore fooles, so sore ye be lade 
 No marvel it is, thoughe your shoulders ake ; 
 For ye beare a great God, which ye yourselfes made, 
 Make it of what ye wyl, it is a wafar cake 
 And between two Irons printed it is and bake, 
 Andloke where Idolatry e is, Christ e wyl not be there, 
 Wherefore ley down your burden, an Idole ye do beare. 
 A lasse poore fooles.' " 
 
 (Page's Reply to Rev. T. J. Brown, of Downside.)
 
 APPENDIX. 297 
 
 The Council of Trent (sessio xxv.) more fully states the 
 nature of this worship, and informs us how it is to be rendered, 
 and that all is to be performed according to the decrees of the 
 second Council of Nice. 
 
 Now, to give you some idea of the nature of this worship of 
 images, I would lay before you a specimen of what that council 
 teaches : " Anathema," a tremendous curse, '* anathema to those 
 who do not adore anathema to those who dare to defame or call 
 them (the images) idols anathema to those who do not dili- 
 gently teach all the Christ-loving people to adore the venerable 
 images !"* 
 
 But in Act VII. of the same Council of Nice, to which the 
 Council of Trent refers us for the increase of our knowledge and 
 piety, we are thus further instructed : " We adore thy cross, O 
 Lord, and the spear which opened the life-giving side of thy 
 blessedness.'' Now, however humiliating this may be, or how- 
 ever irritating this truth may possibly be to the feelings of those 
 who are attached to a church that teaches such things, we can- 
 not answer for that. We are quoting their own doctrines in the 
 investigation of a most important point. 
 
 In the next place, I refer to the article of the same creed which 
 teaches the worship of the saints : " I constantly hold there is a 
 purgatory," &c. &c. &c., " and likewise that the saints which 
 reign with Christ are to be worshipped and prayed unto, and that 
 they offer unto God their prayers for us." 
 
 It may be said, that it is a very profitable thing to pray to the 
 saints, and to get them to intercede for us ; but with the profit of 
 the question we have nothing to do. What we are concerned 
 with is, first, the command of God ; and, secondly, whether this 
 creature worship is an article of the true Catholic faith. 
 
 I now quote from a book written by Costerus the Jesuit, on 
 " The praises of the blessed Virgin," and published "by permis- 
 
 * Second ConciL Nice. Act I., Labb and Coss, vol. vii. p. 60.
 
 298 APPENDIX. 
 
 sion of the superiors." He begins with lamenting the evils which 
 had been caused by the apocalyptic dragon. " He (the dragon) 
 has," writes this author, " rooted the orthodox faith out of the 
 hearts of many ; and, lest anything should be wanting to these 
 evils, he has taken care to abolish all worship of the saints ; and 
 chiefly has he endeavoured to obscure, and entirely pluck up, 
 the honour of the most sacred Virgin Mary, Mother of God. 
 For he well knows both how great is the authority of such 
 a queen of the heavens with God the Son, and also how great her 
 compassion towards men; who, being invoked, always hears, 
 assists the wretched, BREAKS THE MALICE OF THE ENEMY, and 
 BRUISES THE HEAD OF THE SERPENT." 
 
 Again, this author writes : " For not without cause is the 
 Virgin Mary compared to a well-ordered army; or to the star of 
 the ocean, to which, when cast upon the stormy deep, you may 
 look and fly, according to the advice of the blessed Bernard 
 ' Look to the star ; call upon Mary !' " 
 
 It may be objected that this book was published some years 
 ago. But if it be true, as they say, that their church is never 
 divided, and can never change, this doctrine would be binding 
 upon them to the present hour. But the present Pope, from 
 whom I now quote,* will give us more information on this sub- 
 ject, and shew that this is not such obsolete doctrine. The Pope 
 deplores the low state of the church, and thus proceeds : " We 
 select for the date of our letter this most joyful day, on which we 
 celebrate 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" [I thought that it was the province of the Holy 
 Ghost to lead the mind ;] "that she would watch over us writing 
 to you, and lead our minds by her heavenly influence to those 
 counsels which may prove most salutary to Christ's flock." 
 
 * Laity's Directory for 1833.
 
 APPENDIX. 299 
 
 This is fearful language ; but what I shall now read is still 
 worse. " But that all," continues the Pope, " 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." 
 
 Thus is this idolatrous doctrine confirmed and inculcated by the 
 present Roman pontiff! 
 
 And now I need not insult your understanding, or the under- 
 standing of any who have this blessed book, the Word of God, 
 before them, that, whatever such language is, it is not the religion 
 of the Lord Jesus Christ. I need not assert and I say it with- 
 out feeling the least unkindness towards those who are involved 
 in such a system that the whole of this idolatry is far and en- 
 tirely removed from the Bible. I need not, therefore, prove that 
 these sentiments are private opinions. If Christendom were ten 
 times its present size, and if those opinions were embraced by ten- 
 fold the number of persons who now embrace them, they would 
 be no better than private opinions. They are private corruptions 
 that have crept into the church of Christ ; and those corruptions, 
 being publicly taught and enforced, become heresy ; for heresy 
 is, as I have already shewn, the teaching of private opinion as 
 the Catholic faith. These things, therefore, are private corrup- 
 tions taught, and thereby made heresy that heresy is enforced, 
 and thereby made schism. Thus you see that the church of 
 Rome, by teaching and enforcing any, even if these were harm- 
 less, doctrines as the Catholic faith, which are not the Catholic 
 faith, but private opinion, has been guilty of heresy and schism; 
 and when we consider the nature of the doctrines so taught, and 
 how she has dared to force them upon the sinner, under pain of 
 eternal damnation, her guilt is considerably aggravated. It were 
 bad enough that she were entangled in this evil herself; but to 
 go the step further, and to tell us, " You must embrace these 
 opinions, or you must be consigned to excommunication here, 
 and to damnation hereafter," this, this is her crowning sin this
 
 300 APPENDIX. 
 
 is one of the highest acts of blasphemy ; it is speaking for God 
 where He has not spoken ; and it is the greatest oppression that 
 was ever practised upon the sons of men, because it leaves a man 
 no alternative but this to be a hypocrite, and profess to believe 
 that which he does not believe, but which he does in his heart 
 despise : or to be an idolater, bowing down to an idol, the work 
 of his own hands, and giving to the creature that homage which 
 is due, and by Himself reserved and limited, to the living God 
 alone. 
 
 But I will not rest the matter here. We have still stronger 
 evidence than that now produced, and evidence which cannot be 
 denied. Here is the new creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, pub- 
 lished in 1564. From that creed I have selected those three 
 articles. That creed, in its conclusion, tells you that " this is the 
 true Catholic faith, out of which no man can be saved." Between 
 us and the church of Rome there are four creeds that is, she 
 holds three which we embrace ; and then she adds this new creed 
 of Pius IV. Now, whence the origin of creeds ? On this wise : 
 Very soon after the establishment of Christianity, heresies began 
 to prevail, and at last the Christian church drew up certain lead- 
 ing doctrines or articles of faith, and embodied these in creeds, by 
 subscription to which a man was known to be orthodox. To go 
 into the whole of this question would be foreign from our pre- 
 sent business, but I will add sufficient to illustrate our position. 
 Those creeds were drawn up in order; and, as some heretics 
 cavilled respecting the eternity of the Son of God, the Xicene 
 creed was framed to meet their heresies, which went not to teach 
 anything which had not been taught before. Then we have the 
 creed of St. Athanasius ; that also does not teach anything which 
 the apostles' and the Nicene creeds do not teach, but merely more 
 fully explains the essential and mysterious doctrines of the 
 Bible. Long had the church continued in possession of these 
 creeds, and was undisturbed ; and we find that one council went 
 so far as to decree in the following manner against the enlarge-
 
 APPENDIX. 301 
 
 ment of creeds. The Council of Ephesus, A.D. 43.1, decreed 
 thus : '.' That it shall not be lawful for any man to publish or 
 compose 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 be bishops or clerks, they 
 shall be deposed, if laymen, they shall be accursed !" 
 
 Here we find that this council forbad, in the most express 
 terms, the enlarging of creeds; after which the church continued 
 in the possession of the three ancient apostolic creeds ; but at 
 length "the imposing humour" began to appear ; and, after some 
 ages, one thing was imposed, and so from one thing to another 
 heretics went on, until, in 1 564, at the end of the sitting of the 
 Council of Trent, all the different heresies papal supremacy, 
 purgatory, the three specimens of Christianity that you have now 
 heard read, saint worship, image worship, and the worship of the 
 host these and other points were all collected these floating 
 heresies were brought together they were embodied in the 
 creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, and imposed upon men as Ca- 
 tholic faith, and to be received by them under pain of everlasting 
 damnation. Now, that we may not bear false witness, or slander 
 them, we will read the conclusion of that creed. It is this : ''And 
 I will be careful that 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 confessed 
 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 the conclusion of the new creed of Pope Pius the 
 Fourth. It gives, in addition to the Nicene creed, their twelve 
 new articles, and it then informs you that ' this is the true Ca- 
 tholic faith, out of which no man can be saved." But what, or
 
 302 APPENDIX. 
 
 where, is the order of the Council of Ephesus, which forbad 
 any man to publish or compose any other articles or creed in ad- 
 dition to those contained in the Nicene creed ? Where is the 
 order of this ancient council, which the Papacy affects to so 
 highly reverence? It is cast to the winds of heaven ! But this is 
 not all. We will refer to one of those Catholic creeds the 
 Athanasian creed, for instance : " Whosoever will be saved, be- 
 fore all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic faith ;" 
 and the creed then goes on to teach what the Catholic faith is. 
 It is not necessary that I should shew you what it is, but I need 
 only observe what it is not. By the testimony of this creed, it is 
 not the worship of the Host not the worship of the Virgin 
 Mary not such worship as you have heard ascribed to images ; 
 neither is it purgatory, neither is it the supremacy of the Pope. 
 T need not tell you what it is, I only tell you what it is not. 
 You know what it is. And now, what is the conclusion of this 
 creed ? " This is the Catholic faith" thus winding up : and 
 yet not a word about all this new Catholic faith, that we are " to 
 hold whole and inviolate to our last gasp !" " This is the Catholic 
 faith, which, except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved." 
 What does this mean ? It means, that if a man does believe it 
 faithfully, he shall be saved. Oh ! but they were greatly mis- 
 taken ; the good fathers of the church who drew up such a creed 
 as that forgot the Pope and his new religion. If the Pope had 
 been there, he would have taught them otherwise. But I appeal 
 to your common sense. Picture to your minds the Pope sitting 
 at the council where that creed was made, and that when the 
 Christian fathers, following the Word of God, not dreaming of 
 his novelties, had drawn up this creed, and had said, " This is 
 the Catholic faith, which if a man believe faithfully, he shall be 
 saved," and the Pope were to rise up and hand in his twelve new 
 articles, and say, " My good fathers, you are altogether mistaken, 
 you have not got the Catholic faith;" and suppose that they took 
 his statement, and looked at it, and found that one of the most
 
 APPENDIX. 303 
 
 distinguishing features of it was to give himself and his church we 
 know not how many fine titles, what would they have said ? 
 They would, with one voice, have proclaimed, " We know no- 
 thing of you or of your creed ; wherever you found it, it is no part 
 of the truth of God; therefore away with you and your novelties." 
 Would not this have been the answer? and is not this the an- 
 swer of any man of common sense, when such a forgery, such an 
 imposition as this, is palmed upon him that the Pope and his 
 party should, in the sixteenth century, draw up a new creed, and 
 tell a Christian people, " You are mistaken in thinking that the 
 three old creeds contain the Catholic faith ; no such thing ; you 
 will find it in my new creed, the creed of Pope Pius the 
 Fourth ! 
 
 It is not necessary to dwell more upon this point. But the 
 church of Rome has gone still further ; and here it is that she 
 makes her wound incurable. You have seen the way in which 
 she has made a schism, by the enforcement of heresy under pain 
 of damnation. Now, one part of her sin is, that she has set up 
 a new rule, which God has not authorized a rule which has 
 been pretended to give authority to these new articles of Chris- 
 tian faith ; and she has not only set up this new rule, but she has 
 gone a step further, and she has condemned the word of the 
 living God, concerning which He says, " To the law and to the 
 testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because 
 there is no light in them ;" I say, she has gone the step further; 
 she has attained the very climax of guilt, and condemned that as 
 an insufficient, dangerous, and incomplete rule ; and by the con- 
 demnation of this, and by the setting up of a new rule, and by 
 the usurpation of the pretended privilege of infallibility, she has 
 made all her errors incurable she has sealed her own condem- 
 nation ! 
 
 Therefore, what is the doty of every man who is really open 
 to the investigation of truth every man that is anxious to arrive 
 at the truth ? What, I ask, after such undeniable statements as
 
 304 APPENDIX. 
 
 we have placed before you, concerning the nature and guilt of 
 the Papal church what is the way in which every individual 
 who values the truth of God and his own present and eternal 
 happiness should act? One passage from the prophet will fur- 
 nish the reply : " We would have healed Babylon, but she is not 
 healed;" she cannot be healed, because she has condemned the 
 only instrument of regeneration namely, the word of the living 
 God. Understand my meaning when I say condemned. To 
 avoid cavils, I am not now entering upon the question of her 
 ground for setting aside the Bible as a book that ought not to be 
 .read, but I say that she has condemned it as an insufficient and 
 incomplete rule ; therefore, " we would have healed Babylon, 
 but she is not healed: forsake her: for her judgment reacheth 
 unto heaven, and is lifted up even to the skies." And " come out 
 of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that 
 ye receive not of her plagues." 
 
 But I desire, in the last place, to direct your attention to a 
 very important position ; for when we have overthrown, as we 
 have overthrown, the pretensions of the church of Rome to be 
 the Catholic church of Christ when we have shewn you how 
 she has separated herself from the Catholic church, by teaching 
 new things, and by enforcing those new things as articles of faith 
 some of you may say, " Whither shall we go ? would you have 
 us wander about, as the dove of old?" No ! but I would have 
 you to come, as the dove, to the ark of the living God. And I 
 proceed to shew you, 
 
 IV. " That the church of England is a true branch of the 
 Catholic church of Christ, and that, consequently, all Englishmen 
 are bound to unite in her communion." 
 
 This I prove, first, by t\\efact, that the church of England has 
 not made any separation from the Catholic church. Who 
 charges the church of England with separation from the Catholic 
 faith or the Catholic church ? The church of Rome ! It is the 
 Papal church that brings the charge. But on what ground does
 
 APPENDIX. 305 
 
 she prefer the charge against us? We would remind her, that 
 in order to make good the charge, she must prove that there is a 
 Divine command given whereby we are bound to submit to her 
 jurisdiction. The church of Rome is the church of Rome the 
 church of England is the church of England ; and unless it 
 could be proved that, by Divine command, all churches are bound 
 to submit to the church of Rome, the charge of separation must 
 be as the idle wind that passeth by. 
 
 But suppose we granted even that point that is, that we were 
 bound to unite with her; must we therefore be heretics, because 
 we are not now united in communion with the church of Rome ? 
 No ! I have shewed you already who it is that made the sepa- 
 ration, not we ; we hold fast the ancient, the Catholic, and the 
 apostolic faith, as contained in the Scriptures, as embodied in the 
 three creeds of the Catholic church. I ask, then, what articles of 
 the Catholic faith has the church of England ever denied ? This 
 is a bold inquiry ; and I do assert, that every Roman Catholic is 
 bound honestly to investigate this question before he has himself 
 turned away from the church of Christ established in this land to 
 follow after such dangerous and destructive novelties as we have 
 been describing, and which have been promulgated by the church 
 of Rome. I ask, then, what has the church of England denied ? 
 I will tell you what she has denied. She has denied, and shaken 
 off, the usurped authority of the Pope of Rome a yoke which 
 our fathers were not able to bear-^-a yoke which was an iron 
 yoke upon Christendom a tyranny which desolated the nations, 
 and wasted the church of God. Was this the rejection of any 
 part of the Catholic faith ? For, until she proves our rejection of 
 Catholic doctrine, she will prove nothing against the church of 
 England : but the church of England remains as it originally was. 
 This is our offence, not that we reject Christ, though many poor 
 Romanists, and especially in Roman-catholic countries, believe 
 that we do not hold anything more of Christ than do the very 
 heathen ; it is not that we reject Christ, the Bible, or the three 
 x
 
 306 APPENDIX. 
 
 ancient and Catholic creeds but that we reject the Pope of Rome 
 and his novelties, and therefore we must needs be heretics and 
 schismatics I But it is unmeaning and idle to speak thus : we 
 prove that we have not rejected Catholic faith, and here I call as 
 a witness the church of Rome herself. He that shall question 
 us where our church was before Luther, let him look back into 
 the primitive church ; nay, let him look into the bosom of 
 the present Roman church, and there he shall find and confess 
 (I am speaking now of men who honestly investigate truth, 
 laying aside party prejudices and party feelings) and 1 say he 
 shall find and confess, that if ever antiquity and catholicity were 
 marks of the true church, they must 6f right and necessity belong 
 to the church of England. Look into the four creeds which I 
 have brought before you the Apostles', the Nicene, the Athana- 
 sian, and the creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, and you will find 
 that three of those creeds are taught and believed firmly by our 
 church, and those creeds, by the confession of the church of 
 Rome herself, were and are the creeds of the apostles and fathers 
 of the primitive church, and were not created by Martin Luther. 
 Look, again, into the seven sacraments, and you will acknow- 
 ledge that two of those sacraments, about which that is, as to 
 their being sacraments there never was any dispute in the 
 Christian church that two of those sacraments, Baptism and the 
 Lord's Supper, are held by us ; and those sacraments were not 
 instituted by Martin Luther. Look, again, into the canon of 
 our Bible, and you will observe that the canonical books of Scrip- 
 ture which our church approves were received universally in all 
 ages, and are approved at this day by the church of Rome herself 
 as canonical Scripture and these were not written by Martin 
 Luther. Look, again, into the Book of Common Prayer, and it 
 will appear that the same forms of prayer, for substance, were 
 read and published in a known tongue in the ancient churches 
 and these were not written by Martin Luther. Look, again, 
 into the ordination of pastors, and it will appear that the same
 
 APPENDIX. 307 
 
 essential forms are practised in our church at this day which 
 were practised by the apostles, and were not ordained by Martin 
 Luther. If, therefore, the three creeds, the two principal sacra- 
 ments of the church, the canonical books of Scripture, the forms 
 of prayer and ordination^, if all these things were anciently 
 taught, and universally, in all ages, even in the very bosom of 
 the Roman church, is it not a silly and senseless thing to say that 
 we have denied the Catholic faith, or to ask us where was our 
 church before the days of Martin Luther? 
 
 The positive doctrine of our church is contained in a few 
 points. The points in controversy, and which are the subject of 
 contention, are for the most part, if not all, additions obtruded 
 upon the church ; and from the nature of those additions, the 
 question fairly and properly results upon themselves Where was 
 your church, where was your Catholic faith, before the days of 
 Martin Luther? 
 
 If, therefore, our doctrine lay involved in the bosom of the 
 Roman church, which no Roman Catholic can deny if it was 
 hidden as fine gold overlaid with a greater quantity of dross, was 
 it new, was it unknown, because the church of Rome sought, by 
 a prevailing and powerful faction, to obscure it? Was there no 
 corn in the granary of the church before the days of Martin 
 Luther, because it was not till then severed from the chaff? Was 
 there no pure gold because our adversaries would not refine it by 
 the fire of God's word ? If we have nothing but heresy and 
 schism, let them remove from the bosom of their own church all 
 this light chaff, all this heresy, which they say was never heard of 
 till the days of Martin Luther, and then I ask them, what have 
 they left to form a Catholic church of Christ ? Take away the 
 three ancient creeds, the two sacraments, the twenty-two books 
 of canonical Scriptures, which we hold in common with them, 
 and tell me, if such light chaff as this, such novelty, such heresy, 
 were removed, whether their twelve new articles and their no- 
 velties will ever make out the true Catholic church ? 
 x2
 
 308 APPENDIX. 
 
 Nay, more. The most candid, the most ingenuous members 
 of their own church have ever been ashamed ashamed of those 
 additions of theirs which we deny. For instance : we charge 
 them with the worship of images, but they do not condemn us 
 for not worshipping them ; they make the best excuse they can 
 for the manner of their adoration, but they do not accuse us. 
 Again : we accuse them for praying in an unknown tongue; they 
 excuse themselves, upon the ground that God knows the heart, 
 but they cannot condemn us for worshipping God in a language 
 understood by the people. Well, we charge them with idolatry 
 in the worship of the Host, but they do not condemn us for 
 adoring Christ's real body in heaven they do not condemn us 
 for feeding by faith upon the Son of God. They excuse them- 
 selves as well as they can, but they do not condemn us. We 
 accuse them for taking away the cup from the laity in the 
 administration of the Lord's Supper; they endeavour to excuse 
 it, but they do not, cannot, condemn us for receiving it in both 
 kinds. 
 
 Again, what is remarkable, and comfortable, we charge them 
 with flat idolatry, in the adoration of the sacrament, of relics, of 
 saints and images ; and however they excuse themselves, to our 
 endless comfort be it spoken, they cannot charge us in the doctrines 
 of our church, no, not with the least suspicion of idolatry.* 
 
 It is impossible for any candid mind to resist such evidence as 
 this. I may, then, well ask, what article of the Catholic faith 
 has the church of England ever denied ? If she holds nothing 
 but heresy, take it away, and the church of Rome has nothing 
 left to prove herself Christian ; nothing left by which to distinguish 
 her as Christian, any more than you can so distinguish the reli- 
 gion of the false prophet. Before the Reformation, many of 
 those articles were but private opinions, until they were embo- 
 
 * The passage commencing with " He, then, that shall question us,'' 
 p. 306, has been taken, with some trifling variation, from Sir H. Lynde's 
 Via Tutu.
 
 APPENDIX. 309 
 
 (lied in the creed of Pius the Fourth, and persons remained in 
 communion with the church of Rome, who denied them as 
 plainly as we deny them at this day. What will this prove ? 
 That the church of Rome herself not to speak of God's word, 
 not to speak of the council referred to, not to speak of what 
 the creeds say she herself had never defined, until the Council 
 of Trent, as necessary points of the Catholic faith until after the 
 Reformation, the church of Rome herself had never declared all 
 those articles as part of her creed, and which she now declares 
 shall be held " whole and inviolate to the last gasp." 
 
 But, in the last place, I prove to you that the church of 
 England cannot make any such separation from the Catholic 
 church of Christ. The sixth article of the church of England 
 declares that " 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 believed 
 as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to 
 salvation." This shews that the church of England, while she 
 continues fenced in by such an article, can never teach anything 
 contrary to the word of God. 
 
 I go further. It might be said, she may not teach anything 
 contrary, but she may teach something in addition, to the word 
 of God. The twentieth article fences her in against this, for it de- 
 clares that the church of England is not only not to teach anything 
 contrary, but she is not to dare to teach anything besides, or in 
 addition to, the word of God. Therefore, I say again, that as 
 the church of England has not made any separation from the 
 Catholic faith, by teaching anything which God has not taught, 
 so she never can do this as long as she remains the present church 
 of England, because the sixth article of her faith forbids her 
 teaching anything contrary to the word of God, and the twen- 
 tieth article forbids her teaching anything as faith in addition to 
 the same. 
 
 The whole question between us is this : If we do not hold
 
 310 APPENDIX. 
 
 the Catholic faith if we are not members of the Catholic church 
 our condition is no better than that of one who is tossed about 
 by the elements, and who finds no resting-place for the sole of 
 his foot. We must abide in the ship, or we cannot be saved. 
 We must be found cleaving to the true Catholic faith of Christ ; 
 for out of it there is certainly no salvation. Thus have I taken 
 some pains to explain, 1st, The meaning of the word Catholic ; 
 2nd, how to test the catholicity of the church, and how a 
 church may separate herself from the Catholic church ; 3rd, that 
 the church of Rome has so separated herself from the Catholic 
 church of Christ, and that she is therefore, in that act of sepa- 
 ration, guilty of heresy and schism ; and that men are conse- 
 quently bound to separate from her, because her wound is incura- 
 ble and refuses to be healed ; 4thly, I have shewed you that the 
 church of England has never denied any article of the Catholic 
 faith ; that she receives the Scriptures, and everything that was 
 originally taught in the Catholic church ; and that, in rejecting 
 that which the church of Rome would force upon her, she does 
 not reject anything that was esteemed by the Catholic church, 
 or even by the church of Rome, as Catholic, before the session of 
 the Council of Trent.* 
 
 Having explained these points, there are two inferences from 
 all this. The first is, the insecurity of the church of Rome. 
 That church places its members in the most awful position. It 
 leaves them no mode of escape whatever. I do not now refer to 
 the case of some men, who may, perchance, never having heard 
 the voice of warning never having had the question put before 
 them, ignorant of the very creed of which I have spoken, (for I 
 have found comparatively few Roman Catholics, when I have 
 brought this new creed before them, aware of its existence,) 
 continue in the church of Rome ; but whenever the warning 
 voice comes, you are to remember that that church places you in 
 the most awful position ; it leaves you no choice whatever, but 
 
 * The reader should study Stillingfleet, who ably treats this question.
 
 APPENDIX. 311 
 
 to believe her doctrines, or to be excommunicated here and 
 damned hereafter. It consequently leaves you no alternative but 
 hypocrisy on the one hand, if you profess to believe what you 
 perhaps despise : or, if you still continue in communion with 
 Rome, to cleave to a faith which Christ never sanctioned a faith 
 which the Catholic church knew not a new faith, and an im- 
 pious faith a faith that takes the crown from the head of Mes- 
 siah and places it on the head of the Pope of Rome a faith that 
 overturns the very foundation of Christianity, I do assert, that 
 the man who stands upon that new faith, stands upon that which 
 will sink with him into utter perdition ; and if I did not solemnly 
 believe this, I should not stand here to address you. That 
 creed has set up new mediators, and affords no security. It has 
 wrested the sceptre out of the hands of the Son of David, and 
 placed it in those of a mortal man. It was a saying of the great 
 Martin Luther, when he found a Bible, and took that Bible, 
 covered with dust, down from the shelf " In the schools" (in 
 this new system of theology) " I lost Christ; but I found him 
 in St. Paul." You will never find Christ in that new creed of 
 Pope Pius the Fourth. It has buried him under a mass of false- 
 hood and superstition, so that He cannot speak for Himself. 
 Would to God, then, my brethren, that I could persuade every 
 Roman Catholic whom I address, or to whom this address may 
 come, not for the sake of making mere proselytes, but that I 
 could persuade him, as he values the honour of his Redeemer 
 and the salvation of his soul, to take that new creed of Pope 
 Pius the Fourth and cast it to the winds of heaven, and come 
 back to and hold communion with us, by embracing that pure 
 and primitive Catholic faith of Christ, which he will find em- 
 bodied in those creeds and confessions of faith which it is our 
 privilege to believe and maintain. 
 
 If, then, you have insecurity on the one hand, I shew you, on 
 the other, a surer and more excellent way ; and I do trust that 
 every Roman Catholic whom I address will be led to consider
 
 312 APPENDIX. 
 
 these things, to examine for himself the foundations of the Catholic 
 faith of Christ, and be led to embrace and contend for that pure 
 Catholic faith of Christ which will confer upon him that rests 
 upon it, peace here and everlasting salvation hereafter. 
 
 I would, in conclusion, exhort you, as the apostle Jude writes, 
 that you should " earnestly contend for the faith once" (or once 
 for all) " delivered to the saints." And as the apostle further 
 says, " these be they who separate themselves, sensual, having 
 not the Spirit ;" so in his words would I say " But ye, beloved, 
 building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the 
 Holy Ghost, keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the 
 mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life." Amen. 
 
 No. III. 
 INFALLIBILITY. 
 
 TT is truly surprising that Mr. Brown* should refer us to Scrip- 
 ture in such a confident manner, when we must believe, if we 
 follow his creed, that it is not a sufficient rule whereby to deter- 
 mine controversies in matters of faith. If it be so incomplete and 
 dangerous, as they tell us, why refer to it, and in a matter of such 
 moment as the infallibility of his church? How r comes this to 
 pass ? Is the Bible a sufficient rule in some, and not in all, con- 
 troversies? If it be a full and sufficient rule in the highest ques- 
 tion, why not in other points of faith, why not in all ? And if 
 this be so, what becomes of the new creed of Pope Pius IV., 
 the only ground of difference between us ? But as they cannot 
 allow this, pray who is to draw the line of distinction, and de- 
 clare in what particular points the Bible is, and in what it is not, 
 
 * This Treatise is taken from the author's work quoted above " Catholic 
 Truth not Assailed," &c., in answer to the Rev. T. J. Brown, Principal of 
 Downside College.
 
 APPENDIX. 313 
 
 the rule to which controversies are to be brought, in order to be 
 determined? Must we grant the Pope power to decide, in this 
 matter, according to convenience ? When all this is considered, 
 with what surprise must we not read the following security which 
 Mr. B. promises his followers. " Let it suffice, therefore, 
 that I briefly observe, that to the Catholic sufficient security for 
 resting with confidence on the doctrinal decisions of the church 
 of Christ, is given in those emphatical declarations of the God 
 of Truth" 
 
 Before we proceed to examine those declarations, we must 
 have another specimen of the inconsistency of Mr. Brown, and 
 of his advocacy of the doctrine which, when broached by us, 
 draws down, not only his censure, but his ridicule. What security 
 does Mr. B. here speak of? That the word of God says certain 
 things which, he asserts, apply to the Papal church. Does he 
 not teach that the written word is not the rule of faith ? W T hy, 
 then, tell us of security, when the basis of our security is an in- 
 complete rule, one not competent to decide anything ? But even 
 if, according to him, it were complete, how is the reader to know, 
 with infallible certainty, that what Mr. B. would have him be- 
 lieve is indeed the exact meaning the truth of God ? 
 
 The word of Scripture is (as they say) but a dead letter, and 
 a simple man may conclude, from these and other parts, that the 
 Papal is not only not the true, but is an apostate church. Who, 
 then, is to direct him in this difficult matter? the church ? That 
 cannot be : for the question is, whether these Scriptures testify 
 that the Papal church is the true church. Poor man I he is left 
 to his private judgment to infer this. Thus is he compelled to 
 make an act of faith on his private judgment, deducing such from 
 Scripture. And the Papacy is indebted for the belief of its in- 
 fallibility to the private judgment of the person to whom these 
 arguments are submitted. This is as rank heresy as ever Martin 
 Luther was guilty of! 
 
 The passages of Scripture, in Mr. B.'s work, are those gene-
 
 314 APPENDIX. 
 
 rally adduced in favour of his church's pretensions to infallibility. 
 The words of Christ, " Lo ! I am with you always, even unto 
 the end of the world," " that the gates of hell shall not prevail 
 against it" the church : that " Christ will pray the Father, and 
 he shall give another Comforter, that he may abide with the 
 apostles;" and therefore, (adds Mr. B.) with their representa- 
 tives " for ever." Again, " And the Redeemer shall come to 
 Zion. ..." " As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the 
 Lord, my Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have 
 put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of the mouth of thy seed, 
 nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, hence- 
 forth and for ever." 
 
 To establish the infallibility of the Papal church are these 
 passages adduced. That the church and truth of Christ shall 
 never fail, or be overthrown, is certain : but the present question 
 is, whether Christ hath conferred upon the church of Rome this 
 privilege, that it shall not err in any of its decisions, but that its 
 decrees are to be received as articles of faith, as the voice of God. 
 If this claim be established, then it must follow that the disgust- 
 ing and degrading idolatry, and the other contradictions to Scrip- 
 ture which are contained in the new creed of Pope Pius IV., are 
 to be received, under pain of damnation, as the voice of the Holy 
 Spirit of God. This is the question, and an awful one. And 
 now Mr. Brown's arguments in favour of this infallibility the 
 above texts of Scripture ! To this line of argument, which, Mr. 
 Brown assures us, ' affords sufficient security for resting upon 
 the doctrinal decisions of his church" I reply, in the words of 
 Chillingworth, " If it be said, the Roman church is to be be- 
 lieved infallible because the Scripture says it is so, 
 
 "1. I demand, how shall I be assured of the texts that be 
 alleged, that they are indeed Scripture that is, the word of God ? 
 And the answer to this must be, either because the church tells 
 me so, or some other. If any other be given, then all is not 
 finally resolved into, and built upon, that church's authority;
 
 APPENDIX. 315 
 
 and this answer then, I hope, a Protestant may have leave to 
 make use of when he is put to that perilous question How 
 know you (he Scripture to be the Scripture ? If the answer be, 
 because the church tells me so, my reply is ready ; that to be- 
 lieve that church is infallible, because the Scriptures say so, and 
 that the Scripture is the word of God, because the same church 
 says so, is nothing else but to believe the church is infallible, be- 
 cause the church says so which is infallible. 
 
 "2. I could never yet, from the beginning of Genesis to the 
 end of the Apocalypse, find it written so much as once in express 
 terms, or equivalently, that the church in subordination to the 
 see of Rome shall be always infallible. 
 
 " 3. If it be said, that this is drawn by good consequence from 
 Scripture truly interpreted, I demand, what certain ground have 
 I to warrant me, that this consequence is good, and this interpre- 
 tation true ? And if answer be made, that Reason will tell me 
 so ; I reply, 1. That this is to build all upon my own reason and 
 private interpretation. 2. I have great reason to fear, that rea- 
 son assures no man, that the infallibility of the church of Rome 
 may be deduced from Scripture by good and firm consequence. 
 
 " 4. If it be said, that a consent of Fathers do so interpret the 
 Scripture, I answer, 1. That this is most false, and cannot, with- 
 out impudence, be pretended, as I am ready to justify to any in- 
 different hearer. 2. I demand who shall be judge, whether the 
 Fathers mean as is pretended ? If it be said, Reason will tell 
 me so ; I say, 1. This is false. 2. This is again to do that, which 
 is objected to Protestants for such a horrid crime, that is, to build 
 all finally upon reason. 
 
 " If it be said, they are so interpreted by the Catholic church, 
 I demand, whether by the Catholic church be meant that only 
 that is in subordination to the Bishop of Rome; or any other 
 with that, or besides that ? If any other, it is false and impu- 
 dent to pretend that they so understand the Fathers or Scripture. 
 If that only, then this is to say, that that church is infallible, be-
 
 316 APPENDIX. 
 
 cause it may be deduced from Scripture that it is so ; and to 
 prove that it may be deduced from Scripture, because the Fathers 
 say so, and to prove the Fathers do say and mean so, because 
 the church of Rome says they do so. And then what a stir and 
 trouble was here to no purpose ! Why was it not rather said 
 plainly at the beginning The church of Rome is certainly in- 
 fallible, because she herself says so ; and she must say true, 
 because she is infallible I And that is as much as to say, unless 
 you grant me the question, I neither can nor will dispute with 
 you." 
 
 So much for the arguments from Scripture in general. Let 
 us now consider the passages more particularly ; and were we 
 even to allow the Papacy an escape from this circle in which 
 they so weary themselves, and those who seek for the vainly 
 pretended infallibility of their church, yet two things remain to 
 be proved, 1st. That these Scriptures confer upon any church 
 this privilege, that its decrees are to be received as the voice of 
 the Holy Ghost. 2nd. That such privileges, even if conferred, 
 are bestowed upon, or limited to, the Papacy. These two points 
 must be clearly settled. The argument from the first Scripture is, 
 " Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world :" 
 therefore the church of Rome is infallible ! The next, " That 
 the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (the church of 
 Christ) ergo, the church of Rome is infallible ! '* I will pray the 
 Father, (saith our Saviour,) and he shall give another Comforter, 
 that he may abide with the apostles," and, therefore, with their 
 representatives for ever ergo, the church of Rome is infallible ! 
 The last of those Scriptures which " afford sufficient security" for 
 the infallibility of the Papacy, "And the Redeemer shall come 
 
 to Zion" "As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith 
 
 the Lord ; my Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I 
 have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out 
 of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's 
 seed, saith the Lord, henceforth and for ever :" therefore the
 
 APPENDIX. 317 
 
 church of Rome is infallible ! Reader, connect, if you can, the 
 premises and conclusion of these arguments. As well may any 
 other privilege be claimed from these promises as infallibility, 
 unless it be maintained that they with whom Christ is must 
 necessarily be infallible, which proves too rnucli, and therefore, 
 nothing, for he is with " two or three gathered together in his 
 name," and with every believer, as is declared in many Scrip- 
 tures : 4< But ye (little children) have an unction from the Holy 
 One, and ye know all things :" And again, " But the anointing 
 which ye have received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not 
 that any man teach you." Must we conclude, according to 
 Rome's logic, that infallibility is conferred upon all these ? As 
 to the last Scripture, we read large promises to Zion. If so much 
 had been said of Rome, we might, perhaps, be the less surprised 
 at her boasting. Of these assertions may we not ask, " Is it 
 possible she should erect her infallibility upon such a foundation ? 
 \Yere you not first resolved to be infallible, and then catch at 
 anything to prove it?" 
 
 But, if such declarations of Holy Writ contain promises of in- 
 fallibility, then must the Jewish church, to which, beyond all 
 doubt, some of these quoted by Mr. Brown, and others, if pos- 
 sible, greater than these, were made, have been infallible. For, if 
 Christ said to his apostles, " Lo, I am with you always, even 
 unto the end of the world;" did He not promise the Jewish 
 church that (Exod. xxix. 42 46) " he would meet with the 
 children of Israel" that the tabernacle should be sanctified by 
 his glory that he would sanctify Aaron and his sons ? "I will 
 dwell among the children of Israel." Does He not promise Zion 
 thus " This is my rest for ever, here will I dwell ?" Does He 
 not also say, (2 Chron. vii. 16,) " For now I have chosen and 
 sanctified this house, that my name may be there for ever ; and 
 mine eyes and my heart shall be there perpetually" ? Does He 
 not (Jer. xxxiii. 20, 21, 25, 26) make this covenant with Israel 
 and with " the Levites the priests, my ministers," as lasting as his
 
 318 APPENDIX. 
 
 covenant with day and night, so that if the latter were to fail, then 
 should the other ? Does He not, in addition to all this, declare 
 that the " man that will do presumptuously, and will not 
 hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the 
 Lord thy God, even that man shall die?" Deut. xvii. 12. Xow 
 these promises cannot, could not, have failed ; for " God is not a 
 man that he should lie, nor the Son of man that he should re- 
 pent." But the Jewish church apostatized from the faith, and 
 consequently became corrupt in practice. " They (the prophets 
 and priests) err in vision, they stumble in judgment." Isaiah, 
 xxviii. 7. " The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear 
 rule by their means; and my people love to have it so." Jer. 
 v. 31. "And from the prophet even unto the priest, every one 
 dealeth falsely. They have healed also the hurt of the daughter 
 of my people slightly, saying peace, peace, when there is no 
 peace." Jer. vi. 13, 14. And from Jer. ii. 26, 27, it would 
 appear that the Jewish church fell into the same sin as that 
 of the Papacy in the " relative," as they call it, worship of 
 images " As the thief is ashamed when he is found, so is the 
 house of Israel ashamed ; they, their kings, their princes, and 
 their PRIESTS and their PROPHETS, saying to a stock, Thou art 
 my father ; and to a stone, thou hast brought me forth." " But 
 ye (the PRIESTS) are departed out of the way ; ye have caused 
 many to stumble at the law ; ye have corrupted the covenant of 
 Levi, saith the Lord of Hosts." Mai. ii. 8. Such was the tes- 
 timony of God against that church, and especially against its 
 guides, to whom the above promises were made. And when, 
 after solemn deliberation, on several occasions, this same church, by 
 its guides and rulers, proclaimed that Jesus was not the Messiah, 
 it gave further proof of its fallibility. It must then follow, either 
 that such promises did not confer infallibility in their decisions : or 
 that the Lord Jesus was not the Christ ! 
 
 When, then, Mr. Brown, if true to his creed, consigns us to 
 destruction for not believing that the piece of paste made with
 
 APPENDIX. 319 
 
 hands is the body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, and must therefore be adored, the Jew may, with more 
 justice, condemn us for believing in Him who is our only hope. 
 If the Romanist urges that transubstantiation is true, because his 
 church guides have so decreed, the Jew may justify his rejection 
 of Christ Jesus, because his church guides, in council assembled, 
 decreed that He was not the Messiah. Should the Romanist ask, 
 " Am I to set up my opinion against that of such learned men 
 and councils? if the judgment of such cannot be relied upon, 
 what can?" the Jew may, with more justice, urge the same.* 
 
 Upon this infallibility Popery is built. By Popery, I mean not 
 that portion of her faith which she holds in common with us, 
 but that summed up in her new creed of Pope Pius IV. This 
 new and idolatrous creed depends upon their assumed infallibility. 
 And we see that this infallibility cannot be established without 
 arming the Jew with an excuse to continue in his unbelief, and 
 with a lever to overturn Christianity. Let the reader, from this, 
 learn the character of Popery, and beware of thinking lightly of 
 a system which can only be established upon the ruins of the 
 kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 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 infallibility is lodged. 
 But it is all one which opinion we adopt. For we have Popes 
 against Popesf councils against councils councils confirmed 
 
 There is a powerful sermon on this subject by Whitby, to which I 
 acknowledge myself indebted. 
 
 f Pope Gelasius, having heard of some who received the bread only, 
 commanded that all should receive the whole sacrament, bread and wine, or 
 be entirely excluded. Since the days of the Council of Constance, every
 
 320 APPENDIX. 
 
 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 bis church and the church of 
 one age against the church of another 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 deciding controversies, but the Papacy cannot 
 furnish a certain and authorized, much less infallible, commen- 
 tary, 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 ot 
 
 Pope has been pledged to differ with Gelasius, in no less matter than the 
 administration of Christ's sacrament Here we have not only Popes and 
 council against Popes, but in direct opposition to the command of Christ, 
 that all who receive the bread should receive the wine also. Gregory the 
 Great condemned John of Constantinople, comparing his pride in claiming 
 the title of " Universal Bishop," to that of Lucifer : " Whoever," he says, 
 " claims the universal episcopate is the forerunner of Antichrist." His suc- 
 cessor obtained, from the murderer Phocas, this humble title, which has been 
 enjoyed by the Popes to the present day. Here then is one Pope denouncing 
 with all authority the others as Antichrists. There were, at one time, for 
 the space of seventy years, called by some the Babylonian Captivity, two 
 Popes, one at Avignon and the other at Rome, and the Council of Con- 
 stance deposed no less than three (Gregory XIII., Benedict XII., and John 
 XXIII.), and elected Martin V. instead. Sixtus V. and Clement VIII. 
 made, by their contradictions respecting the Vulgate, sad havoc of Papal 
 unity and infallibility. 
 
 But as with Popes so with councils. The scripture asserts, " All Scrip- 
 ture is given for our instruction, and is profitable," &c., and commands us 
 to search them. The Council of Thoulouse most strictly forbids the laity to 
 have the scriptures in the vulgar tongue ; and Trent decrees that, as more 
 harm than good arises, because of the rashness of men, from the perusal of 
 them, the laity should not have them " without a licence," which the Pope 
 and his ministers have always cheerfully granted, and do grant in Spain, 
 Italy, Portugal, and Ireland! The Council of Laodicea condemned the 
 invocation of angels, as a forsaking of the Lord Jesus Christ, and betaking
 
 APPENDIX. 321 
 
 scripture, whereas there are a thousand places of scripture, which 
 you do not pretend certainly to understand, and about the inter- 
 pretation whereof your own Doctors differ among themselves ? 
 If your church be infallibly directed concerning the true meaning 
 of scripture, why do not your Doctors follow her infallible direc- 
 tion? And if they do, how comes such difference among them 
 in their interpretations ? Again : why does your church thus put 
 her candle under a bushel, and keep her talent of interpreting scrip- 
 ture infallibly thus long wrapped up in napkins ? Why sets she 
 not forth infallible commentaries upon all the Bible ? Is it because 
 this would not be profitable to Christians, that scripture should 
 be interpreted ? It is blasphemy to say so : the scripture itself 
 tells us, ' all scripture is profitable,' and the scripture is not so 
 much the words, as the sense thereof; and if it be not pro- 
 fitable, why doth she employ her Doctors to interpret scripture 
 
 to idolatry. Trent and Pope Pius' Creed, not only allow but enjoin this 
 practice as good, profitable, and necessary to salvation. The word of God 
 allows the marriage of the clergy, and declares marriage " honourable in 
 all :" the second Lateran Council condemns it, and declares the married 
 clergy deprived of their benefices. The scripture enjoins respect for an 
 oath : the second Lateran Council declares an oath perjury, if it militate 
 against ecclesiastical utility ! The fourth Lateran Council commands the 
 celebration of divine worship and ministration of the sacraments in the 
 language of the people : the Council of Trent accurses any who should 
 presume tc say that it ought to be celebrated only in the vulgar tongue. 
 The Council of Elvira, in the early part of the fourth century, condemned 
 the worship of images. The Council of Constantinople, A.D. 754, decreed 
 against image worship : the second Council of Nice, 787, decided in favour 
 of this idolatry. In 794, the Council of Frankfort, with 300 bishops, con- 
 demned the decree of the second Nicene Council, and image worship. 
 In 814, at Constantinople, images were condemned. In 842 a Council of 
 Constantinople re-established the decrees of the second Nicene Council, in 
 favour of image worship. In 824, a council at Paris confirmed the decrees 
 of Frankfort against images, and forbad the payment to them of even the 
 lowest degree of worship. A council at Constantinople, in 879, decreed in 
 favour of them, confirmed the second Nicene decrees, and re-estabiished 
 image worship, This idolatry, after so many divisions and wars, became 
 fully established, and continues in Papal countries in full practice to the 
 present hour. But enough of this. It would fill volumes to collect all their 
 differences. Here, then, reader, is unity and infallibility !
 
 322 APPENDIX. 
 
 fallibly ? Unless we must think that fallible interpretations of 
 scripture are profitable, but infallible interpretations would not 
 be so I" 
 
 Nay more: This infallible church has not even favoured us 
 with an authorized version of the Bible ! 
 
 The Council of Trent decreed that the ancient Vulgate should 
 be held as authentic, and yet, in the same degree, gave notice of 
 an edition which was afterwards to be set forth as accurately as 
 possible. As there were various editions of the Vulgate, several 
 persons undertook to provide a correct one : Robert Stephens, 
 John Hentenius, Lucas Brugensis, with the assistance of several 
 other divines of Louvaine, Sixtus V., and Clement VIII. Sixtus 
 declared bis to be that which was the object of inquiry in the 
 Council of Trent, and pronounced such a severe anathema against 
 any person that should presume to alter it, or print any other, 
 that it would not be possible for him to be absolved by any other 
 than the Pope ; and yet, behold, Clement VIII. altered it in no 
 less than two thousand places ! 
 
 Upon these differences in this united and infallible church, 
 Dr. James well remarks : 
 
 ' There is a great controversy between us and the Papists con- 
 cerning the version of Jerome. That Jerome was learned, and 
 that he put forth a vetsion, is received by Protestants and Papists; 
 but what this is, and where it is, is disputed. But let us grant 
 that the edition Papists now use, called the Vulgate, is the same 
 which Jerome handed down ; yet when we have so many of 
 our adversaries acknowledging various editions of the Vulgate, 
 improved and corrected by Stephanus, Hentenius, the Doctors of 
 Louvaine, 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 Louvaine were
 
 APPENDIX. 323 
 
 diligent, (and they certainly were,) what need of the double 
 labour of Sixtus V. ? Some may say, all the other'editions must 
 lie by, and Sixtus V. be received, because he is Pope, and, as 
 such, in a matter of faith, he neither can deceive nor be deceived. 
 But Six/us and Clement are opposed! Sixtus "says, Clement 
 denies, (O concordia discors !) Sixtus put forth his edition to 
 last for ever! (edit, anno 1590.) In 1592, Clement VIII. pub- 
 lished a new edition, so contrary to Sixlus, that you ivould )iot 
 know it to be the same ! Which must be received which 
 believed ?" 
 
 Reader ! do then consider Rome's absurdity in proclaiming 
 herself infallible, because the scriptures say so, and that the 
 scriptures say so, because she, to whom it belongs to declare 
 what is scripture, and to fix its sense, declares that they do say 
 so. Consider that the scriptures, which she brings forward, 
 prove nothing for her infallibility, or that of any other church, 
 unless we make the Jewish church infallible, and thereby destroy 
 the Christian faith. Consider, that although this infallibility is 
 pretended to preserve unity, that yet itself is the apple of 
 discord the bone of contention the cause of great division. 
 Consider her distracted and divided communion, but a very slight 
 sketch of which is given above. Consider that she has never 
 furnished an infallible or authorized commentary on scripture ; 
 that she has not even sent forth an authorized version of the 
 Bible, but in this, as in other points, one party, infallible party, 
 contending with another ! Consider that her whole system is 
 built upon this infallibility, and say, Has not Mr. Brown done 
 much for the Christian world, when he assures us that "sufficient 
 security is given for resting with confidence upon the doctrinal 
 decisions 1 ' of the Papacy. 
 
 T. C. SavUl, Printer, 107, St. Martin's Lane.
 
 \ g 
 
 i 1 
 
 
 %Mnv3-jo 
 
 ^ 
 
 S I 
 
 I i 
 
 S S5 
 
 
 \UFOBto 
 
 ^X t- g 
 
 ^1 s 
 
 . \V\E-UNIVERS//,
 
 -M I 5 
 
 E-UNIVER% A 
 
 3 f 
 
 1 I 
 
 I *. 
 
 
 I \ 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 A 000 035 353 2 
 
 UBRARYQ^ 
 
 JI7S I 
 
 
 . <s 
 
 oe 
 
 2- Sf 
 
 s ^ 
 
 I 1 
 
 s 
 
 o 
 
 
 EUNIVER 
 
 
 N 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 N >;lOS-ANCElfj> 
 
 13DNV 
 
 s > 
 
 '- s' ' + jr? &'"*& 
 
 ^AHVMIH^ y <?Aavaa!H^ 
 
 LIBRARY^ 
 ' 
 
 
 OdlWD-W 
 
 A\\E -UNIVERto) 
 
 ^clOS-ANCElfj^ ^E- 
 
 "^ ij 
 
 I 3 
 
 1 
 I ?/ 
 
 ? V 
 
 S> \, 2>