MA S TER NEGA TIVl NO. ^1106 /^ MICROFILMED 1993 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK „ as part of the Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" Funded by the NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyri States Coa ' ' law of the United States - Title 17, United concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are author ized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or other reproduciion - not to be 'used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research, it a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction - c irpost s excess of "fair use, that user may be liabit oi p i infringement. This institution reserves the right tc c ujse to accept a copy order it in its judgement, fulfillmt r ♦he order would involve violation of the copy ight la .. A W 7 TITLE: THE VIA PLACE: LONDON DA ^E: 1838 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARCFT Master Negative # Restrictions on Use: Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliographic Record . 1 ' » s I uMiMMaai H .-cJ.,-, -Sttorj-' DLj s mavnbe.r ot Oxford convocsli London 1838. 0. ion. S3 P' t of a vol, of /jarnphlets. TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA FILM SIZE:__3_^^_^ IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA DATE FILMED:__2_j,2: IIA) IB IIB REDUCTION RATIO: ^/X INITIALS ^ '^'C HLMEDBY: RESEARCH PI JBLICATION.q , INC WOOnRRmnF7 rT' c Association for Information and Image Management 1100 Wayne Avenue. Suite 1100 Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 301/587-8202 Centimeter 1 2 3 iiniiiiiiiiiiiniiliiiili ii nil Inches 1 .0 I.I 1.25 8 lll|llllllllliilmillllllllllllliiliiiil 1^ 1*0 IS. 9 Liii 10 2.8 3.6 4.0 1.4 ITT 2.5 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.6 n J 12 mi 13 T mmm TTT 15 m m MfiNUFflCTURED TO fillM STflNDRRDS BY fiPPLIED IMfiGE, INC. Kb. 7. THE VIA MEDIA; OR, ANGLICAN ORTHODOXY. BY A MEMBER OF OXFORD CONVOCATION. " The question is, what is that . . . which is neither Protestant nor Roman, but proceeds according to that via media, which, as in other things, so here is the appropriate path for Sons of the English Church."— Newman's Prophetical Office of the Church, p. 8. " The middle path, adopted by the English Church, cannot be so easily mastered by the mind."— Rev. John Newman's Lectures on Proplietical Office, p. 153. " The time was, not long since, when many of these points appeared to us as mere historical curiosities which we should gladly, if we might, have taken on trust."— Keble's Sermon on Primitive Tradition, p. 5. LONDON : JAMES RIDGWAY & SONS, 169, PICCADILLY. MDCCCXXXVIir. itu'?»i?*:vi.wBS'i i^ '••3?'''^'w^^?y^""''''^ jr*s^^S{ CONTENTS. Latitudinarian Via Media stated.— A glimpse at Via- media Anglica, sive Orthodoxis — Oxoniensis—Neanthro- pica. — The question at issue between the two parties declared to hinge upon moral evidence,— Such moral evi- dence as is adduced by the Viamedians briefly examined. — The old Viamedian race characterized, and compared with the new or Neanthropic race. — Peculiar views of history entertained by the latter hinted at. The Reader drawn apart, and his opinion asked with regard to prof- ferred theories. — The Author, and the Reader, return together to the Via. — Ingenious method of instruction described. — Historical deductions of the Viamedians, not always logically drawn, or fairly stated. — This ex- emplified by the history of Creeds, Liturgies, and by the doctrinal testimony of primitive Christian Fathers. — The great Viamedian historical curiosity. — An affectionate leave-taking with many heart-felt thanks.— Objectors to the preceding expose objected against. Concluding re- marks addressed to the world in general, but more especially to my Lord of — — . 4- ""• THE VIA MEDIA- While it is contended by the Independents, that because Christ's kingdom is not of this world, every society acknowledging Christ as its head, should, in ecclesiastical matters, be indepen- j p . ., ^ Latitudinarian cent ot civil government ; and that. Church au- via Media thority having ceased, private judgment, in inter- ' preting Scripture, may lawfully be exercised ; it is argued, on the other hand, that the control of Christian society, as well in points of discipline as of doctrine, is a part of Christianity itself— that such control has rested, from the first, with an hereditary body of authorised ministers — that with them a sacred trust has been deposited, to preserve integrity of faith and uniformity of practice — that these are pre- served by the Church of England and /ler authorised ministers — and that, therefore, it is the duty of a Christian government to uphold and support such a church. "f A glimpse at Via Media Anglica. These are the extreme parties. Between these, a considerable portion of the more highly educated classes is to be found. They agree with the In- dependent view of private judgment, but they, in other points, believe, that the views of both the above-mentioned parties spring from a common error — that of confounding Christianity as it respects the individual, with Christianity as it respects our social state. As regards the conduct of man in this life, and his hopes of salvation in another, they contend, that our religion is immutable, eternal, universal. As regards the mode in which a saving doctrine is to be learned, or the machinery by which religion is to be conducted, it has varied, say they, and ever will vary, according to the social and intellectual condition of different ages and coun- tries. This is the popular Via Media or, as it is reproachfully called, Latitudinarianism. The Via Media of Oxford and of the English Church, is altogether another matter. It hangs in some imaginary limbo, between Latitudi- narianism and Romanism, u e, between, though certainly not midway between, sense and nonsense. A Church either has divine authority, and is, con- sequently, an infallible teacher, or it has not. The orthodox Anglican Church has, and has not. Her divine authority is a kind of modified infallihility, and that of so modest a nature, as not, in her opinion, to require a shadow of proof. J J ^,. Some have imagined the academic Via to be altogether a new fabric ; others have believed it to be very Romanism. It is Romanism, merely in the observance of a few Roman practices, and those not of the most attractive description ; as, for instance*, fasting. With regard to doctrine, it is the Anglican Via itself: by no means, a newly made, but merely a newly mended. Via ; and that, by a very clumsy set of workmen. It is, in fact, the identical dark old passage, in which, for the last two or three centuries, those amongst our divines have been groping their way, whose trade and profession it has been, to hunt out arguments in favour of Church authority. Owing to certain recent occurrencesf, there has been, within the few last years, a most unusual excitement among the inhabitants of the Via. Most of them had dropped into a tolerably sound slumber. They were enjoying the fruit of past labours. The disciples received the faith, i. e, whatever they pleased to tell them. Suddenly the note of alarm was sounded. Many * However primitive may be the practice of fasting, it is at least not, in the present day, a practice of the Anglican Church — but one of those Apostolical customs not deemed necessary to salvation. *' For," remarks Mr. Palmer, {Eng, Ritual.Yol II., p. 16,) » those Apostolical customs, which are " not necessary to salvation, may be suspended, or abrogated by the successors of the Apostles, if there be good reason " for doing so." t The Catholic Relief and Parliamentarv Reform Bflls. 6 of the orthodox tribe had fled : and those who re- mained, were quarrelling amongst themselves. At the same moment the enemy appeared at the gates, loudly demanding a surrender. In the midst of this general confusion, three or four intrepid, but not veteran, champions, deter- mined to make a stand. They recruited with all possible diligence. " Our very foundations are ' laid bare V cried one of them. " Such troublers ' of our community," (said anotherf) " would, in ' a healthy state of things, be silenced ... but ' our times, from whatever cause, being times of ' confusion, we are reduced to the use of argu- ' merit and disputationr " Search the archives," exclaimed all. « What," echoed the last men- tioned leader, " is the nearest approximation to that primitive truth, which Ignatius and Poly- carp enjoyed, and which the nineteenth century has lostt ?" Now this being in the Viamedian tongue, it will be necessary, for the benefit of gen- eral readers, to render it into plain English ; which would run thus :— The nineteenth century, is a " fallen and corrupt" age, in short the most irre- ligious age that ever existed; because it will not believe what we say, without some kind of intelligible proof. The Bible, we fear, no where in express terms states, that the Anglican is the * Keble's Sermon on Primitive Tradition, p. 6. t Newman's Introduction to Lectures on Rom. and Pop. Prot, compared, p. 5. + Newman, ibid. €i 6i (( ± i*> true Church ; but, perhaps, Ignatius or Polycarp does so ; or if not, then Chrysostom or Jerome ; or, perhaps, these say, that somebody told them it was so. Perhaps, for instance, TertuUian (a sectarian to be sure, himself) has recorded that some old man, who, contrary to his advice*, had married a second wife, had been told by her, that her first husband had been informed by another man's very old wife, that her grand- mother had heard St. Paul say, it was the true Church. This would be triumphantly conclu- sive ; for this is — Tradition. But, mildly remarks some austere Academic, (for remember, reader, we are within the very Via itself) this is not what we mean ; besides, you are joking about serious subjects. What you mean, I reply, it is not always very easy to understand ; but one thing I do believe — you mean well : there is about you, an engaging naivete and enthusiasm, which puts this out of all question. You have paved your Via, after the pattern of a much worse place, with good intentions. This is the only serious part of your case. So far, I admit that I have been joking on serious subjects ; and, to make amends, I will now be serious on very serious matters, which you have treated in joke : for to persevere in claiming authority from a divine source, with- out even approaching towards any reasonable * See TertuUian, de Monogamia. f Nature of moral evi- dence. 8 proof of such authority— this, the nineteenth century, the faUen and corrupt age, does indeed deem strictly ludicrous. You urge, and very justly, that the questions at issue hinge upon moral, not demonstrative, evi- dence ; and you truly remark, that the nature of such evidence is to produce conviction upon the individual himself, without affording him the absolute power of convincing others. Thus Christianity itself, depending, as it does, upon an overwhelming accumulation of such evidence, may be rationally believed, and yet not demon- strated. This, you contend is your case. You are convinced, say you, and therefore you are right— here is your non sequitur. What then is right ? What is truth ? demands some skilful querist. Moral truth, I answer, as distinct from that of demonstration, or of the senses, is not positive, but relative ; that is, the question of whether it be admitted as truth or not, must depend upon the state of mind of the receiver. Some believe upon no evidence at all; others refuse to believe after the fullest evidence. The question then resolves itself into this ; namely, what shall be deemed full, or reasonable, moral evidence? and this question must be decided by each individual mind, in each particular case. Do ijou then, in my reader's opinion, produce reasonable moral evidence of your claims ? This is my case; and if you do not admit that it I 9 is a fair one, you must also admit, that there is no such thing as reason. But no : you do not deny the existence of reason, for you have felt its sharp edge sensibly. R^son is an edge-tool, which, whether in your own hands, or in those of others, has invariably wounded you. In order to shew that this remark is not altogether unfounded, let us examine your positions. You claim to be, as successors of the Apostles, the sole divinely authorised interpreters of doctrine, and ministers of the sacrament ; and, in support of this Evidence of claim, you adduce one* text of Scripture (St. t^^l^ tl Matthew's Gospel, c. xxviii., 20,) of which, the best ^^^"^^^^"^• you can say is this— that it possibly may mean, what you so ardently desire it should mean. Now, I would not absolutely assert it as a self-evident axiom, but it certainly does ap- pear to me— that those portions of Holy Writ which most nearly concern us, are also the plainest and most intelligible. Could it be otherwise, with a revelation, mercifully intended to chasten, to instruct, to redeem ? Supposing, therefore, such to be the case, which it would be presumptuous positively to, assert, I ask you this— Would the Saviour, had he deemed it a matter of importance * The other texts occasionally cited, as 2 Tim. v. 2J^, and John XX. 21, are, as far as an ever-continuing succession is concerned, totally irrelevant. 1 10 to man, that there should be preserved throughout all ages a lineal Apostolical succession, have ex- pressed himself in the following words, addressed to the Apostles ? " Lo I am with you always, " even unto the end of the world." If yours be the true interpretation of this text, I can only say, that it affords, according to the guide of reason (which, remember, is a guide afforded to man by the Deity himself), a very remarkable exception, to that strong internal evidence of divine origin, which our Scriptures, in every other instance, carry within themselves. For, to what does it reduce us but this ? that, even could you prove, not merely as you pretend to do, by your text, that an Apostolical succession was divinely and immutably instituted— but, that according to the positive fact of Mr. Palmer*, " there is not a Bishop, Priest, or " Deacon, amongst us, who cannot, if he pleases, " trace his own spiritual descent from St. Peter " and St. Paul"_To what, I say, would the very perfecting of such reasoning carry you, but to the conclusion, that orthodox Christianity was never intended for mankind in general, but for a select few, impurely tayght, as many millions have been, and ever will be, by t"nchirotonized ministers.' In return for your text of Scripture, I will, ♦ English Ritual, Vol. II., p. 249. t X..forov.,,, a word signifying that act of ordination, which IS performed by imposition of hands. 11 in due time, remind you of two passages from the earliest Fathers, which, while they distinctly prove, that Apostolical succession was at the first, in their opinion, and even in that of the Apostles, of great value, also inform us why, and for what reasons, it was so; which reasons do not apply now. At the same time, these Fathers who, on various occasions, treat you with much less respect and affection than you bestow upon them, are most vexatiously silent as to the divine origin and institution of the succession, which they place altogether on the footing of expediency. What other proof, then, is offered of Church authority ? Tradition ; which we are to understand, first, of primitive custom and practice ; secondly, of doctrine conveyed in ancient creeds, decrees of councils, or works of Christian Fathers, which have, like the inspired Scriptures, transmitted to us in a written form, what was originally commu- nicated orally. This traditionary testimony is asserted to be a " deposit," in the keeping of the Apostolical Church ; and this, say the Viamedians, is the true key to the interpretation of Scripture. Now if tradition be alleged as evidence of practice, it is historically good, but establishes no divine ori- gin of a practice. Thus, for instance, the primitive custom of observing Sunday, is faithfully recorded 1 12 by tradition. But if the same evidence be applied to doctrine, the case is widely different. Doctrine must be expressed in language. While such lan- guage continues oral, it will be subject, unless inspired, to continual variation. Nothing uniform can, by such a means as this, be transmitted in language. The early Christians felt this, and there- fore, as soon as they possessed Scripture, they ap- pealed* to that as the best evidence. Uninspired doctrinal tradition, gives us the mere opinions of men ; and that, unless committed to writing by a fellow-labourer of the Apostles, through the most vague and fluctuating medium. If it be contended that our doctrinal tradition is inspired, where is the proof? Credat Judaeus— such a notion is strictly Jewishf, It might perhaps allure a Jew to embrace Christianity, but it will never persuade any reason- able Christian, that the Church of England is ApostoHcal. It is clear, in short, that if we would prove the substance of any existing Scripture to be divine, we must show that the very language itself w as inspired. Thus far I have elbowed my way somewhat brusquely along the Via Media. I have often visited it before, in its better days. Formerly it was full of old drowsy divines, who based our Church authority * Iren^us, Refutation of False Knowledge, B. II., p. 45. t See JosuuA Van Oven's Manual of Judaism, p. ^Q, X \ t 13 upon the Jewish Theocracy, or upon the divine right* of kings : till some one kindly hinted, that the latter argument would hold equally good of Mahomedanism, or any other religion whatever. At that time there were amongst them many plea- sant spirits. They wrote nonsense occasionally; but then, like men of sense, they knew that they did so ; and they did not imagine the rest of man- kind much worse than themselves. Now the scene is sadly changed. On first entering, you would fancy yourself in the Frontisterium of some Athenian sophist, so fast are they spinning their subtleties ; and so intimate a part of their learning, does their own technical phraseology, constitute. But the Eroteticf method soon reduces them to silence. * There has been of late much dispute in the Via, as to whether that covetable commodity called divine right, belongs to the Church, or to the Crown. Two divine rights, or even going halves in one, would be inconvenient, and might lead to contention. Dr. Pusey, on the last 5th of November, dis- tinctly contended, that the divine right of kings {Qy. queens also ?) is somewhere ; though he could not exactly tell where. All the clue I can afford him is, that there was no mention of it amongst Crown property, at the commencement of this session of parliament. Query, what Mr. Palmer's divine permission may be ? {Eng, Ritual, Vol. II., p. 275.) Doubtless, some highly mysterious and esoteric doctrine ; to which, Mr. Newman would admit, as a privilege, the compe- tentes, electi, or (puri^oixevoi. See Newman's Avians, p. 48. t If the reader will momentarily call to mind the part which Socrates plays, in those highly dramatic dialogues of 14 ' II 15 Such a horror have they of interrogation, that over the entrance is written, 'ASK NO QUESTIONS/ And the sum of their reasoning consists in this, WE ARE RIGHT, AND YOU ARE WRONG. At this moment, the Via is crowded with young enthusiasts, who never presume to argue ; except, against the propriety of arguing at all. Our learned Churchmen, I am credibly informed, dare not, for pure shame, show their face amongst them. We however, being strictly incognito, will take a turn in the said Via, and discuss at our leisure, and as mere historical curiosities, some of those topics which the disciples receive as self-evident axioms. According to these disciples, it is self-evident, that our creeds, our liturgy, and our form of eccle- siastical government, are those of primitive Catho- licity — which points, if proved, would afford them nothing more than precedents. The main feature of the controversy between us and the Anglican Church, is, in fact, independent of such an argu- ment. She claims divine authority : we demand proof; which she cannot produce. As far as argument goes, this is the sum total of the case. When, therefore, Mr. Keble sighs* for those Plato, severally entitled, Protagoras — Gorgias — as well as tlie dialogue between Socrates and Aristodemus in Xenoplion's Memorabilia, the application here intended will be inevitably recognised. * See Title Page. halcyon days, in which Church antiquities were regarded as mere historical curiosities, he sighs rationally. But whose fault is it, that they are not so now ; his or ours ? Those matters are, in fact, only immediately related to our subject, in so far as they have been mystified, and falsified, by the Viamedians. The truth is, as I will presently place definitely before the reader, that neither our creeds, nor our liturgy (except where these repeat the very words of Scripture), nor our Church government, are primitive. Of Creeds and Liturgies, indeed, it may be most seriously doubted whether there ever was such a thing as primitive Catholicity: and uniform as the model of primitive Church government un- doubtedly was, it by no means, (except in the mere nomenclature of one or two offices*), resembled our Anglican system. Mr. Newman tells me, that if I say so, I should, in a healthyf state of the community, be silenced, or put out of it ; by which, perhaps, he means — excommunicated ; a threat, contingent indeed, yet how awful ! But a friendly Sibyll whispers in my ear, Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito. I will first, however, invite my reader to step * The title, for instance, of Bishops has been preserved, while the ofiice itself has essentially lost, altogether, its pri- mitive character. •}• Introduct. to Lectures^ p. 5. 16 17 aside with me for a few moments, that I may have the opportunity of asking him, out of the reach of Viamedian ears, whether he would agree with me, as to the following theories on two questions, upon which, we and the aforesaid Viamedians are at variance. The first, respecting the rigkt, of perhaps rather the duty, of private judgment in the interpretation of revelation ; and the second, respecting the value of Apostolic succession : for, upon these two questions mainly turns the subject of our controversy, i. e. Church authority. There are three supposeable modes of inter- preting to man the divine will, whether written or unwritten : — first, inspiration ; secondly, au- thority, either infallible, as claimed by the Private Judg- Romish Church, or that derived from historical testimony, which is insisted upon by the Anglican Church. (For the latter Church does not contend for inherent authority, but merely for such as she pretends to trace to a divine source through tradition.) Thirdly, private judgment. Now, that inspiration, in aid of interpreting texts, or expounding doctrine (as distinct either from divine aid towards holiness of conduct, or towards chastening and preparing the mind for the re- ception of truth) has ceased, I will assert ; first, because all signs from heaven, in evidence of such a gift, are nowhere apparent, and therefore, the claimants to inspiration can be borne out by their assertion merely ; secondly, because, owing ment. to the continual variance between the pseudo- inspired themselves, they are involved in the following most revolting absurdity-namely, that two or more discordant opinions may be equally true. With the exception, therefore, of the above- mentioned claimants (who are comparatively few and unimportant), men are generally agreed, that no hope of aid, as a guide to interpretation, can be entertained from inspiration. We view in- spiration as an appointed means of cherishing Christianity in its infancy; at a time, when teaching was mainly, in some cases perhaps, entirely, oral : and when Anti-Christian prophets, taking advantage of the helplessness of the con- verts, were springing up on every side. There remain, therefore, two only modes of interpreting Scripture, Church authority, and private judgment. The infallible authority claimed by Rome, is liable to these serious objections :— it effectually destroys, as well individual responsibility, as any real kind of beHef ; for belief, although it may not depend upon reason alone, cannot exist without reason. Even a miracle is an appeal to reason, through the senses : and I believe it r )uld be difficult to prove, that the Deity, ha. at any time called upon man to assent, without reasonable evidence. Now this is precisely what the Anglican Church does, as I have already shown, require. The Anglican Church, I again assert, cannot rest c 18 her authority on historical testimony evidencing primitive and Catholic faith, because, even granting that she could show us distinctly, that such or such a belief was both Catholic and primitive, she cannot, by such testimony as she produces, trace such faith to a divine source. She cannot, in short, exclusively of the Scripture, show us anywhere the very language of inspiration. To what, then, does the question of private judgment come, but to a case of mere expe- diency ? It is a question of man against man ; or, if you please, of a body, i. e, a Church, against an individual. The great Academic oracle upon this subject, seems, at last, to be driven to some such conclusion as this ; for, says he, " all* may search Scripture, and deter- " mine, or prove their Creed from it ; that is, " provided they are duly qualified." I doubt not in the least, that the Exclesia — Anglica — Orthodoxis — Oxoniensis — Neanthropica, would, in the low condition of her present authorized finances, most gladly accept the office of deter- mining, upon this exclusive principle, who should, or should not, be fit for such a privilege. But what does, in fact, determine this question ? for private judgment is by no means, as some sup- pose, indiscriminately attempted. There is a ♦ Newman's Prophetical Office of the Church, p. 174. ^ » V \ T 19 check somewhere. The question to determine is — where that check does, and where it ought to, exist. Is it not evident that the relative mental power of each individual, compared with that of his fellow-creatures, does, in fact, either restrain or excite, as the case may happen, the exercise of our judgment in interpretation of Scripture ? If, for instance, a poor or illiterate man should attempt to expound a difficult text, would he not quickly be an object of derision to his neigh- bours ? Momentary instances may, indeed, occur to the contrary, but such would be the sure and general tendency of the check of public opinion. To fear mischief, therefore, from private judg- ment under this wholesome check, is like dreading the progress of democracy in a state of society where no violence is attempted. Do not men see, that in both cases the power is at once the cause, and the vindicator of the right? Our uncontrolled assumption of the right of private judgment, evidences that we have not merely the power, but also (a most material circumstance) the will. Where, then, is the presumption with which we, the Latitudinarians, are so frequently taunted ? In the breast of that individual who, with a will to discover truth, humbly endeavours, according to the means he possesses, to discern it for himself; or — in that Church, which not only presumes to control individuals, but to ex- (< (( 20 elude from the pale of orthodoxy, all other public faiths ? I agree with Mr. Newman* — " in truth she is a Church beside herself; or, rather, she may be said to resemble a demoniac." I now come to the consideration of my second point ; namely, the Latitudinarian, or rational theory of Apostolical succession. I will grant, as a mere matter of heraldry, that the succession has uninterruptedly been preserved. The fundamental point at issue, namely — whether an Apostolical ordination was divinely t instituted, and whether its continu- ance was designed, would still remain un- touched. Scripture, as we have seen, does not afford any very convincing proof of divine appoint- ment : but both Scripture, and the primitive Fathers, evidence, that, at the very first, a lineal apostolical succession was, as a matter of ex- pediency, regarded of great moment. In a letter of undoubted genuineness, composed, at their own request, for the Corinthian Chris- tians, and with the express object, not merely of settling disputed points of faith, but of advising who should be their rulers, Clement of Rome reminds them, that the Apostles, foreseeing how contentions would arise, had appointed as Bishops * Prophetical Office of the Church,^. 101. t For a very curious specimen of reasoning on this subject, see Palmer's English Ritual, Vol. II., p. 254. ▼ . • i T 21 their immediate disciples, and had ordained* that after them there should be another, L e. apparently one more succession! . Why did these contentions arise ? in what age of the Church most violently ? and whence the value, at the very first, of an Apostolical succession ? These questions can be satisfactorily answered, only, by a reference to the state of society during the primitive Christian Church. This Church was composed of different societies, distant from each other, and at first communicating only with dif- ficulty, and occasionally. A very few manuscript copies of a Gospel, together with perhaps one or two Apostolical Epistles addressed to their par- ticular society, was the sum of their written Theology. Even had each individual, laboured with singleness of purpose, to preserve the truth, the mis- conceptions necessarily attendant upon a communi- cation mainly oral, would have defeated their efforts. But such was very far from being the case ; • Neither Clement nor Irenaeus, who lived about a century later, (A. D. 180) contend, that apostolical succession was of divine appointment. avTum. They (the Apostles) appointed the above mentioned, and assigned successors who should follow them, that when they fell asleep, men of approved character might take up their ministry. 22 several spurious Gospels (as we know by the testi- mony of the Fathers of the second century) were composed during the first age. Which, it would be inquired, were the true Gospels? And how, would the first Converts ask, without perusing with our own eyes the genuine records, can we be cer- tain of the facts and doctrine they contain ? Such perplexing questions could be solves , only by an appeal to an immediate or lineal* successor of the first teachers. Hence the value attached to the opinion of Clement, the fellow-labourer of Paul. Hence also, his epistle, although never perhaps regarded as inspired, continued yet to be read in the Church of Corinth for a period of more than eighty years. If such be the doctrines of Latitudinarians, with regard to private judgment, and the authority of teachers; if they regard both the interpretation of Scripture, and the appointment of ministers, to be matters providentially left to mankind ; if, in short, they destroy the basis upon which our Anglican Church now rests, what system of social Christianity, it may be asked, will they, in their wisdom, substitute for it? * Irenseus enjoins apostolical succession on grounds different from those taken by St. Clement. It would seem, that, between the age of Clement and Irenapus, Scripture had been diffused. The latter, therefore, insists on the succession, with a view of maintaining the genuineness and purity of the text. ^ • T 23 Some common *creed, some common form of prayer, and some kind of Church government, must there, of necessity, be, amongst Christians in general, or amongst different societies of Christians ; and the wider the basis of such machinery, the more comprehensive — the more national, in short, the scheme— the better will such a scheme suit the intended purposes. This, I apprehend, to be precisely the Latitudinarian doctrine. We contend for a scheme which, since to include all would be impossible, should ap- proach the nearest to such a union. Such would truly be a national Church, of which the present Anglican establishment is a mere pretence. My Latudinarian reader, who has accompanied me on an expedition to a far distant land, would, I well know, gladly listen to me, while I argued, that our subtle doctrinal controversies, our logo- machies, or fights about words, rather after the pattern of a Greek sophist, than a disciple of the Saviour, are, in fact, the main stumbling block to * It by no means, of necessity, follows, that a publicly inculcated belief should be commensurate with the inward belief of individuals; but rather the contrary. Apparently, in primitive times, it was not so ; nor can it ever be so, un- less the entire scope of faith be included within the province of reason, which is impossible. Nor, again, unless the precise point where the revelation of God ceases, and the inferences of man begin, could be palpably marked. }■ 24 unity. But why should I urge this ? This truth has been generally stated, and minutely illustrated, by a pious Christian* and an able scholar, whom childish malignity has persecuted, but whom time, in his calmest and most dignified mood, will avenge. But listen ! I hear a shout from within the Via — "Anathema Maranatha Exorciso vos *' atq. Exccmmunico ;" which, in plain English, means — " perdition seize you, both here and " hereafter." And this ill-bred remark, reminds me, that the historical curiosities of Via Media were to have engaged our attention. The Viamedian doctors constantly attempt, not indeed to assert (for that they dare not), but to Historical ^^P^Y^ that our creeds and our liturgy are primi- VifMedir^ ^^^^' ^"^ consequently divine. This historical curiosity, or self-evident axiom, constitutes an essential part of the received faith ; and the fol- lowing is the ingenious method by which so desirable a conviction is produced upon the young disciple. The doctor or teacher progresses in a circular direction round the point at issue, till he returns precisely to the spot from whence he set out. Meanwhile the pupil is placed with his back to the said point, his eyes being rivetted on the master. Thus an impression is created upon the soft wax of an unformed mind, which after- wards becomes incorporated, as it were, with the * Dr. Hampden. / 25 mind itself, and is with great difficulty eradicated. But let us sift the case with these sophists. In the first place, it is not true, that because a matter of Christian belief, or practice, is proved primi- tive, therefore it would be necessarily of divine origin. Nor, again, does it by any means follow, that because a belief or practice existed amongst the Apostles, or their immediate successors, there- fore it was Catholic : for we find that on some points they were unsettled amongst themselves. Suppose, therefore, it be fairly proved, that some creed or custom was primitive, neither does it follow that it was Catholic, nor that its source was divine. If, however, primitive Catholicity were predi- cated merely of custom or practice, I would readily admit, that such evidence as we possess on this subject, goes rather to prove the affirmative than the negative. But if the same Catholicity be asserted of doctrine, such assertion is made in the very teeth of facts. Take the history of the three first centuries, within which period the term primitive, in its widest sense, is included ; and what discrepancies do we discover? The Creed of Irenseus, for instance, differs from that of TertuUian, in the ratio of our present Apostles and Nicene Creeds. The Apostles' Creed was recited, as we shall presently more distinctly perceive, with various clauses in various Churches. In the very I 1/ } i 26 earliest age, indeed, Creeds were so far from being promulgated or enforced, that they were not even written. And, the further we pursue onward, the history of doctrine, the more shall we perceive how intangible a substance is primitive doctrinal Cath- olicity. Through whatever age we pursue it, it is a phantom which eludes our grasp, or a fleeting cloud of ever-varying hue. Thus, the divinity* of the Holy Ghost is nowhere even surmised by Clement of Rome, and can be but faintly, and by laborious inferences, deduced from Poly carp or Ignatius. The denial of this doctrine by the Arians and the Sabellians in the fourth century^ first brought the question in a definite shape before the Christian world ; and in the year 325 about 300 bishops met in council at Nicaea, not to pro- nounce at once, that the present Orthodox doctrine had ever been the Catholic Christian faith, but to * I trust the reader will not understand me, as arguing against the Divinity of the Holy Spirit, but merely as giving a history of the doctrine. Still farther be it from me to imply, that the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, which inevitably fol- lows from the admission of such Divinity, is a matter of no practical import to Christians. All that 1 contend for, is this — that these awful mysteries, neither were made matters of logi- cal and dogmatic reasoning in the primitive Church, nor ought to be thus treated (as they most irreverently have been) by each successive age of Scholastic Divines. The mystery of the Godhead is, lowly meditation's holy ground, upon which impotent, yet arrogant reason, should scarcely dare to tread. <4 I » 27 investigate by a comparison of their different Creeds, whether such actually had been the case. This further circumstance also should be distinctly borne in mind ; that, the object of their council, convened as it was, by Constantine himself, was not purely a religious one. Christianity had already become the establii^hed religion of the empire ; and the Arians were to be condemned, not solely as dissenters from Catholic doctrine, but as disturbers of the commonwealth. And here, I apprehend, will be found the true key to all subsequent religious controversy. In primitive times, points of ab- struse doctrine were not dogmatically enforced. Clement, Ignatius, and Irenseus (as will presently be distinctly exemplified), insist upon more simple topics— but the moment the state and religion are connected, it becomes the personal interest of one set of men to triumph over another. The idea that the primitive Fathers insisted upon all our modern Anglican tenets, is purely visionary ; and the abortive attempts of our divines, to torture them into taking some definite part, upon every question affecting the Trinity, only shows, how im- possible it is for a political Churchman to feel and comprehend the simple and unsophisticated spirit of primitive Christianity. If, Mr. Newman tells me, that the earliest Fathers of course, thought as he does, but that they were unwilling to publish or enforce their Creed ; I can only reply that, until ■r 28 he developes more palpably* the doctrines taught in the Catechetical schools, I shall continue to draw my inferences, not from what they might have thought, but from what they have recorded. At the same time I would beg to suggest, that the modesty of not publishing or enforcing an abstruse doctrinal system, is a bright example of primitive habits, which he would do well, with all convenient speed, to follow. That there was, therefore, such a thing as strict uniform primitive doctrinal Catholicity, and that such Catholicity was the same thing with Anglican doctrine, are matters rather fitted for "self-evident axioms," or "plain and boldf state- " ments," than for proof. The Viamedian estimate of historical testi- mony, is no less a curiosity, than their reasonings on primitive Catholicity. According to the Via- medians, the earlier testimony is, throughout all ages, and in all circumstances, better than the later, i. e. that the less that is written or thought upon any subject, the more we know about it. Now, what I will most distinctly dare to con- tend is this — that whether there were such a thing * History of Arianst p. 48. f Mr. Palmer (^EnglUh Ritual^ Vol. II., p. 253,) fearlessly asserts ; that " The true and orthodox bishops and pastors, " teach those doctrines, which the Catholic Church has taught " in all ages from the beginning," I 29 as an absolutely uniform Apostolic doctrine or not, those who lived prior to the general diffusion of the inspired word, were, unless under the constant eye of an inspired teacher, in a far more unfavour- able position for ascertaining such doctrine, than they who lived afterwards— Again, they who lived prior to the establishment of the genuineness of the canon, than they who lived subsequently to that period — Again, they who lived before written histories of councils, than they who lived in a later age — Lastly, they who enjoy the printed word, the printed history of councils and Christi- anity, the printed comments of all ages, are best of all able to determine primitive doctrine and discipline. It is a strange mistake to suppose that the earliest evidence, even if written, is always the best: the fact is, that unless it be either inspired or contemporary evidence, it often is not so : and whether it be so or not, will much depend upon the attainments of the writer. Will any one in these days discard Lingard or Hallam, and gravely sit down to Geoffroy of Monmouth, Gildas, or Nennius ? Will any one, again, who studies the early history of Rome, rely rather on Livy than on Nieburh ? Is it not plain, that, in matters involved in the obscurity of antiquity, it is out of the accumulated investigations of suc- cessive ages, that the nearest approach to the truth is made ? 30 Having thus cleared away some of the mists which, owing to Viamedian industry, yet hang about the subjects of primitive Catholicity, and the value of traditionary evidence, let us proceed briefly to examine the history of creeds and liturgies, not as questions affecting clerical autho- rity, not again as mere historical curiosities, but as subjects deeply interesting to the whole Christian world. In some minds great mystifica- tion yet exists even in these points ; which have, at various times, been much simplified for the ignorant. By some, for instance, it may, for aught I know, be yet believed, that The Apostles' Creed was actually the composition of the twelve. A Treatise, which long passed for a work of Ambrose, Archbishop of Milan, describes the imaginary proceeding graphically — " Duodecim " Apostoli velut periti artifices in unum conve- " nientes, clavem suo consilio conflaverunt, clavem enim quamdam ipsum Symbolum (the Creed) dixerim per quod referantur diaboli tenebrse, " ut lux Christio adveniat." This point being thus authentically established, but a step was required to prove, that, supposing the Creed divided into twelve parts, each part might be assigned to a particular Apostle ; and this became consequently a received point of history. The truth is, that, with the exception of the mere circumstance of title, we have not the slightest « « \. 31 evidence for believing this Creed to be the com- position of the Apostles themselves. The very notion that it was so, did not originate till about A.D. 400. In fact, that the Creed, as it now stands, was either uniformly Catholic, or composed l)y the Apostles, is absolutely disproved, by the known points of its history. The Communion of Saints was not in any Creed till above four hundred years after Christ, and then was not immediately received by all. The Descent into Hell was not in the Roman or the Oriental Creed : and the clause of Life Everlasting was omitted in several, whilst in others it was inserted*. The Nicene Creed was originally framed at the earliest general Council of Nica^a (A.D. 325), and was afterwards enlarged at the second general Council of Constantinople, about sixty years afterwards. I confess, therefore, that I am deaf to Mr. Keble's exhortation, i. e. " to endeavour^ to " imagine myself convinced that Nicene tradition " is true and divine." Nor can I, as the same preacher supposes we all evidently do, " discern [in it] an echo, as it were, of the divine voice, remote but unquestionable, and infallibly guiding us towards the true and only Temple," (C (€ « * Lord Chancellor King's History of the Apostles' Creed, p. 29. f Appendix to Sermon on Tradition, p. 148. 32 I. e. the Church of England ; for I venture to append this brief, but valuable, note, to the fer- vent, but somewhat imaginative eloquence, of the Poetry-Professor. Both date and author of the Athanasian Creed are unknown. The original is in Latin, and therefore it may be presumed to be of Western or Latin origin ; and by some it has been attributed to Hilary of Aries, in the fifth century. Whether it be now seriously believed by any one, that a uniform and apostolical Liturgy was in use amongst the primitive Churches, I know not. But that such an opinion has been held, is well known. « It seems" (says Palmer*), " to have been often assumed by the learned, that there was originally some one apos- * tolical form of Liturgy in the Christian Church, * to which all the monuments of ancient Liturgies, * and the notices which the Fathers supply, might ' be reduced ; were this hypothesis supported by * facts, it would be very valuable ; but the truth is, * that there are several different forms of Liturgy '• now in existence, which, as far as we can per- ' ceive, have been different from each other, from * the most remote period." The truth is, that there never was a time when Liturgies were * Introduct. to Ant. of Eng. Ritual, p. 5. 1 » i 33 so uniform as they are at present ; Councils, Papal power, printed books, and, lastly, large and regu- larly ordered Christian societies, being, as I con- ceive, the chief causes which have led to such modern uniformity. Not merely do we find, from the most ancient records of Liturgies, that those of Antioch, Constantinople, Alexandria, Africa, or Rome were different— not merely, again, that with- in the Western Church itself, there were material discrepancies— that, previous to Charlemagne, the Gallic Liturgy diftbred from the Roman ; that the latter was not introduced, even into one of the Spanish kingdoms (Arragon), till the year 1060 ; that, from the time of Gregory the Great, A. D. 594, the Milanese or Ambrosian Liturgy, has pre- served the ancient Roman form of the Eucharist, which was changed in Rome itself, by that pontiff ; but that in our own island, although the Roman formulary was introduced by Augustine, yet, that in York, Sarum, Hereford, Bangor, Lincoln, and Aberdeen, different " uses" were adopted, at the will of their several Bishops. I am totally unable to place before my reader any thing like an authenticated history of early forms of prayer. But perhaps if he would accept the following hints, they may not be very con- trary to such fact as we possess. The Lord's Prayer, with a psalm or hymn, seems to have constituted the most primitive form of all. The 34 95th Psalm was very anciently sung in alternate verses. The Lessons or Readings consisted of a few verses from the Gospels, together with the Epistle, or Apostle, as it was anciently styled. Litanies or supphcations always formed distinct services, and were performed in procession, and accompanied with wailing and lamentation. Our English Liturgy is the irregular growth of ages. It is essentially of western origin ; the prayer doubt- fully ascribed to the golden-mouthed Chrysostom, and which is still used in Oriental Rituals, forming, perhaps, a solitary exception to this general rule. In its several portions, it is eloquent yet simple ; moving the heart, yet without offence to the reason. As a whole, it is doubtless disordered ; yet, this very disorder, like that of Nature herself, is a beautiful disorder. New-organized, whenever it may be (and some expressions, some repetitions loudly call for such re-organization), let the reform- ation be skilfully and reverently effected. But let it ever be remembered that, with the exception of the Scriptural portions, our Ritual is the work of man : originally appointed under the national sanction, enduring under such a sanction, and lawfully, whenever the approved time may arrive, to be revised under such a sanction*. * " The obligations of the Rubric (declares a very recent petition to the House of Commons) now rest, in the first place, upon the Spiritual authority of Convocation ; and, in ^. 35 Exclusively of the early Creeds, and the history of Councils, much stress has been laid by the Ortho- dox party, upon the doctrinal testimony of the Fathers. The Fathers, say they, bear traditionary testimony to all Catholic* and Orthodox Christian doctrines, as distinct from heretical notions ; and this general statement is admirably calculated to inveigle, because, in a very limited sense, it is irrefragably true. But, as broadly inculcated by all Orthodox Churchmen, (Mr. Palmer for instance) it contains within itself two obvious fallacies- First, that the Fathers of any age, reasoned with reference to a complete and uniform system of doctrine ; which system is imagined precisely commensurate with the Anglican system— secondly, that traditionary testimony, has never the second place, upon divers Acts of Parliament." Spi- ritual authority, if it be intended to bear any kind of definite and intelligible meaning, must signify Divine Sanction. But, in case the majority of the Legislative body should happen not to believe in the existence of Divine Sanction, as here applied, divers Acts of Parliament are brought up as a most effective and judicious rear-guard, or corps de reserve. * The term Catholic Church, which crept from the Greek into the Latin creeds, was substituted, I know not precisely at what time, for the more ancient expression Holy Church. Our Apostles* Creed expresses belief in the Holy Catholic Church, which article originally run thus— I believe in the Remission of Sins, and in Life everlasting, fJirough the Holy Church. 36 been altogether annulled by written or printed evidence ; but has continued (though gradually diminishing, and becoming " beautifully less") throughout all ages of the Church. Let us test these two extravagant positions separately, — First, then, does the history of controversial divinity present to us, from its origin downwards, a full broad stream ? or does it not rather resemble a river, whose fount is limpid, yet with difficulty traced ; but whose waters as they flow onwards, gradually expand, and carry along with them much that is impure ? If Anglican Divines be resolutely determined, in order to gain their point, to subvert this order of events ; if with them, aivu Tjoroiy.uT/ 'Uqui ^u/pscTi 'TTxyan, I am equally resolved upon discovering to them, that their notions exist, rather in their own fervid imaginations, than in ecclesiastical history. Shall we not find that a Christian code has been enlarged or varied, according to the circumstances under which Councils assembled, or controver- sialists composed? These questions will best be answered by tracing the course of early controversial divinity. After St. Paul, his fellow labourer Clement of Rome, is the earliest writer who touches on points of controversy ; and the doctrines insisted upon by him are the following ; the resurrection of the body, and the necessity, yet not all- i 37 sufficiency, of works. Ignatius*, the next in point of time and value, urges chiefly this point— The reality of Christ's body ; which the Gnostics con- tended was a mere phantom ; thereby destroying the cardinal doctrines of the atonement and the resurrection. Again, the writings of Justin Mar- tyr, are rather directed, in the form of apologies, against heathens, or against the followers of false Christs and Prophets (who were, in his day, rising up on every side), than employed in expounding Christian doctrines. But after the age of Justinf Martyr (who, whether chronologically, or doctrinally, may be regarded as a transition from the Primitive to the Philoso- phical Fathers), Christian controversy changed its ground. The Arians, the Jews, and the Greek philosophers, afforded the principal marks against which the rhetoric, or learning, of the Fathers was directed; many of whom were themselves educated in the Greek schools. Hence, as weU from the character of their antagonists, as from their own education, the scope, the matter, and * Ignatius and Polycarp, each about thirty years younger than Clement, may be regarded as strictly contemporaries. In constitutional temperament they afford to us the contrast of a St. Paul and St. John ; of the latter of whom Polycarp was a disciple. On doctrinal points, the EpisJes of Ignatius to the Churches of Ephesus, Magnesia, and Trailes, are fat more copious, than that of Polycarp to the Philippians. i Born about 100 A. D. 38 the style of Christian controversy, underwent an essential alteration ; and instead of the pious and calmly dignified epistles of Clement, Polycarp, or Ignatius, we are perplexed, rather than edified, by the fanciful erudition of TertuUian, or the Electic tenets of Clement of Alexandria. And thus has it been throughout all ages of con- troversial divinity; which has taken its scope and colour, not so much from a reference to some known uniform standard, as from the character of the times. To take a familiar and recent instance ; the Catholic Relief and the Reform Bills have evidently produced Nean- thropic Viamedianism, which otherwise would probably never have been discovered. To what- ever point, in short, of controversial history we turn our attention, we shall ever perceive, sug- gested by an adversary, some new topic, which had before lain dormant; and thus a complex doctrinal* system has gradually arisen out of Christianity, of which, at the first, it formed no * According to Mr. Newman, this doctrinal system is, and ever has been, the legitimate property of the Apostolical clergy ; to be by them dealt out to the faithful, as a privilege. — (Hist, of Avians, p. 147, et sequentia.) He feelingly regrets that such doctrines are " circulated in print amongst all classes of the unclean and profane ;" and that " the Church is obliged, unwillingly, to take a part in the discussions of the day, as a man crushes venomous creatures,' I • 9 n 39 essential part. From the age of St. Paul, to that of Mr. Newman, so it is. Having thus cleared our way, by explaining the origin and progress of controversial divinity, let us examine, secondly, the relative value of tradi- tionary testimony in different ages. From the days of Irenaeus* to the present time, all Churches, which have not held to Roman notions of infallibility and authoritative tradition, have agreed, that Scripture is the ultimate appeal in doctrinal disputes. The matter in debate between our- selves and the Anglican Church, is this— by what means and by what aids may Scripture best be interpreted? The Church, amongst other aids, adduces the Fathers, not merely on the footing of modern divines, but as the posses- sors of traditionary doctrine, or, as Mr. Keble would say, of the identical deposit which St. Paul left with Timothy. Now, if they adduce such Fathers as lived before the general diffusion of genuine Scripture, their testimony is mainly tradi- tionary ; but it is the very best of that kind— for they lived nearest to the birth of our religion, and, in some cases, conversed with the Apostles them- selves. We receive, therefore, their testimony with the deepest respect ; but, as I have already shewn, it is not precisely to all the points for * His death, the cause of which is unknown, took place about A. D. 200. ""^i' 'i!*^ 40 which the Anglican Church contends. But if Fathers are alledged, who lived subsequently to the Canon, or who, as in the case of Origen or Tertullian, were not born till about a century after the death of the latest Apostle, what better means of interpretation had they, than we have now? The traditionary knowledge of such Fathers as these, is absolutely nullified by the in- terval of time ; and if such tradition be seriously adduced, as proving the divine origin of any doctrine, the same kind of testimony would, as exhibited in early Greek poetry, go to prove, that the Tale of Troy is divine also. Nay, the tradition in the latter case is yet stronger, for previous to the committal of thoughts to writing, metre aided the memory, in what a strange manner have some of our most admired divines reasoned on the value of traditionary evidence, without, as it should seem, for a moment reflecting upon the limit beyond which it was superseded by written evidence! Where," says Leslie* " any text of the New Test- ament is disputed, the best evidence is from those " Fathers of the Church who lived nearest to the Apostolical age, and learned the faith from the Apostles themselves; such as Ignatius, Poly- carp, &c. These must know the best sense and meaning of the words delivered by the * Apud Keele's Appendix to his Sermon on Tradition, 104. (( <( (( « (« (C •»ir * '• A » (( « « (C « 41 Apostles ; and next to them, they to whom « they did deliver the same, and so on through « the several ages of the Church." There is, at least, a very touching forgetfulness of self in this naive opinion ; for, according to such a graduated scale, it is evident that Leslie himself is worth but little, while the authority of his admirer, Mr. Keble, fines down to a point, and becomes so small as scarcely to be perceptible. « It does not follow," says Mr. Newman*, "that doctrines are uninfluential, when plainly and boldly put forward, because they offend the prejudices of the age at first hearing. Had « this been true. Christianity itself ought not to « have succeeded." Mr. Newman will recollect, that, at the outset of Christianity, prejudices were overcome by miracles. In Ueu of such tokens of divine authority, reasonable proof is demanded ; not indeed in every state of society, but in every one which does not altogether abandon rational inquiry. We demand proof of some kind, either miraculous, or reasonable ; and if Mr. Newman intends still to persevere, in the absence of both kinds of evidence, to put forth his plain and bold statements, let him not, with a half-worldly wisdom, assert the justice of the principle, but let him at once proceed to act upon this principle. Let him take a pattern and example from the Quarterly * Introduction to Lectures, p. 1 8. i 42 Review, which knows the rest of the world, quite as well as he knows Oxford. The great Via- The ChuFch of England, asserts the Quarterly median histo- r> • tvt ^^r^-r^T^ . ricai curiosity. /^^«^«^W', No. CXVIIL, p. 451, IS the Same* thing with the Old Catholic Christian Church ! ! ! Old and Church are terms of most convenient and self-adjusting elasticity. Let my Reviewer, therefore, if it be of doctrine that he predicates the above-mentioned identity, answer the following question — Is the Athanasian doctrine of the Trinity, so explicitly unfolded either in Scripture, or by Clement of Rome, or by Ignatius, or by Polycarp, or, in short, by any authority of the first Christian age, that no question can arise, but that such doctrine was held and understood in that age, precisely as revealed to us in our apocryphal document ? for apocryphal tnost clearly it is, whatever Waterland may wish to the contrary. But, says the Reviewer, I do not much press the question of doctrine — there were crypts in those days, and there are crypts now. Our Church edifices resemble in this, and in many other most remarkable respects, the primitive edifices. Raze the superstructure to the ground, I reply, and you will at least admit, that the resemblance will be still more perfect. Proteus now changes his shape for the last time, * This is, probably, the gem of Mr. Klble's Historical Curiosities. 43 and here I have him. Our Church, declares he, is the Primitive Church, as regards form of government. If, I rejoin, we would be very primi- tive (and the more primitive the better), it would be a grave question whether we should not all be clergy, or all laity ; for the original distinction between the clergy and laity is an obscure subject ; and the opinion of Bingham* (no mean authority) is, that such distinction was derived from the Jewish into the Christian Church. A second question might also arise in limine ; namely, whether the property of Christians should be in common ; unless indeed community of property be one of Mr. Palmer's Apostolical customs, which, as not necessary to salvation, the lineal successors of the Apostles may suspend or annul. But you admit, exclaims our oracle, that there were from very early times, three orders. Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. I certainly admit, that Monmouth and Macedon both begin with the letter M : and we are informed, by an authority which all Englishmen revere, that there is a river in each. But I can by no means allow, that the resemblance between the Primitive and the Anglican Church is so fully established, as that between the two localities ; for we never imagine the rivers them- selves to be very dissimilar : whereas, the three primitive orders, whether taken separately, or collectively, are most distinctly different from the * Eccles, Ant.f B. I,, ch. v. 44 'ii <( (C sc modern English orders. The Anglican Church is the Catholic Primitive Church ! ! ! I wish I knew whether this were intended in jest, or for a prophecy. If the latter, it is one which I by no means wish should be fulfilled. An Establishment, provided it be not on the com- prehensive principle of Hooker (most unfortu- nately, yet unintentionally* I believe, applied by Elizabeth to Ireland), namely that *' every member " of the Commonwealth is likewise a member of " the Church of England" — but an establishment, on Mr. Hallam's principle, that " in maintaining or altering a religious establishment, it may be reckoned the general duty of governments to respect the wishes of the majority" — such an establishment, is, at least at present, a social blessing. I would not even abolishf archbishops, or reduce the modern English prelate precisely to the model of the primitive episcopos, elective ^ as * Elizabeth did not intend to establish such a mischief as a faith with which a vast majority of Ireland should be at variance ; for she never for a moment doubted, that the entire population of that country would obey her dictate in religious matters. f It is scarcely necessary to remind the reader, that Arch- bishoprics formed no part of primitive Church government. On their origin, see Mosheim's Gen. Hist. B. II. ch. ii. p. 11. J That the system of congregational election began during the life-time of the Apostles, and that not even an appoint- ment made by them was considered valid without the sanc- tion of such election, is proved by Clement's first epistle to the Corinthians. — Cotekrii Patrcs Jpostolici, p. 173. « > ^ ♦ 45 the latter continued to be, as late as during the life-time of Constantine. Yet, if the Quarterly Review continues to assert, and the British critic to applaud, such extravagant notions of eccle- siastical history, such things may possibly, ere long, take place. " What 1" says an unweaned Undergraduate of ** Oxford, can the Quarterly Review be wrong ?" My dear Sir, do not decide too hastily. Time only, shows whether we are right or wrong. " Opi- " nionum commenta," &c. as Cicero says. If, there- fore, the said Review declares to-day, that the Church of England is the primitive Cathohc Church, and this should prove true five or six years hence ; then, it logically follows, that the Review is right. Besides, the word primitive, has but one recog- nized legitimate meaning. * Primitive,' means whatever actually exists, provided it be suitable to the taste of the Quarterly Review. I now bid farewell, I trust a long farewell, to the Academic Viamedians ; and in taking my leave of this mild and harmless race, I feel myself called upon to express to them, in the most heart- felt terms, the deep obligations which popular Pro- testants owe to them. They have been employed for some years in a most useful task, which they have now successfully accomplished — they have " laid bare the foundations" of Orthodox Anglican- ism. We now see distinctly what it is. It is a ed against. 46 mere pretence to authority, unsupported by a shadow of substantial evidence. Objectors to Somc may possibly urge, " we admit all this ; Lpo^robjec"? " why take such pains to prove it ?" Others will say, " very true, but very dangerous." A word to both classes of objectors. To the first, I reply, many do not admit that our Anglican system is based on a mere footing of expediency ; and of those who do admit this point, some will not, others dare not, maintain it. Now if the political questions which regard our establishment are to be settled on any thing more, than the mere clamour of party, if reason and conscience are at all to enter into the case, it is of the utmost impor- tance that, whether our clergy are attacked or defended, the dispute should proceed* on defined and intelligible grounds. The second class of ob- jectors reason thus: " Your object," say they, " is to unsettle opinions, which, whether true or " false, are yet quiescent." My object is certainly to disturb error, but not to unsettle opinion. Opinions may repose in error, but they cannot be ♦ In this opinion, I find myself supported by the great periodical Oracle. "We have no wish to enter into the Theology of the question, but this we do wish to impress upon them [the clergy], that it is a question not of fancy, but of fact— not of feeling, but of learning." — Quarterly Review, No. CXXXI., p. 228. But there remains just this to be added— that the laity will investigate also. I 47 settled by it. My object is to settle opinion, by dis- turbing error. Let us come to something definite with these sophists. Nothing is so mischievous as shuffling. The Roman Catholics when they talk of infallibility, do not shuffle ; nor does the Quarterly Review, as I have in some measure shewn, when speaking of other matters. There is something comfortably intelligible in a straight- forward, manly, vigorous falsehood. In short, if a falsehood is good for any thing, it should be intelligible. But these are those very timid and moderate persons, who fancy there is something between right and wrong— between truth and falsehood— or, who deem, perhaps that moral truth is nihil — or, that, if perchance it should exist, it is a matter of no consequence, and does not practically concern any body. They sneak about in silence, till you question them ; and then, whisper they, " we agree with you, but would it not be far " better to hush it up?" Others argue more boldly. Established usage is with these persons everything; and amongst their most valued maxims will be found, LEAVE ILL ALONE, and ESTABLISHED FALSEHOOD IS A GREAT PRACTICAL BLESSING. "But," interposes a supernumerary Canon of some wealthy diocese, one, who would far prefer that there should be no Christianity at all, than such a Christianity H Concluding remarks. 48 as he would not think worth accepting, " If you ** destroy our divinely instituted authority, no " one will respect us, as mere human agents." Not you, Sir, perhaps, but that is your affair. If you never knew heart-felt respect yourself, ask yourself why ? and if you never witnessed it as felt for others, look to our parochial clergy ; who, in imitation of a less authorized class of ministers, have brought the word of truth and consolation into the poor man's cottage. Again, say some of these objectors, you open the door to fanaticism and infidelity. To this, I answer, you shut the door upon truth— or rather, you block up the avenues of inquiry, which, as far as my experience goes, is the road to truth. Will inquiry, rational inquiry, lead either to fanati- cism, or to infidelity ? If you think the former, you have read history and man with other eyes than mine : if the latter, you have no very stable faith in your professed religion. Is it ignorance, or is it knowledge, which has led to these evils ? You are they who open the dangerous door, not the Popu- lar Protestants, as you style them. In conclusion, I will offer these remarks. While a shadow of pretence to divinely insti- tuted authority exists in our Anglican Church, so long the Reformation, once intended in this country, has not been completed. It is however fast approaching. In former ages. ^ " n-r ■r\l 49 Church doctrine took its complexion from kings. Under Edward VI. we veered towards, so called, Puritanism. Under Mary, we were tortured into Roman Catholicism. Under Elizabeth, the Mon- grel-Church began. Now, matters are otherwise. Church establishments must derive their character from the nation. We need no John of Lancaster, to espouse the cause of a fearless, but persecuted Wickliffe — we need not even the weapons of ridi- cule, so powerfully employed against priestcraft, by the friend of Wickliffe, and the Father of English verse, — what would a Hampton Court confer- ence be to us now ? We require, what we have obtained, a popular representation ; and, through that, will we establish Popular Protestantism. Aye, my Lord of — , we hear your re- sponding shout. "I have, too, what I require, " an ignorant and deluded populace, and through " that will* I establish Anglican Orthodoxy. Through that, indeed, you have hitherto done so ; but can you continue so glorious a struggle ? Work the choicest of your worst — say even, if it so please you, " Omnibus umbra locis adero." But leave it to me to retort upon you the remainder of the Mantuan verse, " Dabis improbe poenas." Indeed if I might hazard a conjecture, it is, that you yourself apprehend your ship is sinking ; and * Tliy wish was father, Harry, to that thought. »> 50 you vainly endeavour to persuade the nation, that if you perish, they also must perish with you. Do not waste your compassion, on objects which have no need of it. We are not all embarked with you. Many are daily putting off to shore, where they chaunt their " suave mari magno," in sweet secu- rity ; and " alterius spectare laborem," is indeed delicious to them. You are labouring at the helm, while all your engines, your exclusive universities, your political pulpits, your periodical oracles, and your national schools, are plying ineffectually. You seek, say you, by such means, to establish sound religious doctrine : while, in fact, you are labour- ing like a Clement of Alexandria, or a Roscelin of Compiegne, to render our holy mysteries, matters of dogmatic reasoning. Awful are these mysteries ; and when the subjects of meek meditation, chasten- ing at once to the pride of intellect, and exalting to the heart ; but impiously mocked are they, when it is vainly sought to reduce them logically within the province of the understanding ; and impotently arrogant must that Churchman be, who dares authoritatively to exact a logical belief in matters which he himself cannot logically comprehend. Such apparent extravagancies as these, can be sanctioned by a divine mission alone. Shew us, then, your authority ; for if it be not of God, it must of necessity be of man. There is no Via Media, no middle path between these two plain 51 positions. Whatever attempts to insert itself be- tween them, is priestcraft. Priestcraft is an im- pious attempt to invest man with the authority of the Deity. It is an idol, to which helpless igno- ranee superstitiously bows, but which indignant reason scatters to fragments. The essence of priestcraft is mystery— not such awful mystery, as is obscurely imparted by the All-wise, and the Almighty ; but, mystery of human contrivance. Egyptian, Druidical, Classical, Christian Priest- hoods, all tell the same tale. It is necessary to their existence, that they should be in pos- session of some important strong-hold, the key of which is their legitimate right. Hiero- glyphics, Greek ^Alphabets, Greek Philosophy, Logic, even the Bible itself, have been these strongholds. Church Antiquities yet remain, but the lock is loosening every day ; private keys have been obtained, and the contents of the chest are found to be of relative, not of positive import- ance. Why resolve not our Clergy to recede from a ground, which they well know is untenable ? Why fear they the j udgment of a nation, from which j udg- ment they well know that they cannot escape ? In * It may not, perhaps, be immediately in the recollection of every reader, that the Druids (whose compulsory oral system of instruction, doubtless, raises many a covetous sigh in Mr. Newman's breast) employed mysteriously, according to Caesar, the Greek alphabet. 52 other days they feared it not. Under a Becket they defied to open warfare the constituted authorities. The divine right of kings was, at that crisis, momentarily trampled under foot ; a right indeed, which has ever, with a propensity rather human than divine, sided with the strongest party. Thus, for instance, it was conferred upon Henry VIII. by that most valid of all earthly sanctions, an Act* of Parliament ; which act has, ever since, been inter- preted by the Church, to be in force only during the good conduct of the government ; for, when- ever the Church and the government have been at variance, the latter has invariably been supposed to be rather diabolical than divine. At the Refor- mation, how patiently and confidently were our Canons, our Ritual, and our Church govern- ment submitted and entrusted to the civil head of the Church ! Is an absolute monarch alone to be trusted, and then only if that monarch be orthodox? Have not the constituted authorities the same just right now, which they formerly, by your own confession, possessed ? Whence the present recu- sancy of our Clergy ? I will answer these questions for them. They well know, that Church authority has, ever since the apostolical age, ever since the cessation of miracles, been, in fact, based upon human, not upon divine sanction. IVieir diviiie right has ever been, in * 25. Henry VIII., c. 19. 1 53 reality, human power; but their relative power has fallen. Their voice is no longer so loudly heard in the councils of the nation. The arrogance of a Becket, or a Laud, dares not even to hope for a hearing. Such arrogance would be drowned by the indig- nation of an entire people; and in its stead, the childishness of Academic sophistry, raises its scarcely heard, and feeble voice, only to afford a mark for ridicule. The secular power of the clergy was a theft, which has been restored to the rightful owners; their spiritual power, was a dream which has passed away. They are now, whether legally or spiritually, but a part of the people ; and if they would yet, in exchange for by-gone tyranny, accept a place in our respect and affections ; if they would reserve for them- selves an efficient and beneficial moral power, such power, let them be well-assured, is no plant to be forced in the hot-bed of political intrigue ; but one of spontaneous growth ; and luxuriantly springing from the gratitude of their flocks, requiting the devotedness of pastoral care. FINIS. tONDON : «.NT.O Br T. BRETTELL, RUPERT STREET, .UVMAR.ET.