I\

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

EXHIBITING ITS

.TWENTY-TWO TENETS;

WITH A

REFUTATION OF EACH TENET;

AND AN

EXPOSURE OF THEIR TENDENCY :

TO EXALT THE POWER OF THE-CLERGY-TO ENSLAVE THE MINDS OF THE
PEOPLE— TO PROPAGATE A SPURIOUS RELIGION— AND TO
DELUDE AND DESTROY SOULS.

MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT.

By RICHARD WEAVER*

tfROM T H fe LONDON EDITION;

NEW YORK:

' 'r't/- COLLINS, BROTHER,* C6.,-
W31 i8i3-

ADVERTISEMENT.

Numerous as the publications have been on the subject of
Puseyism, the writer of the following Essay thinks, that a
complete and detailed view of it, with a distinct refutation of
its several tenets, and an exposure of their dangerous conse
quences, is a desideratum ; he has therefore attempted to
make such a work. Conceiving also that the proper way to
dispel the darkness of error, is to introduce the light of truth,
he has stated the true Scripture doctrine on each subject, and
has endeavored to write in the spirit enjoined by the Apostle
Paul upon the Ephesian church, " speaking the truth in love."
May " the Father of Lights " she,d the light of truth upon the
mind of every reader ! R. W.

PUSEYISM— BY THE BISHOP OF CALCUTTA.
" It is to me a matter of surprise and shame, that in the
nineteenth century, we should have the fundamental position
of the whole system of Popery virtually reasserted in the
bosom of that very Church which was reformed so determiri-
ately three centuries since from this same evil, by the doc
trine and labours, and martyrdom of Cranmer and his fellow-
sufferers. What ! are we to have all the fond tenets which
formerly sprang from the traditions of men reintroduced in
however modified a form, amongst us 1 Are we to have a re
fined transubstantiation ; the sacraments, and not faith, the
chief means of salvation ; a confused and uncertain mixture
of the merits of Christ and inherent grace, in the matter of
justification; remission of sins and the new creation in Christ
Jesus confined, or almost confined to baptism ; perpetual
doubt of pardon to the penitent after that sacrament; the duty
and advantage of self-imposed austerities; the ihriocency of
prayers for the dead ; and similar tenets and usages, which
generate a spirit of bondage, again asserted among us ? And
is the paramount authority of the inspired Volume, and the
doctrine of the grace of God in out Justification by the merits
of Jesus Christ, which reposes on that authority, to be again
weakened and obscured by such tiuman superadditions, and a
new edifice of will-worship, and 'voluntary humility,' and
'the rudiments of the world,' as, the apostle speaks, to be
created once more, ii^ the place of the simple gospel of a
crucified Saviour T'

PUSEYISM— BY THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER.
'-' I cannot but fear the consequences for <the character^ the
efficiency, and the very truth of our Church, if a system of
teaching should become extensively popular, which dwells
upon the external and ritual parts of religious service, whilst
it loses sight of their inner meaning and spiritual life ; which
defaces the brightest glory of the Church by forgetting the
continual presence of her Lord; seeming, in effect, to depose
him from his rightful pre-eminence . . . which tends to sub
stitute, at least in unholy minds, for the worship in spirit and
in truth, the observance of ' days and months, and times and
years ;' for the cheerful obedience of filial love, an aspect of
hesitation, and trouble, and doubt; for the freedom of the gos
pel, a spirit of bondage . . . which works out salvation indeed
with fear and trembling, but without any foretaste of the rest
that remaineth for the people of God, and without joy in be
lieving."

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM,

CHAPTER t
tHE OftlGlN 01? PUSEYISM ; ANI* CAUSES OF
ITS SUCCESS. WITH SOMfc NECESSARY
CAUTIONS.In the year 1833, a spirit of liberality
having been evinced by government toward
Dissenters and Catholics, a part of the Es
tablished Church of England began to take
alarm, imagining that encroachments were
made upon it by the civil power. This alarm
was taken particularly by the Oxford clergy ;
who even feared that, at length, " the Aposto
lical Church would, be forsaken, degraded,
nay, trampled on and despoiled by the state
and people of England " — and since it ap
peared to have been much in accordance
with public opinion, such a state of things
was considered by them as nothing less
than " National Apostasy." We have before
us, a sermon preached by John Keble, M. A.,
fellow of Oriel College, in the University of
Oxford ; preached in St. Mary's, before the
Judge of Assize, on Sunday, July 14, 1833,
with this as its title, and containing in the
sermon the words before quoted. As in the
time of Queen Anne, it was judged requisite
therefore again to have recourse to the doc
trines of primitive tradition, apostolical suc
cession, the exclusive right of the clergy to
administer the word and the sacraments, the
apostolic church, and the efficacy of the
sacraments. Nor were such doctrines inap
propriate to the occasion ; for if men, because
they have been ordained by the hand of a
bishop, become the only true successors of
the apostles ; and as the only true successors
of the apostles, have alone the right of preach
ing the word and administering the Sacra-
is o
ments ; of course, it behoves us all to sit
under their ministrations : and if they, by
ministering the sacraments, can minister
salvation and grace to our souls, then what
men are so worthy of being regarded as our
spiritual guides, and whose official regards
and attentions it is so important for us to
secure ? Dissenting teachers of every name
are of course to be repudiated, as intruders
into the sacred office, and their ministrations
will be treated as invalid. To propagate such
2

opinions, therefore, was the object of that class
of the clergy, now called " Puseyites," front
Dr. Pusey ; with whom are to be attached
the names of Newman, Keble, Palmer, Cary,
&c, the authors of those tracts which for
many years have been put into circulation
from Oxford. These sentiments/ with others
bordering upon Popery, have been industri
ously propagated ; and have obtained such
a hold on the public mind, as to excite alarm
in the breasts of the friends of evangelic
truth, not only among Dissenters, but among
a considerable portion of the Established
Church itself. *
These dogmas of" apostolical succession,"
&c. were broached " in the time of Queen
Anne," for much as they may appear to some
as novelties, they are not really so. At the
beginning of the eighteenth century they
were maintained with great assiduity by
Hicks, and Dodwell, and Brett, apparently
too with the same views as now, to secure
the Church of England against its supposed
danger. As it throws light upon our subject,
and will gratify some of our readers, we ex*
tract Burnet's account of this affair. " There
appeared at this time an inclination in many
of- the clergy to a nearer approach toward
the church of Rome. Hicks, an ill-temper-
etr man, who was at the head of the Ja
cobite party, had in several books promoted
a notion, that there was a proper sacrifice
made in the Eucharist, and had on many
occasions studied to lessen our aversion to
Popery. The supremacy of the Crown in
ecclesiastical matters, and the method in
which the Reformation was carried, were
openly condemned. One Brett had preached
a sermon, in several of the pulpits of Lon*
don, which he afterward printed, in which he
pressed the necessity of priestly absolution,
in a strain beyond what was pretended to
even in the church of Rome : he said no re
pentance could serve without it, and affirmed
that the priest was vested with the same
power of pardoning that our Saviour himself
had. A motion was made in the lower
house of convocation to censure this ; but it
was so ill-supported, that it was let fall.
Another conceit was taken up, of the inva
lidity of lay-baptism, on which several books*

10

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

have been written. Nor was the dispute a
trifling one, since by this notion, the teach
ers among Dissenters passing for laymen,
this went to re-baptizing them and their con
gregations. Dodwell gave the rise to this
conceit ; he was a very learned man, and led
a strict life ; he seemed to hunt after para
doxes in all his writings, and broached not a
few ; he thought none could be saved, but
those who, by the sacraments, had a federal
right to it ; and that these were the seals of
the covenant : so that he left all who died
without the sacraments to the uncovenanted
mercies of God. And to this he added, that
none had a right to give the sacraments, but
those who were commissioned to it, and those
were the apostles, and after them bishops
and priests ordained by them. It followed
upon this that sacraments administered by
others were of no value. He pursued these
notions so far, that he asserted that the souls
of men were naturally mortal, but that the
immortalizing virtue was conveyed by bap
tism given by persons episcopally ordained.
And yet, after all this, which carried the
episcopal function so high, he did not lay the
original of that government on any instruc
tion or warrant in Scripture, but thought it
was set up in the beginning of the second
century, after the apostles were dead. He
wrote very doubtfully of the time in which
the canon of the New Testament was settl
ed ; he thought it was not before the second
century, and that an extraordinary inspira
tion was continued in the churches to that
very time to which he ascribed the original
of episcopacy. This strange and precarious
system was in great credit among us ;"and
the necessity of the sacraments, and the ill-
validity of ecclesiastical functions, when
performed by persons who were not episco
pally ordained, were entertained by many
with great applause. This made the Dis
senters pass for no Christians, and put all
thoughts of reconciling them to us far out of
view : and several little books were spread
about the nation to prove the necessity of
re-baptizing them, and that they were in -a
state of damnation till that was done. But
few were by these arguments prevailed upon
to be re-baptized. This struck even at the
baptism by midwives in the church of Rome ;
which was practised and connived at here
in England, till it was objected to in the
conference held at Hampton Court, soon
after King James the First's accesssion to
the crown, and baptism was not till then
limited to persons in orders. Nothing of
this kind was so much as mentioned in the
year 1660, when a great part of the nation

had been baptized by Dissenters ; but it was
now promoted with much heat."* Who can
read this extract without recognising in it
the history of our own times I
But the public, in general, have consider
ed these doctrines as novel, particularly as
being mixed up with those Roman Catho
lic tenets which the Protestant churches
have so long impugned. This apparent
novelty, and the circumstance of such tenets
originating with men of literature and science,
with men matured in our halls of religion
and learning, have caused them to attract a
more than ordinary degree of attention.
And while the pulpit and the press, our
fountains of instruction, have been polluted hy
them, no wonder that the public, who drink
of the streams in so considerable a degree,
should have been also polluted.
Whence the success of these Puseyite
opinions ? It may not be useless, before we
come to the body of our work, to reply to
this query, inasmuch as it may guard us
against reasoning from outward appearances,
a thing so fallacious, especially in matters
that relate to a spiritual religion, and a
" kingdom not of this world." We repeat
the question ; whence the success of these
Puseyite or Tractarian opinions ? Alas, the
human heart and the state of society were
too well prepared for it ! Sentiments that
give and secure a predominance to our own
party, especially if they minister to our emo
lument and power- — sentiments that relieve
from the trouble of heart-searching artd heart-
exercise by substituting the " form" for " the
power of godliness" — sentiments that favour
a religion of sense rather than a religion of
faith and of inward power — such sentiments
are too readily imbibed by the bulk of man
kind. Nor is that all ; there is an indispo
sition in men to think closely, at least so as
to investigate truth. It was justly observed
by Seneca, a heathen philosopher, " Unus-
quisque mavult credere quam judicare ;
every one would rather believe than investi
gate." Hence the common people too rea
dily take for granted what their supposed
accredited teachers declare to them, and
indolently receive a creed made ready to
their hands, without examining for them
selves ; or else having received a creed, will
not allow themselves to be disturbed. Would
that men were more like the noble Bereahs,
of whom we read in the Acts of the Apos
tles, who " search the Scriptures daily,"
whether those things, " declared to them by
Paul and Silas," were so !
* Burnet's History of his Own Times, vol. ii. 603,
604.

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

11

It does not follow necessarily that because
men are men of literature and of science as
to this world, that their religious views are
correct, and that therefore they are fitted to
be our spiritual guides. " For," says the
apostle Paul, " where is the wise 1 where
is the scribe ? where is the disputer of this
world 1 hath not God made foolish the wis
dom of this world 1" And further on in the
same epistle to the " puffed-up " Corinthians,
he says, " If any man among you seem to
be wise in this world, let him become a fool,
that he may be wise." How different is the
" wisdom of this world " from the " wisdom
of God !" The former may make a skilful
mechanic, a sagacious tradesman, a politic
statesman, an intelligent philosopher, but it
can proceed no further. Of the wisdom of
God in the plan and operations of redemp
tion, or of that wisdom that avails in a " king
dom," that is " not of this world," they all
may be profoundly ignorant : nor is it ac
cording to the apostle, until such " become
fools " that they are likely to be " wise "
subjects or servants in this kingdom. Ad
mitting that men maj", from interest and con
venience, theoretically learn, and in conse
quence subscribe certain doctrines which are
in themselves spiritual ; yet may they be
doctrines, notwithstanding, of which they
have no spiritual understanding, and for
which they have no spiritual taste. Hence,
there have been eminent philosophers and
wise statesmen who have been mere dolts
in the religion of Christ, and as to the
" things of the Spirit of God." We must
therefore refuse submission to the chair even
of a university, if occupied by a man who is
wise only in this world ; and must appeal
to the " Spirit " and " wisdom of God " in
matters that relate to a " kingdom " that is
" not of this world," even though it be occu
pied by an uneducated Bunyan. " The
natural man " — the man physicically consi
dered only, not having the Spirit, " receiveth
not the things of the Spirit of God ; neither
can he know them, because they are spiritual
ly discerned. But he that is.spiritual judgeth
all things." Not to " the natural man, there
fore, but to " the spiritual " man should we
look for a right judgment concerning " the
things of the Spirit." Moreover, although
we would by no means disparage that
mental culture and discipline which a uni
versity education imparts, yet we must demur
to receiving with implicit confidence, a
religious doctrine even from the university
chair of Oxford, for several reasons. 1.
Because at matriculation, those who en
ter at our universities are not required

to give evidence of their spiritual regenera
tion, or of their having been " renewed in
the spirit of their mind ;" and so, in the
course of their studies, do not know, and
therefore cannot judge 6f those things that
are to be only spiritually discerned.* 2. We
demur, because a very disproportionate at
tention has been paid in these universities
to theological truth.f — Andfinally, we demur,
because that with regard to the knowledge
of the Hebrew and Greek originals — the
principle of all theology, and therefore
branches of literature which should particu
larly occupy the attention of theological stu
dents — candidates for holy orders, although
they may have been familiar with the Greek
classics, yet have been very deficient. On
all these accounts, not to insist upon the tone
of morals in these schools of learning, which
corrupt the heart and blind the mind — im
plicit confidence must not be paid to the opi
nions of these Puseyite writers, although of
the university of Oxford.
Nor will an appearance of " holiness " in
spire us with confidence ; for though we
would not judge others, or refuse the claim
of piety wherever there is the evidence of
it, yet we remember that the Pharisees were
of the straitest sect of the Jewish religion ;
that they fasted twice a week ; that they
were very zealous as to Sabbath observance ;
that they gave tithes of all that they pos
sessed, even of " anise, mint, and cummin ;"
and that they not only trusted in themselves that
they were righteous, so as to " despise others,"
but were also venerated by others as such.
* Sir R. Inglis, in resisting the claims of the Dis
senters to the endowments of the universities and
the education there, makes this remark—" That ac
cording to the standard adopted at the university, the
application of six months was amply sufficient for the
purpose of giving that knowledge — head knowledge,
if thy pleased. Why, after all, what could any public
body do but give head knowledge of the subject ?
It rested with a different power to touch the heart ;
but it was the function of our fellow human beings to
take care that all committed to their charge for the
purpose of instruction, should receive knowledge ofthe
externa] doctrines and discipline ofthe Church of which
they are members." Very just distinction as to the
knowledge of the head and heart ; but ought they not
to have that knowledge ofthe heart which i3 the effect
of his divine " touch " before they go to the university 1
Most assuredly. For what if the heart be not touched
after all' Then will they not be fit teachers ; and what
becomes of the taught i — Speech, May, 25lh, 1843.
t Greater attention is paid of late years, the opera
tion of which will now be seen ; but this can hardlv
be said to effect much the generation that is passing
away ; and after all, since " knowledge puffeth up,"
there will be reason to fear that in all such casej, as
there is head knowledge only, and not the charity or
"love that edifieth," that will only cause them to de
spise and judge their dissenting brethern the more.

13

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

Having made these preliminary remarks,
we will now approach the subject itself.
Reverting to the tenets of these Oxford di
vines before mentioned, let not the reader
imagine that they are all which we intend
by Puseyism. There are numerous doc
trines springing out from or connected with
them, with which the Christian church has
been annoyed, which will require our atten
tion. They seem to originate in, or to derive
their strength from adherence to what they
call Primitive and Catholic Tradition : for
as though conscious that they could not be
maintained from Scripture alone, they have
thought proper to have recourse to tradition,
and to the ancient fathers, as the true and pro
per interpreters of Scripture. What has been
the consequence ? Not only the doctrine of
baptismal regeneration, but the various other
errors which distinguish the systems of Pu
seyism and High-churchism have been pro-
pagated^until at length, ashamed of the
Reformation, they have been receding to-
Popery. With reference to the public mind at pre
sent, it would appear that some scarcely be
lieve in, or will take notice of, the actual
existence of the thing ; others content them
selves with vague and unsatisfactory concep-
tions of it ; a third class suppose that it in
cludes only some two or three erroneous
doctrines ; and a fourth class do not choose
to trouble themselves about it : the conse
quence of which state of things will be,
that the subtle poison will insidiously diffuse
itself throughout the whole public body, until
the moral and religious condition of society
has become irrecoverably diseased. To pre
vent, or rather to counteract the mischief of
such inadequate conceptions of the Oxford'
doctrine, as well as of such indifference to it,
we shall state in detail, and with distinctness,
the whole of the Oxford tenets, as drawn
from their own writings ; so having given a
full whole-length portraiture of this Puseyism
and High-churchism, we shall attempt a re
futation of them ; and then, expose the inju
rious tendencies of such dogmas. As the
clear -statement of truth often proves the best
refutation of error, we shall include in our
discussions, the correct and scriptural views,
of justification, of regeneration, of sanctifi
cation, of baptism, and of the Lord's Supper
— all of which are more or less involved in
this controversy — and in all may we be en
abled to investigate and -declare " the truth-
in love |"

CHAPTER II,
THE OXFORD DOCTRINES DISTINCTLY ANt>
FULLY STATED FROM THEIR OWN WRIT*
INOS.
Taking the analytical method, or dividing
the subject into its several parts, we recog-;
nise no less than twenty-two tenets, as held
by the writers of the Oxford school, that re
quire notice in this discussion.
Tenet I.
Tradition, primitive and catholic, must be con
nected with Scripture in forming the Rule
of Faith.
Tradition is something delivered either by
word of mouth or in writing ; and it is usu*
ally distinguished from the inspired and ca
nonical Scripture, distinctively so called.
That We may have clear conceptions of
the tenet above-mentioned"* we must divide
the tradition here intended into two parts :
first, Primitive or Apostolic Tradition ;. and,
secondly, Catholic Tradition: the former
intending tradition delivered by the apostle
before the New Testament was written ; by
the latter, the tradition of the . Church, as
declared by the fathers and councils, and by
liturgies. Now, while it is the fundamental
doctrine of Protestants, that " the Bible alone
is the religion of Protestants," or the sole
rule of faith, the Puseyites, or Traciarians,
maintain that it is not a sufficient rule, but that
we must add -to it 'tradition.
1. As to "Apostolical Tradition," as de
nominated and maintained by Keble, who
has written a book on the subject, discoursing
on those words of Paul to Timothy, " That
good thing which was committed to thee,
keep," &/C, he says, " Must it not be owned,
on fair consideration, that Timothy's deposit
did comprise matter independent of, and dis
tinct from the truths which are directly"
scriptural ? that it contained, besides the
substance of Christian doctrine, a certain
form, arrangement^ selection, methodizing
the whole and distingushing fundamentals ?
and also a certain system of church prac
tice, both in government, discipline, and
worship, of which, whatever portion we can
prove tp be still remaining, ought to be reli
giously guarded by us, even for the same
reason that we reverence and retain that
which is more properly scriptural, both being
portions of the same divine treasure ?" He
endeavours to establish this hypothesis upon
the considerations — that " the truths and
rules committed to Timothy's charge were

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

13

at the time almost wholly unwritten ;" that
" the Thessalonians had been exhorted to
hold the traditions which they had received,
whether by .word or by apostolical letter;"
that Peter exhort6 the whole body of Orien
tal Christians to " stir up their pure minds
by way of remembrance of the command
ment of the apostles of the Lord and Savi
our ;" and also that John refers believers for
a standard of doctrine to " the word which
they had heard from the beginning." So far
for the Apostolical tradition. Now let us hear
what they say as to Catholic tradition, and the
insufficiency of Scripture. " In the sense in
which it is commonly understood at this day,
Scripture is not, on Anglican principles, the
rale of faith."* " How much more dutiful,
with all seriousness to use our privilege of
belonging to a church, which on the one
hand refers us to Scripture as the standard
and treasure of all necessary doctrine, on the
other hand, ties her doctors, as much as the
Council of Trent does, to expound Scripture
according to the consent of the ancient fa-
thers."f " We do not make Scripture the
rule of our faith, but that other things in their
kind are rulers ; likewise, in such sort that
it is not safe without respect had unto them,
to judge things by the Scripture alone. "|
" Adherence to Catholic tradition, as well
as to Scripture," js advocated by the Rev.
H. Melvill.§ " Catholic tradition is a divine
informant on religious matters ; it is the un
written word. These two, the Bible and
Catholic tradition, form together a united
rule of faith."|| " Scripture and tradition
taken together are the joint rule of faith. "TT
To these sentiments a reviewer subscribes ;
for speaking of the Church of England he
says — " Her standard -of appeal in matters
of doctrine and discipline is Holy Scripture,
as interpreted by the voice of the ancient
church."**
Refutation of Tenet I.
" Ye hold the tradition of men.'' Mark vii. 8.
Who can doubt that this is the great bul
wark of Puseyism and High Churchism,
that observes the great array of Ancient Fa
thers brought forward in Dr. Pusey's work
on Holy Baptism, as well as in Keble's
" Primitive Tradition V So it is now, as it
was of the Jewish heretical, and of tho Ro
mish, churches.
t * Tract 90, page 1 1.
t Keble on Primitive Tradition, page 142.
t Field in Tract 90, page 11.
i> Gentleman's Magazine, July 1839, pages 57, 58.
II Newman. T Tract 3.
** Gentleman's Magazine, March, 1813, page 273.

It may be of some use, if we can trace
this adherence to tradition up to its origin.
In Tract 90, upon the cover, you have a list
of works recommended by the Tractarians ;
and almost at the head of the list you have
" Vincentii Lirinensis Commonitorium, with
translation ;" a translation of the Commoni-
tory of Vincentius of Liren's work ; a work
on this very subject of tradition, and which
doubtless these Tractarians published as the
great auxiliary to the doctrine of primitive,
or so called Catholic tradition. What of
this Vincentius of Liren 1 He was a native
of Liren, an island in the Mediterranean,
adjoining to France ; and in the year of our
Lord 434, he wrote a Commonitory concern
ing the rule of faith, in which, against the
erroneous opinions of the Novalians, Pho-
tinians, Sabellians, Donatists, Arians, Apol-
linarians, and others, he endeavoured to es
tablish the faith of the orthodox Church by
an appeal to the unanimous consent of the
writers and bishops of the Church at large,
in the earliest limes. " I have been at great
pains," says he, " and often made it my par
ticular business, to consult very many per
sons of the highest rank for piety and learn
ing, about a certain general rule to distinguish
the true Catholic faith from the depravations
of heresy ; and after repeated inquiries, the
sum of all their answers amounted to this,
that if I, or any other Christian, would disco
ver the artifice of growing heretics, and keep
out of their snares, and continue perfectly
sound in the right faith, the way by God's
grace is to secure it upon these two founda
tions : Upon the authority of Holy Scrip
tures ; and after that, upon the tradition of
the Catholic church." Then, he adds, " But
here perhaps a man may ask this question,
' Since the canon of the Scripture is com
plete, and more than sufficient in every re
spect, what need is there for adding the sense
of the Catholic church to such a perfect
rule V To which question I answer, That
there is good reason for such addition ; be
cause the sacred writings, having a sublime
sense, all understandings cannot reach it
alike ; but one expounds the divine oracles
after this manner, and another after that ; in
somuch that there are almost as many opinions
about the true meaning as there are expositors.
For instance, Novatianus interprets one way,
Photinus another, Sabellius another, Donati-
us another, Arius another, Eunomius, Macedo
nia another, Apollinaris, Priscillianus an
other, Jovinianus, Pelagius, Celestius an
other, and in fine, Nestorius another.
Therefore, under so great difficulties, in
such a perplexity of various error, I hold it

14

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

extremely necessary to apply the sense of
the Catholic church to the Scriptures, as a
rule to a line, and as the clue to conduct us
in this labyrinth of opinions. For us, who
are in the bosom of the Catholic church, it
ought to be our first and principal care to
choose such doctrines as we find to have
been believed in all places, at all times, and
by all the faithful. For there is nothing
truly and properly Catholic, as the word suf
ficiently declares, but which fully and truly
comprehends all these. We are thus Ca
tholic, when we follow universality, antiquity,
and unanimous consent. But we follow uni
versality, when we profess that only to be
true faith which is professed by the church
all the world over. In like manner we are
followers of antiquity when we religiously
adhere to that sense of Scripture which
manifestly obtained among the holy Fathers,
our predecessors. And we follow consent,
When we embrace the definitions and opi
nions of almost all, if not all, the bishops
and teachers in the ancient church."
This extract not only points us to the ori
gin of this " Primitive Tradition " tenet, but
presents the, argument of our opponents for
it in as fair a light as possible. And that it
is from this writer and in this way, the Ox
ford school maintains its adherence to primi
tive tradition, at least as to the Catholic part
of it, cannot well be called in question from
the republication of the work, and from the
repeated reference in their writers to the
" quod ubique, quod semper, et quod ab om
nibus creditum est " of Vincentius. But al
though it sets forth the argument — is the
argument in point ? or is the case parallel '(
Or if the argument be in point, is it satisfac
tory ? We answer — The case is not pa
rallel ; and, if it were so, it is not satis
factory. As to the the parallelism of the case :
Vincentius lived not more than three or four
hundred years after the apostles, and less
after their disciples Clement, Polycarp, and
Ignatius, whose writings had come down to
the Christians of that day. He wrote too
at a time when the sentiments of the first
Christians might be fairly gathered without.
that mixture of interpolations, mistakes, and
alterations, with which, after the lapse t>f
fifteen centuries, the writings of the Fathers
might becorrupted. Moreover,innovations in
the sentiments or practices of the churches,
or of individuals, could easily be detected.
But will this justify, under circumstances so
different, the Romish church in their adhe
rence to tradition, or our later Protestant
brethren, such as Hicks and Dodwell, or

those of the present day, in doing so ? The
PuSeyites, as though conscious that Scrip
ture will not sufficiently avail them, are ap
pealing, either to some supposed apostolical
tradition, or to the ancient fathers, and coun
cils, and liturgies of the church, in the inter
pretation of the Scripture and in support of
their tenets, sheltering themselves apparent
ly under the wing of this Vincentius ; but
Vincentius lived only three or four hundred
years after the day of the apostles ; we live
seventeen or eighteen hundred years after
them. In his days, they could trace the
writings to their authors, and distinguish
them from apocryphal and acknowledged
heretical writers ; but we, after the lapse of
fourteen or fifteen hundred years from them,
have an accumulation of writing, both here
tical and orthodox, the genuineness of which
may be disputed : and moreover, we have
fathers against fathers, bishops against bi
shops, council against council, pope against
pope, church against church — can an appeal
to such quarters then now be satisfactory ?
When can ever the test of Vincentius, the
universality, the antiquity, the consent be
justly applied? Have the distinguishing
sentiments of our opponents been held every
where in either the ancient or modern Chris
tian Church 1 Have they been held from
the beginning, or were they held in the first
century of the Christian Church 1 Were
they held by universal consent in the first
age or ever since 1 Neither of these ques
tions can be answered in the affirmative.
Nor must it be overlooked that Vincentius
himself has respect to what was "set out
by the holiest and wisest men in the first
and purest ages of Chrstianity ;" and that
he calls the Scriptures " a complete canon
and more than sufficient in every respect,"
and a " perfect rule :" also, that he strongly
censures those that cannot rest contented
with the old rule of faith once delivered and
deposited in the primitive church ; but must
be every day upon new researches, and are
never well, but when they are adding to, alter
ing, or curtailing Christianity ; as if the doc
trine was not from heaven, nor one revela
tion sufficient."
We see then how little the Commonitory
of Vincentius of Liren avails the tradition-
ists. He appears to have been a good man,
and an ardent lover of truth, and probably
would have been grieved if he had foreseen
that his work would have been used to such
a purpose. We will now take up the question upon
its own bearing. Are Scripture and tradi
tion united the rule of faith, or ia Scripture

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

15

alone so ? We answer, that the Scripture
alone is so.
1. Against Apostolic tradition.
What Keble means by this, and what he
said in favour of it, may be seen by referring
to the statement in this first tenet of Pusey
ism. After considering all that he says,
what argument really is there in it all for a
tradition, " independent of and distinct from
the truths which are directly scriptural V
The very circumstance that ¦" the truths and
rules committed to Timothy's charge were at
the time almost or wholly unwritten," pre
sents us with a reason why these " truths "
should be considered by him as a sacred de
posit until they were writien ; so that " no
Christian Scriptures then, existed, except per
haps Matthew's Gospel," supplies too a rea
son why the Thessalonians should " hold
fast the traditions they had been taught," for
the present only, " by word or epistles." So
again, the consideration that Peter had not
as yet provided, that " after his decease " the
Christians might "have the things" declared
to them " always in remembrance," was the
very consideration that should induce them
to be " mindful " of the •• commandment of
the apostles ;" and finally, as to what the be
lievers addressed by John, had " heard from
the beginning," that appears to have been no
other than the law of love, which certainly
all that had received the Scriptures, as these
Jews had, must have " heard from the begin
ning." What foundation is there then in
such reasons as these for the doctrine of a
tradition of the apostles, distinct from the
Scripture which they afterward wrote 1
Everything of importance which they deliv
ered by word of mouth to Timothy or to the
churches, before they had written their epis
tles, we may reasonably conclude, they
would deliver in the epistles when they did
write them.
But to give weight to his argument, Keble
brings forward what he calls " the direct and
formal testimony of the ecclesiastical writers
of the age immediately following the apos
tles," such as Tertullian and Irenaeus. And
what does it all amount to ? Nothing more
than this, that there would have been suffi
cient testimony to confute the heretics, if the
Church had no Scriptures, but tradition only
to rely upon, since there was sufficient evi
dence that such was the tradition of the
apostles : but neither does Tertullian or Ire
naeus intimate that, now that the Scriptures
were written, they were not the true and
sufficient rule of faith. Nor does Vincentius
Lirinensis himself intend anything more

than that Catholic tradition might be a help,
and on account of the peculiar circum
stances of the case at that time, should be
adhered to in the interpretation of the Scrip
tures. Upon a review then of the subject,
we conclude that the " tradition " so called in
Scripture, and the good thing committted to
Timothy were merged in our Scriptures. If
not, where indeed is it 1 Can Mr. Keble find
us a copy of it 1 or if it has never been com
mitted to writing, who would trust to it after
the lapse of near eighteen hundred years ?
From the Apostolic tradition —
2. We pass to the Catholic tradition, or to
that which is delivered to us in the writings
of the fathers, the decrees of councils, and in
the different liturgies of the church. Are
these to be joined with scripture, as the rule
of faith ? or are we bound to interpret scrip
ture as the rule of faith ? We answer— No !
1. God will not allow, in this case, of any
word but his, of any authority but his.
Observe the following scriptures. " Ye
shall not add unto the word which I com
mand you, neither shall you diminish aught
from it." " Whatsoever thing I command
you, observe to do it ; thou shalt not add
thereto, nor diminish from it." " Add thou not
to his words, lest he reprove thee." And see
the Saviour reproving the Jews for teaching
for " doctrines the commandments of men,"
which they did, ever " making the command
ment of God of none effect by their tradition."
Of the same mind was his servant the apos
tle Paul, for he would not allow the Colos
sians to be " subject to ordinances after the
doctrines and commandments of men," how
ever tbey might have a " show of wisdom in
will worship," and of" humility and neglect-
ing.of the body." After such prohibitions as
these, will men bring forward and assert the
authority of fathers, of councils, of liturgies ? ¦
We must then ask, who gave them this au
thority ? Besides, we are charged to call no
man master but Christ, and no one our father,
but our Father who is in heaven.
2. The fathers themselves denied other
authority than that of the Scriptures.
Ignatius, a disciple of John, in writing to
the Romans, says, " I do not as Peter and
Paul command you." " All that has been
said since the apostles,'' says Jerome, " ought
to be held as of no authority. However holy,
however learned, be any one who has come
after the apostles, still he has no authority."
Augustin himself, of whose writings Dr,
Pusey very greatly avails himself, disclaims
the idea of authority. " Even now that 1
am old," says he, in his Retractions, " I

16

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

cannot expect to be perfect, never stumbling
in my speech ; how much less so, when in
my youth I first began to write." " Take
care," says he, in another place, " that you
are not submissive to my writings^ as if they
were canonical Scriptures." " Let us not
esteem the works of catholic and venerated
men as the canon of Scripture. We may,
without at all prejudicing the respect justly
due to them, reject whatever in their writings
we find contrary to truth. I regard the
writings of others, as I should wish my
readers to regard mine."
Whoever will read the Epistles of Igna
tius or Polycarp, or the Apology of Justin
Martyr, or that of Tertullian, or the writings
of Iienseus, concerning the Scriptures in the
first two centuries, or Eusebius, the ecclesi
astical historian, in the fourth century, must
see that the Scriptures alone, and not tradi
tion at all, were the rule of faith to the primi
tive Christians-
3. The Scriptures teach, and fact proves,
that. the stream of knowledge was polluted
nearUo the fountain itself; and therefore
who would drink at a fouled stream when
he can drink at a pure fountain ?
The very first Christians were in danger
either from the Judaizing teachers, or from
"the philosophy and vain deceit" of the
heathens. . The Apostle Paul evidently fears
that their influence would corrupt the church
es. Why else was he so much afraid lest
the Corinthian church should be " corrupted
from the simplicity that is in Christ 1" why,
that the Colossians should .be " spoiled
through philosophy and vain deceit ?" Why
warn them so against being " subject to or
dinances, after the doctrines and command
ments of men," whatever " show of wisdom
in will-worship and neglecting of the body "
they might have? Why indeed, all the
warnings that the same apostle gives to
Timothy and to Titus respecting the errors
that were ever propagating, if the churches
were not in danger of a corrupting influence
from the opinions and doctrines of men ?
Can any one read the Epistle of Barnabas,
the Shepherd of Hermas, the writings of
Justin Martyr, or of Tertullian, though within
one hundred years of the apostles, and make
them a just standard of doctrine ? And if
we cannot place confidence in them, how in
the writings of the third, fourth, and fifth
centuries, when the stream of knowledge,
being still more distant from the fountain,
might be supposed to be still more fouled
by the feet of men ? Yet the Puseyites and
our high-church traditionists look there prin

cipally. Then as to councils, we well know
the power and influence of a few master
minds in such assemblies, especially as
under the, influence of a powerful emperor,
as were the councils called in the early ages.
What says Greg6ry Nazianzen, one of the
most eminent fathers of those days ? " 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."
4. Catholic tradition is contradictory.
Striking is the profession of the great
Chillingworth, after stating his opinion, that
" the Bible, and the Bible alone is the reli
gion of Protestants " — " I for my part," says
he, " after a long, and, as 1 verily believe
and hope, impartial search of the true way
to eternal happiness, do profess plainly that
I cannot find any rest for the sole of my foot,
but upon this rock only. I see plainly, and
with my own eyes, that there are popes
against popes, councils against councils,
some fathers against others, the same fathers
against themselves; a consentof fathers of one
age against a consent of fathers of another age ;
the Church of one age against the Church of
another age ; traditi^e interpretations of Scrip
ture are pretended, but there are few or none
to be found. No tradition but only of Scrip
ture can derive iself from the fountain, but
may be plainly proved to have been brought
in in such an age kfter Christ, or that in such
an age it was not in. In a word, there is no
sufficient certainty but of Scripture only for
any considering men to build upon. This,
therefore, and this only, have I reason to
believe. This I will profess. According to
this I will live, and for this, if there be oc
casion, I will, riot only willingly but even
gladly, loose my life, though I should be
sorry that Christians should take it from me.
Propose me anything out of this book, and
inquire whether I believe or no, and seem it
never so incomprehensible to human reason,
1 will subscribe it with hand and heart, as
knowing no demonstration can be stronger
than this, God has said it, therefore it is true.
In other things, I will take no man's liberty
of judgment from him, neither shall any man
take mine from me. I will think no man
the worse man, nor the worse Christian ; I
will love no man the less for differing in
opinion from me. And what measure I
mete to others I expect from them again. I
am fully assured that God does not, and that,
therefore, men ought not, to require any more

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

17

of any man than this, to believe the Scrip
tures to be God's word, to endeavour to find
the true sense of it, and to live according to
it." To the above testimony of the uncer
tainty of faith as founded upon the fathers,
Sherlock's may be added, who says, " That
the Scripture is all of a piece, and every part
of it agrees with the rest ; -whereas the fa
thers many times contradict themselves and
each other.*
Upon the whole then, we see that to
admit Catholic tradition in our rule of faith,
is to involve ourselves in a labyrinth of per
plexities — it is to be thrown upon the wide
and unstable sea of uncertainty. But to have
recourse to the Bible, and the Bibje alone, as
the sole standard of truth, and to allow it to
be a self-interpreting book ; and together
with these things, to admit the right of pri
vate judgment, we then stand upon firm
ground : and however we may differ from
others as to its interpretation, we feel satis
fied in the assurance that we are amenable
to the tribunal of our Maker, who knows the
heart, and will judge with righteous judg
ment. To the above-mentioned arguments we
might have added another, that, every one
not only may, but must be " persuaded in his
own mind," and must give account of him
self unto God ; but this will form a distinct
subject in the consideration of the next tenet.
We close with remarking — That if we once
admit Catholic tradition as a handmaid, we
are in danger of having it for a mistress, at
least if in accordance with our preconceived
opinions. So it was with the Jews, who
made void the commandment of God by the
tradition of the elders ; so has it been in the
Roman church ; and so is it in a measure
with our Protestant Established church, as
is manifested by the superior regard that is
paid by a considerable proportion of its mem
bers to the three festival days of Easter,
Whitsuntide, and Christmas, to that of the
Lord's day ; although the latter is authorized
by Scripture, while the observance of the
others is supported only by tradition.
* The same may be said with regard to churches.
Witness the churches of the East against the
churches of the West, concerning Easter ; the
church of Erigland against the church of Rome, and
the church of England against the church of Scot
land. What says one of the articles of the church
of England 1 "As the church of Jerusalem, Alex
andria, and Antioch have erred, so also the church
of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and
manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith."

Tenet II.
Individuals should make a surrender nf their
private judgment tp the judgment of the
Church. ,
Thus they speak : " The Church of Eng
land, in freeing herself from the corruptions
of Rome, did not give up her adherence
to Catholic tradition, and set every man
loose to interpret Scripture for himself."* —
'' More accustomed to elevate his soul in
the prayers of the sanctuary and the sacri
fice ofthe altar, than presumptuously to weigh
the arguments of the preacher, and dogma*
tically to pronounce whether he does or does
not preach what he would call ' the Gospel,'
he runs not first after one preacher and then
after another, but permits God in his provi
dence to choose for him a pastor ; and
wherever he is, frequents his parish
church."t The same writer says, " Now,
such is the Christian the Church would train ;
and many such Christians there would be;
if pious men, instead of relying on the assum
ed infallibility of their own judgments,
would only defer in humility to the judgment
of the Church." — " We claim to interpret
God's word according to the teaching of
the Holy Catholic church in the first ages,
as it is now summed up in our Creeds and
Rituals : the Dissenter twists and distorts it
into all imaginable absurdities, arising from
an unrestrained abuse of each man's private
judgment.":): Refutation of Tenet II.
" Let every man be fully persuaded in his
own mind." — Romans xiv. 5.
The doctrine, that individuals should sur
render their private judgment to the Church,
supposes that the Church in the -aggregate is
most likely to judge that which is right ; and
it is urged upon the plea of uniformity as
tending to peace. But how far the former
may be considered as a well-founded suppo
sition may be seen from the foregoing Sec
tion. We may ask in our turn whether the
mischief arising from adherence to lathers
and councils, or " Catholic tradition," be not
best prevented by the exercise of private
judgment; and whether, that very exercise
* Melvill, in Gentleman's Magazine, July, 1839,
page 57, 58. ,
t Hook's Sermon on Training of Children, pages
4-6, 7.
t Knowll's Sling and Stone, page 84, 25.

18

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

be not, and was not designed, to be the great
conservative principle of the Church ? In
connexion with having the Bible in free and
universal circulation, as the great rule and
principle of religion, we incline to think it
is so, and was so intended : but we shall
not stay to discuss this point here, but pro
ceed to notice the plea upon which such
surrender of private judgment to the Church
is urged : that by uniformity you preserve
the peace. Very true — such a peace as it
is ! If the " whole world lay in wickedness,"
without any counteracting agency, it would
suit the designs of the great deceiver well —
nothing would please the "prince of dark
ness " more than your succeeding, by throw
ing a veil of ignorance and error over the
world, to lull them into peace ! But, ye
sons of light,: ye " children of light and -of
the day," resist his artifices, and be," valiant
for the truth upon the earth." Your Saviour,
" Prince of Peace," as He was, " came not"
thus " to send peace on the earth " — no —
" but a sword;" and his apostle James, much
as he pleaded for peace, placed purity of
truth before peace. We must be " truthing,"
we must be investigating, buying, and declar
ing the truth, although it must be " in love "
— in love to God, the God of truth, and to
man, who can be Saved alone by truth ; for
" the wisdom that is from above is first
pure " — then " peaceable " and "gentle."
But if the love of truth may not yield even
to the love of peace,, then uniformity cannot
in the present state of human nature, be
maintained ; and if it cannot be maintain
ed, then the forced attempt to maintain it
must, so far from " preserving the peace,"
in proportion as that force is used, tend
to destroy it. But is it the fact, that uni
formity in modes, and forms, and views,
cannot be maintained 1 We think that di
versity of opinion is unavoidable ; and that
therefore, so will be diversity of modes and
forms. Difference of constitutional tempera
ment, of oral communication, as well as of
the sources of information, will occasion
such diversity. One, by reason of a certain
constitutional temperament, upon a given
subject, will draw a hasty conclusion ; ano
ther, by reason of a different temperament,
will form a deliberate conclusion ; one, on
account of constant communication with a
certain circle of friends, will favour this
scheme of doctrine ; another, having com
munication with a circle of friends of a con
trary or different persuasion, will favour
that scheme of doctrine ; this may have ac
cess to a great and well-chosen library,
while that may have access only to a small

and ill-chosen one. How can you avoid
such occurrences, or their different results ?
And if you cannot, then therefore must be di
versity—there cannot be uniformity. Doubt
less, much may be done by a desire of uni
formity ; and doubtless we ought, according
to the apostolic exhortation, to endeavour to
be " of the same mind, and of the same judg
ment ;" but for the reasons above given,, it
cannot be ; and therefore, the only thing that
remains in the present state of things, is not
to insist upon it, but to " endeavour to keep
the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace,"
notwithstanding all our differences, upon
the common ground laid down by the
Apostle in the connexion of the words
last quoted ; that " there is one body and
one Spirit, even as we are called in one
hope of our calling ; one Lord, one faith, one
baptism, one God and Father of all, who is
above all, and through all, and in us all ;"
aiming to be " of the same mind and of the
same judgment," by preaching, by conversa
tion, by writing, and all in love ; edifying
one another, not biting and devouring one
another, " till we all come in the unity
of the faith, and of the knowledge of. the
Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the
measure of the stature of the fulness of
Christ." A forced attempt at uniformity, so far from
preserving peace, may break it. Take an
occurrence in early church history for illus
tration and example. There arose, about
the erid of the second century, a difference
of opinion between the Eastern and West
ern churches concerning the time of keep
ing Easter. " The churches of all Asia,"
says Eusebius, " guided by a remoter tradi
tion, supposed that they ought to keep the
fourteenth day of the moon for the festival of
the Saviour's passover, in which day the
Jews were commanded to kill the paschal
lamb ; and it was incumbent on them at all
times to make an end of the fast on this day,
on whatever day of the week it should hap
pen to fall. But as it was not the custom
to celebrate it in this manner in the churches
throughout the rest of the world, whoobserve
the practice that has prevailed from aposto
lic tradition until the present time, so that it
would not be proper to terminate our fast on
any other but the day of the resurrection of
our Saviour." Hence there were synods
and convocations of the bishops on this ques
tion ; and all unanimously drew up an eccle
siastical decree, which they communicated
to all the churches in all places, that the
mystery of our Lord's resurrection should bo
celebrated on no other day than the Lord's

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

19

day ; and that on this day alone we should
observe the close ofthe paschal fasts." Here
then, we see " synods and convocations of
bishops " assuming to themselves the power
of settling this point, as guided, they say, by
" apostolic tradition." But let us hear Eu-
sebius again : " The bishops however of
Asia, persevering in observing the custom
handed down to them from their fathers,
were headed by Polycrates. He indeed
had also set forth the tradition handed down
to them, in a letter which he addressed to
Victor and the church of Rome. ' We,'
said he, 'therefore observe the genuine
day; neither adding thereto, nor taking
therefrom. For in Asia, great lights have
fallen asleep which shall rise again in
the day of the Lord's appearing ; in which
he will come with glory from heaven, and
will raise up all the saints.'" Polycra
tes goes on to mention the names of seve
ral who observe their custom ; among whom,
Philip and his two daughters, John the
Apostle, and Polycarp of Symrna, are
mentioned. " ' All these,' adds he, ' observ
ed the fourteenth day of the passover, ac
cording to the gospel ; deviating in no re
spect, but following the rule of faith. More
over, I, Polycrates, who am the least of all
of you, according to the tradition of my
relatives, some of whom I have followed.
For there were seven of my relatives bishops,
and I am the eighth ; and my relatives
always observed the day when the Jews
threw away the leaven. I therefore brethren
am now sixty-five years in the Lord, who,
having conferred with the brethern, through
out the world, and having studied the whole
of the sacred Scriptures, am not at all alarmed
at these things with which I am threatened to
intimidate me. For they who are greater
than I, have said, " We ought to obey God
rather than man." I could also mention
the bishops that were present, whom you
requested to be summoned by me, and whom
I did call ; whose names, did I write them
would present a great number. Who, how
ever, seeing my slender body, consented to
the epistle, well knowing that I did not bear
my gray hairs for nought, but that I did at
all times regulate my life in the Lord
Jesus.'" > Such is the account which Euse-
bius gives us of the churches of Asia, and of
the conduct of Polycrates as their represen
tative ; and we see how far it was from
being uniform with the churches of the West,
as headed by their " synods and convoca
tions," on this Subject of the time of keep
ing Easter. Nor was there a diversity of
opinion and practice as to the time of keep

ing it only, but also as to the manner of
fasting at that period. " Some think," says
Iranasus, " that they ought to fast only one
day, some two, some more days ; some
compute their days as consisting of forty
hours, night and day ; and this diversity ex-
isting^ among those who observe it, is not a
matter that has just sprung up in our times,
but long ago, among* those before us,
who, perhaps, not having ruled with suffi
cient strictness, established the practice that
arose from their simplicity and inexperience."
See then, from all this, that: uniformity
could not be maintained in those early
ages of Christianity. — We now proceed to
show, that a forced attempt to preserve only
tended to break the peace it was designed
to occasion. For what did Victor the
bishop of Rome do, when he found that
Polycrates and the churches of Asia would
not comply ? He " forthwith cut off the
churches of all Asia, together with the neigh
bouring churches, as heterodox, from the
common unity; and he published abroad, by
letters, and proclaimed, that all the brethren
there were wholly excommunicated."* Such
was the result of this forced attempt at uni
formity in this case; and perhaps a more
dreadful one happened in our own country
about the year 600, when Austin, or Augustin,
having been made archbishop of Canterbury,
demanded that the Britons should conform
to the See of Rome concerning the very
same feast of Easter, in connexion with some
other things. " At the borders of Worces
tershire, a spot selected as being conveni
ent to the British clergy then residing in
Wales, he," Austin, " summoned a council,
and demanded from them obedience to the
See of Rome, and the reception of the Ro
mish ceremonies. But the Britons firmly
opposed it. Another synod or session of
the clergy was consequently agreed on, and
a greater number assembled than before, and
among them seven bishops. Agustin how
ever could not succeed in his object ; and
finding them firm to their purpose, now in
sisted on an agreement only in three things —
the observation of Easter, the administration
of baptism, and assisting him in preaching
to the English Saxons. But, ' suspecting
him of pride,' neither in these would they
submit : and soon after, it appears that, under
Edilfrid, then the most powerful king of the
English, who gathered together an army to
reduce them into subjection, many hundreds
of the monastery of Bangor were slain ; so
that the authority of the Roman See over

* Cruse's Eusebius, pp. 188—191.

20

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

the British churches had its foundation iri
cruelty and blood ;* and. its forced attempt at
uniformity, resulted in cruelty and blood !"
Shall we not add to these the attempts, at
uniformity since ? What has been the re
sult of them? Bonds, imprisonment, the
stake, fines, cruelties, disabilities, reproach,
contempt, and whatnot?
Charitable as we "have been in imputing
this attempt at uniformity to a desire of
peace, we should not do right to confine
it to such a motive. Has it not sometimes
proceeded from a desire to prostrate the"
minds of others to our own ? Why did Ne
buchadnezzar set Up the golden image, and
command all " people, nations, and langua
ges," to "fall down and worship it?" Was
it not under the supposition that to bow all
minds to the mind of Darius, would be pe
culiarly flattering and acceptable to him,
that the presidents and princes of his empire
proposed the decree that no person should
" ask a petition of any god or man for thirty
days, save of him the king?" We know
what it was that prompted Antiochus to de
mand of the Jews a compliance with his re
ligion. " Moreover," says the author ofthe
first book of the Maccabees, " king Antiochus
wrote to his whole kingdom, that all should
be one people, and every one should leave
his laws," in which he had been brought up,
and the Jews among the rest — " that they
should leave their children uncircumcised—
to the end that they might forget the law,
and change all the ordinances." There must
be uniformity — all must think as he thought
~alL must do as he did. And what was the
result of this command for uniformity and
for bowing to the arbitrary will of man in
these cases ? In the first, Shadrach,^ Me
shach, and Abednego, were " cast into the
midst of a burning fiery furnace "—in the
second, Daniel was " cast into the den of
lions " — in the last, great numbers of Jews
were " tortured " and perished ; and all, men
too " of whom the world was not worthy,"
and for nothing else, moreover, than because
they would " obey God rather than man !"
Then come down to the Christian era : was
there nothing of self-will, nothing of love of
arbitrary power in the case of Victor — in
our popes — and in all the requisitions of uni
formity since the Reformation in England
until now ?
If we would " keep the unity qfthe Spirit
in the bond of peace," we must abandon this
idea of uniformity. So Paul the apostle
taught, as may be seen in that remarkable,
* Weaver's " Pagan Altar," &c. pp. 200, 201. 1

and on this subject, truly important chapter,
the fourteenth- to the Romans. In the church
at Rome there was a great difference of opi
nion and practice in regard to the distinction
of meats and observance of days ; does the
apostle quarrel with them on account of it ?
does he feel angry with them ? < does he insist
upon uniformity ? does he ever require that
the minority should yield to the majority ?
No such thing. On the contrary, he will
not allow brother to " despise " brother
on account . of it, nor even to. -"judge"
his brother ; but concludingthat either side
did it " to the Lord," to please the Lord, he
still exhorts them to " receive one another,"
and that" with one mind and one mouth they
glorify God." How was it with the prmitive
Christians ? Even in the case of Victor,
many of the bishops " exhorted him to conr
template that course that -was calculated to
promote peace, unity, and love to one' an
other." " Among the rest, was Irenaeus,
who in the name of those brethren in Gaul
over whom he presided, wrote an epistle, in
which he ' admonishes Victor-not to cut off
whole churches! of God, who observed the
tradition of ancient custom,' and reminds him
how those who differed in times ' long ago,'
' maintained peace with one another,' adding ;
' And those presbyters who governed the
church before Soter, and over which you
now preside, I mean Anicetus and Pius, Hy-
ginus with Telesphorus and Xystus, neither
did themselves observe, nor did they permit
those after them to observe it. And yet
thoughthemselves did not keep it, they were
not the less on peace withthose from churches
where it was kept, whenever they came to
them ; although to keep it then was so much
the more in opposition to those who did not.
Neither at any time did they cast off any
merely for the sake of the form. But those
very presbyters before thee, who did not ob
serve it.sent the eucharist to those of churches
who did. And when the blessed Polycarp
went to Rome, in the time of Anicetus," and
they had a little difference among themselves
likewise respecting other matters, they im
mediately were reconciled, not, disputing
much with one another on this head. For
neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp
not to/observe it, because he had always ob
served it with John the disciple of our Lord,
and the rest of the apostles with whom he
associated ; and neither did Polycarp per
suade Anicetus to observe, who said that he
was bound: to maintain the practice of the
presbyters before him. Which things being
so, they communed with each other ; and in
the church, Anicetus yielded to Polycarp,

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

21

out of respect, no doubt, to the office of
consecrating, and they separated from each
other in peace, all the church being at peace ;
both those that observed, and those that did
not observe, maintaining peace.' "* So writes
Irenaeus to Victor;, and the extract shows, that
until Victor, the churches understood and acted
upon the principles laid down by the apostle
Paul, in the chapter before-mentioned. Nor
is this all ; we find that Socrates Scholasti-
cus, who followed Eusebius in ecclesiastical
history, and who wrote about the fifth cen
tury, while he gives us to understand very
much at large that there existed a great di
versity of opinion and practice throughout
the Christian world, yet that they remained
still united in communion. An extract or
two shall confirm our remark. " Every sect
and religion hath sundry and divers rites and
ceremonies, yet conceive they no worse opi
nions of others than of themselves." " Al
though all these countries, nations, and lan
guages, thus varied one from another, yet
they never divided the communion of the
church, neither break they asunder the bonds
of unity." As to these diversities, he says,
" The originals and authors of great diversity
were bishops who governed the churches
at divers and several times. But to put on
paper the infinite and divers ceremonies and
customs throughout cities and countries
would be a very tedious piece of work, and
impossible to be done."t
To compel or enforce uniformity therefore
is not only anti-scriptural, but it is directly-
opposed to that Catholic antiquity to which
our opponents so firmly adhere, and there
fore we must abandon the idea ; if we would
preserve peace. " Let every one," says the
apostolic injunction, " be fully persuaded in
his own mind ;" nor can the mind have rest
and peace, or be free in the exercise of Chris
tian love to his brethren, without such per
mission ; while on the other hand, if every
man be left to the free exercise of his own
judgment, without fear of being " despised "
or "judged" by his brother, we shall soon
see that " the unity of the Spirit in the bond
of peace " is kept in a far higher degree than
.when uniformity of modes and forms is en
forced by legal enactments ; and far more
likely are we, in this way, to hear again the
* Cruse's Eusebius, p. 191.
t Socrates Scholasticus, p, 353.
t " To reduce Christians to unity of communion
there are but two ways that may be conceived proba
ble. The one, by taking away the diversity of opi
nions touching matters of religion ; the other, by
showing that the diversity of opinions which is among
the several sects of Christians ought to be no hinder-
ance to their unity in communion." Chilling-worth.

world remark, " See how these Christians
love one another."!
Having shown the futility of those argu
ments upon which the surrender of our pri
vate judgment is demanded of us, we shall
be better prepared to listen to such as may
be advanced in favour of such right.
1. It arises from the very constitution of
our nature, both mental and moral ; that is,
as endued with understanding, and as made
accountable. The great Creator has given us a nature
consisting of " spirit," " soul," and " body "
— of a " spirit," to think and understand ; of
a " soul," to be the seat of sensation, of the
passions, and affections ; of a " body," as
the organ of both ; and he has created us
free agents, forming us so as that our under
standing shall influence our will and affec
tions, and these, our actions. Moreover he
has set up within us a tribunal, wherein our
" conscience bears witness, and our thoughts
the meanwhile accuse or else excuse us."
Such being the case, as our King, he has
commanded that we should think, that we
should understand, and act according to our
understanding, and has made us accountable
for the employment of our understanding ;
and therefore, if this right of private judg
ment be not given me as the regulator of my
conduct, vain in me is the conscience that
bears witness, and the thoughts that judge
me, in regard to the love or hatred of truth,
to the compliance or non-compliance with
duty — another, the church, must judge for
me what is truth and what is error : another,
the church, must determine what is right and
good, and what is wrong and evil. We must
all throw down the tribunal of judgment
created within us ; we must all shut up the
court of conscience, in which we are to
judge ourselves ! The apostle Paul might
as well have spared his recommendation to
the Corinthians to "judge themselves, thai
they might not be judged of the Lord," as
well as his appeal, " Judge ye not of your
selves what is right ?" — But we have under
standing for ourselves ; and are accountable
for the use of that understanding ; if not so,
why among the catalogue of the crimes of the
heathen world, do we find that one, of being
" without understanding ?" why are the Jews
so often censured for their want of under
standing and consideration ? why that re
markable expression, " It is a people of no
understanding : therefore He that made them
will not have mercy upon them, and He that
formed them will show them no favour ?"
Why again does God pronounce a "wo"
against them that call " evil good, and good

n

COMPLETE VLEW OF PUSEYISM. '

evil;. that put darkness for light, and light
for darkness?" If we are not to judge for
ourselves as to the mind of God in Scripture,
why are we commanded to " search the
Scriptures ?" and why were the Bereans
considered as " noble," " because they
searched the Scriptures daily, to see whe
ther the things told them were so ?" What
soever respect therefore I may have for the
judgment of others — yet I must understand,
I must judge for myself; and if I do, as
Scott the commentator said, use others'' spec
tacles, I must after all use my own eyes.
Nor is that all — whatsoever upon considera
tion I judge or believe to be right to do, I must
do ; for " he that knoweth to do good, and
doeth it not, to him it is sin."
2. This exercise of our own understanding,
and this personal judgment, is not only allow
ed in Scripture, but enjoined. .
When, in the apostles' days, the church
of Rome was divided in its opinions as to the
distinction of meats and observance of days,
the injunction of Paul was, " Let every man
be fully persuaded in his own mind ;" and
he taught also that, whatever persuasion any
brother might possess, that he should not be
"judged" or " despised" by his brother on
account of that persuasion. It was enough,
that for such persuasion, and for the conduct
consequent thereupon, he was to " give ac
count of himself to God." Nor was he to
act without such persuasion ; for, says the
apostle, " whatsoever is not of faith, is sin :"
as if he had said, We must exercise our un
derstanding in the best manner we can ; we
must form our judgment as correctly as pos
sible ; for if, while when " we know how to
do good, and do it not, to us it is sin ;" if
we do what we believe is not right to do, " it
is sin :" thus showing, that we should form
our judgment upon things, and act according
to such judgment. Hence such exhortations
as these, " Prove all things ; hold fast that
which is good" — " Believe not every spirit,
but try the spirits " — " Beware of false pro
phets " — " If any come unto you and receive
not this doctrine, receive him not into your
house ;" hence also the commendation of
the Ephesian church for " trying them that
eaid they were apostles ; and hence the cau
tion of our Lord to his disciples against blind
leaders, giving them to understand that the
led, as well as the leaders, would " fall into
the ditch." Do not all these things — addressr
ed to individuals as they were — prove that
individuals not only are allowed, but thatit
is enjoined upon them, to exercise the right
of private judgment ?
3, This exercise of private judgment seems

to be, the conservative principle ofthe Church;
for if men do not thus exercise this right,
what security has the Church against rising
error ?
" There must be heresies among you,"
says, the apostle Paul to the Corinthians,
"that they which are approved maybe made
manifest ;" but how could they be " ap
proved " and made " manifest," if they were
to yield to the heresy, without bringing it to
the test ? , Even in the apostles' days there
were " heresies " in the church at Corinth ;
some in the churches of Galatia " perverted
the gospel of Christ ;" the apostle Paul as
sures the elders of the Ephesian church that,
" even of their ownselves should men arise,
speaking perverse things to draw away dis
ciples after them." The same apostle deem
ed it necessary to warn the Colossians to
"beware lest any man spoil them through
philosophy and vain deceit ;" he assures tho
Thessalonians that there would be a falling
away, and that the " man of sin " would be
revealed, who, in " the temple of God," the
church, " would exalt himself above all that
is called God ;" and even that " the mystery
of iniquity was already working ;" and our
Lord, in his addresses to the seven churches
of Asia, plainly indicates the danger, they
were in from error, and, from "synagogues
of Satan," or assemblages. of men who were
the patrons of error. , Now in these cases,
and under these circumstances, were not the
members of the respective churches individ
ually to watch and judge ? Yes, they were
to " prove all things ;" they were to " try the
spirits ;" to bring both men and things to the
testof Scripture, and thus preserve the Church
from error. Hence we conclude, that the
exercise of private judgment, in connexion
with the free and universal circulation of the
Scriptures, under God, is the conservative
principle of the Christian church.
But it will be said, " Who so likely to un
derstand the Scriptures, and to know the
truth, as well-educated men, or as the church,
collectively considered?" To which we re
ply, that a poor illiterate man is as likely to
know the mind of God in the Scriptures, as
the literary and scientific. He has not the
pride of worldly wisdom to overcome, as the
latter have ; for what says the apostle ?
" Let no man deceive himself: if any man
among you seemeth to be wise in this world,
let him become a fool that he may be wise.
For the wisdom of this .world is foolishness
with God." Not only was Christ's religion
designed for the many as well as the few,
but it is expressly said ; " God hath chosen
the foolish things of the world to confound

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

23

the wise ; and God hath chosen the weak
things of the world to confound the things
which are mighty ; and base things of the
world, and things which are despised, hath
God chosen ; yea, and things which are not,
to bring to nought things that are ; that no
flesh should glory in his presence." If so,
we cannot wonder that " the way-faring men,
though fools, should not err therein — " and
that God should reveal that unto babes, which
is hid from the wise and prudent."
As to the judgment of the church, what.
satisfactory dependance can be placed upon
it ; if instead of relying solely on the Scrip
tures, we have recourse to tradition so falla
cious ? For the church of England in one
of their articles, say — " as the churches of
Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have
erred, so also the church of Rome hath
erred, not only in their living, and manner
of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith."
Tenet III.
The Church of England can claim an aposto
lical succession of Ministers, who receive in
ordination Apostolic Grace."
By this Apostolical succession they mean,
that the bishops by whom their clergy are
ordained, can' trace up their pedigree to the
apostles, and that their authority is apostolical,
as is also that of the clergy whom they ordain,
to the exclusion of all other preachers and
teachers in the administration of the word
and sacraments. As to this Apostolical suc
cession thus they write : "The Bishops of
our church without question, are descended
in a regular line frOm the apostles."* " The
only ministration to which the Lord has
promised his presence is to those of the bi
shops, who are successors of the first com mis
sioned apostles, and the other clergy acting
under their sanction and by their authority."-)-
" The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper can
only be administered by ministers duly or
dained, and that, therefore, it is needful to
continue in a church possessing an Apostoli
cal Succession. "J
To give efficacy to their Apostolical Sue-
sion, they maintain that — '
The Holy Ghost dwells in the clergy, passmg
to them in ordination, and that this is called
Apostolical or Episcopal Grace.
Thus Keble, discoursing on that passage,
"That good thing which was committed to
thee keep by the Holy Ghost, which dwell.
* Cary's Apostolical Succession, page 6.
T Hook's Sermon on Church Establishments.
t Hook's Sermon on Training of Children, page 10.

eth in us," says ; " Now certainly the obvious-
meaning of the text is, that the treasure of
sound doctrine was to be guarded by th«
grace of the apostolical succession. For
Paul speaks of the Holy Ghost dwelling in
us, that is, in himself and Timothy ; and how
it had passed from him to Timothy, had been
expressed a few verses before; 'I will that
thou stir up the grace of God which is in
thee by the imposition of my hands.' The
Church of England, you will remember, sup
plies full warrant for this interpretation, by
directing the same phrase to be solemnly re
peated at the consecration of every bishop :
' Remember that thou stir up the grace of
God which is given thee by this imposition
of oiir hands ;' and also where, in ordaining
a bishop or presbyter, the solemn words are
spoken, ' Receive ye the Holy Ghost.' Our
Church, therefore, does not teach us to con
sider the Holy Ghost dwelling in Paul and
Timothy as properly miraculous, a gift of ex
traordinary grace, but as their portion of that
Spirit which was to be poured on all apostles
and successors of the apostles for ever. It
was not what is commonly called miraculous,
yet it was altogether supernatural; for no
natural or acquired virtue or talent, though it
might be called the gift of the Holy Ghost,
would ever be designated as the Holy Ghost
himself abiding in a man ; neither was it the
preventing or assisting grace common to all
Christian persons, for it was given to Timothy
in particular by imposition of Paul's hands'.
It could only be what the Church interprets
it, apostolical or episcopal grace."* Speak
ing further on, of the nature and operation of
this " Holy Ghost dwelling" in such, he says,
"As often as misgivings and alarms come over
us, we must ' stir up the grace of God which is
in us by imposition of apostolic hands,' for
' God hath not,given a spirit of cowardice, but
of power, and of love, and of brotherly correc
tion and reproof; a Spirit that brings with
him an invisible but real power, to open and
shut the kingdom of heaven in the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ ; a Spirit of never-fail
ing love and charity to men's souls, to guide
us in the exercise of that more than human
power ; and lastly, a spirit of kind and father
ly, yet if need be, uncompromising and fear
less rebuke."f " The gift of the Holy Ghost
has been preserved in the world solely by
means of the Episcopal succession ; and to
seek communion with Christ by any other
channel is to attempt an impossibility ."t
* Keble on Primitive Tradition, page 42, 43.
t Keble, nage 52.
t Prefaces*) Froude's Remains.

24

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

Refutation of Tenet III.
" Thou hast tried them which say they are
apostles, and are not, and has found them
liars." — Revelation ii. !i.
" Our bishops are successors of the apos
tles, and we, as ordained by them, share in
the succession, and are therefore the autho
rized teachers of God's word, and the admi
nistrators of his sacrament." Such is the
language of the English clergy of the Pu
seyite or High-Church school ; and some
will attach the word "only " to it, not only
as to the administration of the sacraments,
but as to the preaching of the word.
" Successors of the apostles !"* High
sounding words ! Not, as apostles, of
course, because they neither immediately
came out from Christ, nor have " the signs of
an apostle — in signs, and wonders, and mighty
* As to the succession, let us hear what has been
said by some of the eminent of the succession them
selves. Bishop Hoadly. — "As far we can judge of this,
God's providence never yet, in fact, kept up a regu
lar uninterupted succession of rightful bishops." — " It
hath not pleased God in his providence to keep up
any proof of (he least probability or moral possibility of
a regular uninterrupted succession ; but there is a great
appearance, and humanly speaking, a certainty of the
contrary, that the succession hath often been inter
rupted." Bp. Stillingfleet, — " By the loss of the records of,
the British churches, we cannot draw down the suc
cession of bishops from the apostles' times ; that of
the bishops of London, by Jocelyn, of Fumes, not
being worth mentioning."
Abp. Usher frankly refers to a celebrated author,
Giraldus, who declares that " the accounts given of
British bishops which stand at the head of the suc
cession, were rather agreeable to common fame and
opinion than any certainty of history."
Abp. Whalely. — " There is not a minister in all
Christendom who is able to trace up, with any ap
proach to certainty, his own spiritual pedigree."
To show the invalidity of the argument he says,
" If a bishop has not been duly consecrated, or had
not been previously, rightly ordained, his ordinations
are null." " We read of bishops consecrated when
mere children ; of men officiating who barely knew
their letters ; of prelates expelled, and others put
into their places by violence ; of illiterate and profli
gate laymen and habitual drunkards admitted to holy
orders ; and in short, of tho prevalence of every kind
of disorder and reckless disregard of the decency
which the apostle enjoins. It is inconceivable that
any one, even moderately acquainted with history,
can feel a certainty, or any approach to certainty, that
amidst all this confusion and corruption, every requi
site form was, in every instance, strictly adhered to
by men, many of them openly profane and secular,
unrestrained by j)ublic opinion, through the gross ig-
noranc« of the population among wnom they liv^d ;
and that not one not duly consecrated or ordained,
was admitted to the sacred offices." ^Kingdom of
Christ, pp. 176—178. ^

deeds ;" but it must be that they succeed to
the apostles in their official right of " preach
ing the kingdom of God, and teaching the
things which concern the Lord Jesus
Christ," as did the apostle Paul and the
other apostles ; it must be, that as servants
in that kingdom, they might gather in sub
jects to that kingdom and subserve its inter
ests. Now to do these things, the succes
sion cannot be a succession by birth, as was
that of the Levitical priesthood, which priest
hood is done away ;" but it must :be a suc
cession of office that is intended, and there
fore the question arises, What is that official
succession which the King of Zion intended
in his kingdom to succeed the apostles in
advancing the interests of that kingdom?
Was it the mere appointment to office, with
out regard to qualification, or an appoint
ment with such regard ? Common sense
says the latter. Suppose an individual of
the medical profession were to express his
desire in his will that the eldest son in each
successive generation from him should ad
here to the same profession, would he intend
it without respect to qualification ? Certain
ly not : would he wish so to risk the lives
of his fellow race ? Nor could the Lord
Christ, when he expressed his will that
there should be a succession of individuals'
who should proclaim and administer his
" saving health," intend that such individu
als should be engaged who were not quali
fied for such an occupation. When, there
fore, our Lord, by the expression, " Lo, I
am with you alway, even unto the end of
the world " — meaning, " the end of time" —
indicated that there would be a succession
of such as should " preach the gospel," &e.
he must intend the gracious promise for
persons engaged therein who were qualified
for the engagement: nor can we indeed
suppose that he would pledge himself to be
thus graciously present with any others.
We conclude therefore, that it is not such
an " official succession " as has respect only
to appointment, but that it was designed to
include qualification; and that such only
would the Lord Christ consider as the
successors of his immediate apostles, and
that to such only the promised presence
applied. 1. No one was ever intended to be a suc
cessor of the apostles, who is not " recon
ciled to God by Jesus Christ."
What are these successors ? " Ministers
of reconciliation " between God and man, to
whom is " committed the ministry of recon
ciliation." But would any king or master
employ an ambassador or servant to effect a

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

28

reconciliation with a party at variance, when
such ambassador or servant, was not on
terms of amity with his king or master ? It
is absurd to suppose it. The apostle Paul,
•speaking of himself, and his fellow labourers
as ambassadors for Christ, and as having
" committed to them the ministry of recon
ciliation," takes care to inform them that
God had " reconciled them to himself" first.
Let no one therefore boast of the " apostolic
succession," who has not " received the re
conciliation," and is thus actually " recon
ciled to God "
2. No one was ever designed by the Lord
Christ to be a successor of the apostles but
one who loves Christ.
Not even Peter the apostle was to be
commissioned to " feed " Christ's " sheep,"
or even his " lambs," until he he had declar
ed his love to Christ, and by implication,
his supreme love to him. All the apostles
did supremely love Christ, nor would they
have been fit to serve him or the gospel, if
they had not so loved ; for otherwise, they
could not have endured such privations and
persecutions in his cause. Do ye thus love
Christ, all ye who claim the " apostolic suc
cession ?"
3. No one was to be a successor of the
apostles who would not act the part of a
shepherd — love the flock, feed them, watch
over them, and restore them ; for such did
God promise to "set over " his sheep.
Speaking ofthe days of Messiah the King,
the Holy Spirit says, " I will set up shep
herds over them, which shall feed them :
and they shall fear no more, nor be dismay
ed, neither shall they be lacking." Now
what is the meaning of this? That the
shepherds he would set over his people
should be persons who should not only feed
their flock, but should so watch over them,
so comfort, so encourage, so guard them by
their good and scriptural doctrine, that they
should not, at least, have occasion for "fear "
of perishing by their enemies ; and should
also, under the care and blessing of the
" great Shepherd of the sheep," so defend
and preserve them by their wholesome doc
trine, as that they would not be finally lost,
and so be "lacking." And why mention
snch shepherds as these ? Evidently to
distinguish them from " the pastors that de
stroy and scatter the sheep," before reprov
ed — pastors that, in other places, are repre
sented as " no shepherds," or as " idol shep
herds," which are as " nothing in the world;"
and from "shepherds that cannot under
stand." In accordance with this, our Lord re
presents him who " entereth not by the door,"

himself, "but climbeth up some other way,"
not as " the shepherd of the sheep," but as
•' a thief and a robber ;' and declares them
to be " strangers " also, whom the shepp
" will not follow," and whose " voice they
know not."
4. None did the Lord Christ design to be
successors of his apostles, but "fajtkful men
who should be able to teach others also."
Would Christ commit such a deposit as
the gospel to men who could not be recog-r
nised as believers of that gospel, and who
were unfit to be entrusted with it ? He did
not " put into the ministry " Paul himself,
but as " counting him faithful." Would he
commit to men to teach and preach it such as
did not know it themselves, and were not
qualified for teaching it toothers ? But let us
hear the apostle Paul himself, speaking of
the true succession : " The things that thou
hast heard of me, among many witnesses,
the same commit thou to faithful men, who
shall be able to teach others also." Paul, as
having been " counted faithful," had com
mitted to him the precious deposit ; he com
mitted it to Timothy, and now Timothy
was to commit it to others. But who were
they that were to receive it ? " Faithful
men," true believers and trusty ; and men
*' able to teach others." Ah ! without the
faith that " works by love," that " purifies
the heart," that " overcomes the world,"
what Christians would be faithful to their
engagements ? If men have not been
" taught of God " themselves, they are not
" able to teach others. It will not suffice,
that men should teach by sermons prepared
by others, but their own " heart must indite
good matter," and their " tongue must be as
the pen of a ready writer," in order that
they may prove themselves " the servants of
the Most High God, to show unto men the
way of salvation."
5. The King of Zion could intend no per
sons to be servants in his kingdom, or to
minister the " word ofhis kingdom," but such
as would be subjects of his kingdom.
What . king would employ aliens, and
much less enemies ? Now, it is written,
" Except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God." To be a subject of this kingdom, we
must " enter :" and natural-born subjects may
become servants, and be employed as suc
cessors to other natural born subjects, in the
required service ; but not those who are not
" children of the kingdom." Those there
fore whom the King of Zion would intend
to be successors of his apostles in minister
ing the word of his kingdom and in promot-

26

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

ing its interests, we may naturally conclude
would be, at least, subjects of it ; and since
hone can be so but such as are " born of the
Spirit," we may conclude that none could be
intended by him to be the successors of the
apostles who were not regenerate'd persons.
In conclusion, let us ask our brethren who
know that " the kingdom of God is not in
word, but in power ;" who know that " the
kingdom of God is within " us ; who know
that " the kingdom of God is not meat and
drinh," that it does not consist in the observ
ance of certain customs, or in certain reli
gious observances, but " in righteousness,
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost ;" let us
ask them two questions — the first is, whether
the apostle Paul does not say, that " he that
in >hese things," " righteousness, peace, and
joy," serves Christ is " acceptable to God ?"
and the second is a qustion which follows
from the other, whether he who, while he
aims at, succeeds in bringing most of such
subjects into this " kingdom of God," ought
not to be accounted the best servant in this
kingdom, and most truly a successor of the
apostles ? and whether such a one does not
" serve Christ " better, and is not more " ac
ceptable to God," than thousands of those
who boast of such succession ?
Thus, we have endeavoured to show, not
only that the successors ofthe apostles would
be so appointed with respect to their qualifi
cations for such office, but also that there are
certain requisites to such appointment, both
in the view of common sense and of Scrip
ture. Now then, upon a review of the whole,
let a judgment be formed — let the public
teachers of the Established church, of the
Independents, ofthe Baptists, of the Wesley -
ans, be judged by the qualifications or requi
sites specified, and we shall soon see who
have the fairest claim to the denomination of
" successors of the apostles." Alas, that a
corrupt and filthy succession, which involves
in its line popes of abominable ' character,
numberless priests who were slaves of sin
and of the world, men whom the King of
Zion himself would stigmatise as " watch
men that are blind — ignorant — dumb dogs,
sleeping, lying down to slumber — greedy
dogs — shepherds that cannot understand, that
look to their own way, every one for his gain
from his quarter ;" alas, that such should be
set up as of the " holy apostolic succession,"
and the only dne, while thousands of men of
a totally different character should be " cast
out " as unauthorized !
But, say our opponents, there is " aposto
lical grace connected with the ordination."
.We therefore naturally inquire, What is this

grace ? and what is its communication ? What
is this "-grace of the apostolical succession ?"
Keble says, " It was not what is commonly
called miraculous, yet it was altogether super
natural-;" " neither was it the preventing or
assisting grace common to all Christian per
sons " — " it could only be what the Church
interprets it, apostolical or episcopal grace."
But then the question Teturns, What is this
" apostolical or episcopal grace ?" Accord
ing to him, it is " the Holy Ghost dwelling
in us," as a " Spirit of power, of love, and of
brotherly correction and reproof; a Spirit that
brings with him an invisible but real power,
to open and shut the kingdom of heaven in
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ ; a Spirit
of never-failing love and charity to men's souls,
to guide us in the exercise of that more than
human power ; and lastly, a Spirit of kind
and fatherly, yet, if need be, uncompromising
and fearless rebuke." Such is Keble's state
ment, but it leaves us in doubt, after all, as
to the nature of this " grace." But, no mat
ter ; unless this grace be such as quaMfies for
the ministry, and is given to the persons Je-
fore described, even to such as are " recon
ciled to God by Jesus Christ," it will not set
aside our views of the true apostolical suc
cession. Keble, however, founds the doctrine on
that exhortation of the apostle to Timothy ;
" That good thing which was committed to
thee, keep, by the Holy Ghost that dwelleth
in us," in connexion with the words of our
Saviour to his apostles, " Receive ye the
Holy Ghost." But, I, It does not follow that,
because Paul exhorted Timothy to " keep,"
&c, that Timothy would understand it of
other grace than that ofthe Holy Spirit which
dwells in all true believers. 2, It does not
follow, that supposing the apostle intended
peculiar grace as dwelling in himself and
Timothy, both at the time giving evidence of
it, that all succeeding preachers of the word,
whether giving evidence of it or not, should
possess it. Nor, 3, Does it follow that be
cause Paul had power to communicate^ this
" peculiar grace," so supposed, to Timothy,
that therefore Timothy would have power to
communicate it also, much less that bishops
in all succeeding ages should have this power;
for neither Timothy nor such bishops would
be apostles as Paul was, having the signs of
an apostle as he. Nor, 4, Concerning our
Lord's saying, " Receive ye the Holy Ghost,"
can it be inferred from thence, that bishops
in succession, even to the present time, have
a right to say so, or can efficiently communi
cate the Holy Ghost ; indeed it seems to us
presumption, bordering upon blasphemy, for

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

27

any man to say so to his fellow men. Who
was the person who uttered these words ?
One, in whom the Father dwelt — one, in
whom the Holy Ghost, or the Spirit of the
Godhead, dwelt personally, and as his own,
and therefore one, who might well give it as
his own property ; and with the words, as
from him, " virtue " might go forth, as in his
miracles : but can this authorize any mere
man to say so ? He " breathed on them " at
the time, intimating that the Holy Ghost was
from himself, as the breath of man is from
himself : and it was not improbably, his de
sign, by this " inspiration " to give an " un
derstanding " suited to their office. But will
any mere man imitate him in either the words
or the breathing ? indeed, dare any man do
so ? We really tremble at any man's saying
only — for our Anglican bishops do not, we
presume, use the sign of breathing — "Receive
ye the Holy Ghost," for it implies that they
have it to give ; but who can bestow this
inestimable gift beside God. Yet Keble
teaches us that the Holy Ghost passes from
the bishop to the candidate by the imposition
ef his hands.
This brings us, 2, To inquire concerning
the communication of this " apostolical or
episcopal grace."
This grace, communicated to " dwell in "
the candidate, passes to him by the imposition
of hands ; but we have proved, that there is
no communication at all, since the time of the
apostles. But we will suppose, for the pre
sent, that there is such communication, and
then we would ask another question — What
if there should not be a receptivity in the sub
ject for such " apostolical grace ?" If it be
" grace " worth the name — " peculiar grace,"
— grace such as qualifies for the ministry,
and not mere fanaticism or mysticism, it must
be a compassion for souls, zeal for the glory
of God, an impressive conviction of the im
portance of Divine truth, and its adaptedness
to the great purposes of saving souls and of
glorifying God, for these are the true pre
paratives ofthe Christian ministry. But how
can there be compassion of souls, where
there is no previous sense of the soul's worth
or danger ? How can there be a zeal for the
glory of God, as seen in the redemption of
sinners, if there has been no prior discovery
of that glory to the mind ? How can there
be an impressive sense of the importance
and adaptedness of Divine truth for the pur
poses of the ministry, if that truth has not
been before known ? We say then, that such
" grace " supposes a receptivity in the subject
— in the candidate for holy orders ; and con
sequently, where such receptivity is not, it is

incongruous to imagine that such " grace "
would be communicated. If the idea of
Keble be, that the " grace " really passes from
the person of the bishop to the person of the
candidate, we might remark, that as well
might we expect that the electric fluid would
pass through a chain composed of links of
wood asiwell as of iron, as that the apostoli
cal grace would pass in lineal succession from
the apostles to the clergy of the present day ;
for less receptive of this grace have thousands
of the ordained clergy, from the times of the
apostles until now been, than would the links
of wood, in a long-continued chain of iron
and wood, be of the electric fluid. Think
of what Baronius himself, though a Roman
Catholic historian, said ; " that for a succes
sion of fifty popes, not one pious or virtuous
man sat in the pontifical chair ; many of
them were whoremongers and murderers ;"
think of the long succession of bishops and
priests during the official continuance of these
popes ; think of the ordained during the reign
of the Stuarts, and of such men as King
Charles II. — think of the Anglican clergy,
during the time of their late awful defection
— and then say whether the chain will have
been completely receptive of this " apostolical
and episcopal grace."
Or if by this " grace " passing from the
bishop to the candidate upon the imposition
of hands, be intended only that, at this bi
shop's official designation of the candidate,
the grace is not actually communicated from
his person, but that it proceeds immediately
from God ; yet can it be supposed, that the
infinitely holy God, would give such grace
to persons, not only so unworthy, but so unfit
for it ? We read of God's " giving the Holy
Ghost to them that obey him ;" we read of
two or three cases in which he gave the
spirit of prophecy, for some particular pur
pose, to unregenerate men, such as Balaam,
and Saul, and Caiaphas ; but the Scripture
will not w.arrant us in saying, that he would
give the " grace " of the Holy Spirit to such
men as are above-mentioned, much less to
" dwell in " them.
We appeal to fact. How can all those
ordained by bishops say, " the Holy Ghost
dwelleth in us," and that by that Holy Ghost
dwelling in them, they keep the sacred de
posit ? How could the fifty popes themselvs^
of whom mention has been made, say so ?
how could all the worldly and corrupt, priests
that have taken upon them the Christian,
ministry say so ? If not, where are the
" apostolical grace," and the " apostolical
succession 1"

28

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

Tenet IV.
The Episcopal clergy, as ministers of the
apostolical succession, have'the sole right to
administer the Word and the Sacraments.
" The only ministrations to which the
Lord has promised his presence, is to those
of the bishops, who are successors of the
first commissioned Apostles, and the other
clergy, acting under their sanction, and by
their authority."* " The sacrament of the
Lord's supper can only be administered by
ministers duly ordained ; and therefore it is
needful to continue in a church possessing
an apostolical succession "t " Bishops,
Priests, and Deacons alone can administer
Christ's sacraments and ordinances. "J
Refutation of Tenet IV.
Your brethren that hated you ; that cast you
out for my name's sake, said, Let the Lord
be glorified : but he shall appQar to your
joy, and they shall be ashamed. Isa. Ixvi. 5.
Perhaps in speaking of the claimed sole
authority of the' Episcopal clergy to adminis
ter the word and the sacraments, we should
distinguish between the administration of the
word and the administration of the sacra
ments ; because some might admit of the
former and not of the latter : but we shall
not consider the distinction as worthy of
notice, but proceed to the general question,
Have the ordained clergy of the Episcopal
Church of England the sole right thus to
administer the word and sacraments ? If
they have, then, Independent ministers, or
Baptist ministers, or Wesleyan ministers, of
every class, have no right to do so. Ye are
all intruders into the sacred office, and there
fore resign all your pretensions ; let your
chapels and yOur schools of instruction be
all shut up and sold to the best bidder ; and
no more, in your official capacity at least,
attempt to save souls, or to advance the in
terests of the kingdom of Christ and of God.
But since the validity of ordination by the
bishop depends upon the apostolical succes
sion and the apostolical grace, so called, if we
have succeeded in proving the futility of
these claims in the preceding section, we
may consider this exclusive claim also as
null and void But we will show the inva
lidity of such an assumption, on other
grounds. We will assume that dissenting
ministers, even though the dogma of aposto-
* Hook's Sermon on the Church Establishment.
t Hook on the Training of Children, page 10.
X Knollin's Sling and Stone, page 46.

lical succession were admitted, have never
been fairly excluded from it ; upon this
ground, That the " Act of Uniformity," pass
ed in the time of King Charles II. , according
to the laws of Christ's kingdom — the laws
by which all Christians profess to be govern-
ed-^was an illegal act; and as such, 'was

null and void. Have we not proved in Sec
tion II. that the laws of Christ require that
one Christian, or that one section of the Chris
tian church, should allow another Christian,
or another section of the Christian church,
the right of private judgment, or to " be fully
persuaded in its own mind ;" without being
"judged" or "despised" on account of a
differing judgment ? If so, unquestionably
that "act" must have been illegal'; for it
required " an unfeigned assent and consent
to everything written in the Book of Common
Prayer," upon pain of exclusion from their
situation in the Church of England ; the
obvious consequence of which was, that no
one could thenceforward be ordained by a
bishop, so called, who did not thus conform ;
and thus they were necessarily excluded
from Episcopal ordination. How comes it
to pass, then, that dissenting ministers are
not episcopally ordained, and as our oppo
nents imagine, are out of the apostolic suc
cession ? Because a certain section of that
kingdom passed an act contrary" to Christ,
the King and his government itself, which
neither that king nor that government will
allow to be legal. Shall any account then
be made of such an illegal act ? No ; it was
— it is null and void ; nor can it operate in
the sight of Christ, the King of his church,
or according to the construction of his law,
as an exclusion. We claim therefore, if
there be anything in this " apostolical suc
cession," still to belong to it ; and as to the
" apostolical grace," we assume that we have,
at least, as fair a claim as the ordained
clergy of the church of England to that.
Moreover, we maintain, that dissenting
ministers, according to Christ the King, and
according to his laws, are more worthy of
being considered as of the " apostolical suc
cession " than the ordained clergy of the
church of England, whether we consider the
persons ordained, the ordainers, or the ordi
nation itself ?
1. As to the persons ordained, they are
men " reconciled to God by Jesus Christ ;"
they are recognised as such who love Christ
their King ; they are shepherds that love their
sheep, that watch over and feed them, and
restore them; they are "faithful men, able
to telach others ;" they were subjects of the
kingdom before they were servants. More-

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM

29

Over, as to the " grace " peculiar to such- as
are properly of the succession, they have
that compassion for souls, that zeal for the
glory of God, that conviction of the import
ance and adaptedness of the truth of the
gospel for the great* purposes of the gospel
ministry, which should distinguish the " suc
cessors of the apostles " in " the kingdom of
Christ and of God." And an impartial judge
will allow, that since the " Act of Uniformity"
passed which excluded them, as a body, they
have a fairer claim to those requisites and
qualifications than the Episcopal clergy in
general, from that time until now, have had.
If so, then they are more like the successors
of the apostles.
2. Not only do the character and qualifi
cations of the dissenting ministry better ac
cord with the designation of " successors of
the apostles," as the ordained ; but the or-
dainers of the Dissenters are more like
those who ordained in the apostolic and pri
mitive times.
Who were then the ordainers ? Apostles,
evangelists, and afterwards bishops or elders.
But whatever was theiroffice, and however
designated, they were men who themselves
" taught and preached the kingdom of God,
and the things that concern the Lord Jesus
Christ' ;" they were men inflamed with love
to and zeal for the extension of this kingdom
of " righteousness and peace and joy," and
for the glory of Christ ; they were men of
God, and not of the world ; men, in whom
the Spirit ol God dwelt, and whose "effect
ual fervent prayers " for the ordained might
" avail much." After the second century,
when we read no more of evangelists, but of
bishops or presbyters, those bishops were
men wh3 were pastors or shepherds over
their respective flocks ; men who watched
over and fed their flocks ; men over one flock,
and not many flocks ; and who consequently
lived among them. Nor were there any
other bishops in the apostolic and primitive
days. For the truth of this, we appeal to
Archbishop Wake himself, who has given
us the writings of the Apostolical Fathers.
In his work we have the epistles of Clement,
bishop of the church at Rome, the epistle of
Polycarp, bishop of the church at Smyrna,
and the epistles of Ignatius, the bishop of the
church at Antioch. The former writes to
the church at Corinth, the second to the
church at Philippi, and the latter to the
churches at Ephesus, at Magnesia, at Tralles,
at Rome, at Philadelphia, at Smyrna, and
another to Polycarp, as bishop of the church
at Smyrna. From all these epistles, it ap
pears, that not only were the writers them

selves bishops of one church, but that the
churches to which they wrote had each over
them a bishop, as bishop of that one flock
alone, and as such resided among them.
Although Clement and Ignatius and Polycarp
write to those churches, yet it is not as their
bishop, or as having authority over them,
only as more aged, as of longer standing*
and as having been acquainted with and
disciples of the apostles. By such men as
these, then, were the ministers of the first
churches, or the churches after the apostles
and evangelists, ordained ; and let the reader
therefore judge, whether the bishops of the
church of England, or those of the churches
of the Dissenters by whom their ministers
are ordained, agree best with the primitive
pattern. 3. The ordination itself.
In the days of the apostles and in those
succeeding the apostles, those who presided
over the churches, the bishops or presbyters,
were chosen by the suffrage of the church.
Nor was it until the council of Laodicea, in
the year. 368,* that the practice was discon
tinued. Let those acquainted with ecclesi
astical history deny this, if they can.t But
the bishops and priests of the church of Eng
land do not so ordain, or are not so ordained.
Ah ! if the scriptural, the apostolic custom
had ' continued, we should, most probably,
never have heardof many of those corruptions
that have obtained in the church of God ! It
might have acted as a conservative principle,
However, among the general body of Dis
senters, the custom of ordaining pastors by
*- A council at Laodicea, in the year 368, decreed
that the laity should not choose the priest. — Hunmer's
A ncient Ecclesiastical Histories, p. 586
t From the emperor Constantine's letter to the peo
ple of Antioch, requesting them not to withdraw Euse
bius from Cesarea to be bishop of Antioch, it mani
festly appfears, that he considered the people as elec
tors ; for, says he, " Ecclesiastical honours should be
obtained and conferred without trouble or discord ;
therefore the general suffrage of all men should be
equally weigKed and considered:" — P. 52. " He that
is elected to a bishopric by the general suffrage and
consent of wise men assembled to deliberate thereof,
ought by God's laws to enjoy it, and receive the fruit
thereof, seeing he was by your free consent and ap
probation formally elected."
Socrates Scholasticus, speaking of an elettion to.
the bishopric of Constantinople, thus remarks : — " Af
ter the decease of Atticus Marcus, great contention,
in the church of Constantinople arose about the elec-.
tion of a bishop ; for some would have Philip a minis
ter, some others Proclus, who also was' a minister,
preferred : but all the people with uniform consent
desired Sisinius. All the laity laboured by all means
to have him to be their bishop, because he was counted
a very godly man, and partly also for that he endea
voured to relieve the poor beyond his substance. — ¦
Philip inveighed against the laity who were electors."
Page 390.

30

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

the suffrage of the church is observed ; and
therefore we again put the question, Who
most resemble the apostolic and primitive
pattern, the established church of England,
or the Dissenters ?
Hence, we conclude, that as to the or
dained, the ordainer, and the ordination, the
Dissenters have a fairer claim to be of the
true apostolic succession than the established
church of England. Let us hear no more of
the exclusive right of the episcopal clergy
to minister the word and the sacraments.
But what if it appears, that the ministry of
a man of good character and of the requisite
qualifications is valid, even though episcopal
hands have not been laid upon him, or indeed
, any hands ? Philip the deacon went down
and preached at Samaria — who laid hands
upon him ? Apollos was an eloquent man,
mighty in the Scriptures,and eminently useful;
there is no appearance of his having been
ordained by the imposition of hands, or of his
being ordained at all ; nor of the many " fel
low-helpers," and " fellow-workers," or " la
bourers " with Paul. Would the gospel have
been propagated as it was if they had waited
for that ? Moreover, it would be well for us
to consider, that it is the power God chiefly
regards, not the form; the spirit,notihe tetter.
Why else does the apostle argue as he does,
in the latter end of the second chapter of his
epistle to the Romans, where, although not
speaking of the ministry, yet he teaches us
what is most acceptable to God as a Spirit,
and that persons who have the qualifications
without the ceremony are ever preferred to
such as have undergone the ceremony, who
yet have not the qualifications ? For in the
case of circumcision and uncircumcision ;
flie man uncircumcised that kept God's law,
was to be preferred to the circumcised that
kept not God's law ; and the former would be
reckoned as in God's covenant, although he
had not the token of the covenant. By par
ity o( reasoning, therefore, we may conclude,
that God would consider that man as his ser
vant and a true successor of the apostles, who
possessed the character and qualifications
requisite to such office, though not regularly
inducted into it by any instituted form, rather
than he- who, although inducted by the pre
scribed form, was yet destitute of those quali
fications : because, while " man looketh at
the outward appearance, the Lord looketh at
the heart;" and because he regards the
" powet " more than the " form."
Upon the whole, then, we see with how
little reason the Anglican clergy count them
selves the only authorized teachers, and
"cast out" their brethren as unauthorized.

Ah ! it reminds us of the conduct of the Jew
ish teachers toward the apostles of our Lord,
as foretold by Isaiah, " your brethren who
hated you, that cast you out, for my name's
sake, said : Let the Lord be glorified ; but
he shall appear to your joy, and they shall
be ashamed. Who say, Stand by thyself,
come not near to me ; for I am holier than
thou : These are a smoke in my nose, a
fire that burneth all the day."
Tenet V.
The Episcopal Church, such as is the Church
of England, is the only true Apostolical
Chutch.
Thus they write : — " It is needful to con
tinue in a church possessing an apostolical
succession." " The only ministrations to
which the Lord has promised his presence,
is to those of the bishops, who are successors
of the first commissioned apostles, and the
other clergy, acting under their sanction and
by their authority."* " No congregation,
not being under this form of government,"
bishops, priests, and deacons, " can be a true
branch of Christ's holy Catholic church. "f
" That body does not belong to Christ's
church, in which there are not bishops,
priests, and deacons. "J
Refutation of Tenet V.
" I know the blasphemy of them that say they
are Jews, and are not." — Revelation ii. 9.
" For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly ;
neither is that circumcision, which is out
ward in the flesh ': but he is a Jew, which is
one inwardly ; and circumcision is that of
the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter;
whose praise is not of men, but of God."—
Romans ii. 28, 29.
The introduction of light is the best way
of dispelling darkness : let us therefore let
in the light of Scripture upon this subject,
"the Church." The word eKKkrjata, the
Greek word for "the Church," occurs seven-
ty-fivetimes in the Septuagint Old Testament.
In more than forty of these it indicates the
whole congregation of Israel, not always how
ever, as assembled for religious purposes;
for it is applied to the congregation assembled
for war, when David and Goliath engaged
in single combat. In Psalm xxvi. 12, and
lxviii. 26, it is used in the plural number for
" congregations." Another view of this word
is given us in 1 Sam. xix. 20 ; for there it is
* Hook's Training of Children.
f Bishop of London.
t Exposition pf Church Catechism.

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

%t

applied to the company of prophets at Naioth
in Ramah, of which Samuel was the head.
More remarkable still ; in Psalm xxvi. 5, it
is used for a company of evil doers. It must
then be a generic terra, signifying a congre
gation, as such ; although it is usually applied
to the whole congregation of Israel, and near
ly always to such congregation as a " whole,"
or else to particular congregations of them.
Indeed, the word eKKXrjata is constantly ren
dered " congregation " in the Old Testament.
In the New Testament it occurs one hun
dred and eleven times. Of these, about
twenty apply to the whole church of God, or
all the professors of the faith and worship
and practice of Christianity, " of all kindreds
and tongues, and people and nations." There
are about eighty in which the term is applied
to particular congregations of such in a city
or town, or else the aggregate of believers
in such city or town, as at Jerusalem. There
are five places where it is used for an assem
bly of Christian people meeting in a house
These include all the senses in which ekkX-
rjaia is used, applicable to the Christian reli
gion. There yet remain, three places, in
which the word has reference to a heathen
assembly, as at Ephesus ; when that tumul
tuous cry was made, " Great is Diana of the
Ephesians !" and where it is applied to the
" assembly," either then convened, or that
might be convened. From these statements,
we gather —
1 . As the word is applied to the whole body
of the people of Israel — " the church in the
wilderness " — and to the whole congregation
of Israel ; we may perhaps apply it, as the
Westminister Confession of Faith does, to
" all that profess the true religion and their
seed." 2. It will apply to the whole true spiritual
Israel, " the general assembly and church of
the First-born."
3. It applies to all separate congregations
of professed believers, as to the church at
Rome, at Corintjh, "the churches of" the
province of " Galatia ;" and to such congre
gations, however small. Hence, there are
five places where we read of a church in a
house. There are about eighty passages in the
New Testament in which the term is applied
to particular congregations. This therefore
is the most pominent idea, and it is recog
nised in the Article of the church of England
which runs thus : It " is a congregation of
faithful men, in the which the piire word of
God is preached, and the sacraments be duly
administered, accordingto Christ's ordinance,
in all those things that of necessity are re- '

quisite to the same." Now then the ques
tion returns, Is the Episcopal church the
only true Apostolical church ? In replying
to this question, we will show what tho
churches in the apostolical days were, and
we shall then see, that not only is not the
church of England, the only true Apostolical
church, but that the churches of the Dissen
ters have a far better claim to be denomi
nated " apostolical."
We begin with the church at Rome, the
first in order in the New Testament. This
consisted of such as were " called of Jesus
Christ " " called to be saints ;" and in reading
the epistle, we find that they were the "jus
tified by faith," such as had " received the
atonement," were no longer " the servants
of sin," but " the servants of righteousness ;"
not now " in the flesh, but in the Spirit,"
having " the Spirit of God dwelling in " them.
Passing on to the church of Corinth, we find,
that the members who composed it were
" the sanctified in Christ Jesus," were in the
habit of " calling on Christ," and though
notoriously wicked before, were " washed,
sanctified, justified." The churches of Ga
latia are represented as those who had " re
ceived the Spirit ;" and professedly " all the
children of God by faith in Christ Jesus ;"
and as " sons," having " the Spirit " of God's
" Son sent into their hearts." The Ephe
sian church was " blessed with all spiritual
blessings in Christ Jesus," and " accepted in
the Beloved." The church at Philippi had
a " good work begun in them," and Paul
thought it " meet for him to think this of
them all." The Colossian church was ad
dressed as " faithful brethren," as having
" love to all the saints," and a " hope laid up
for them in heaven." In the church at
Thessalonica are recognised " the work of
faith, and labour of love, and patience of
hope in our Lord Jesus Christ." When
Paul wrote to Titus, speaking manifestly of
the church in general, after noticing their
former state as " foolish, disobedient," &c4
he represents them, of God's " mercy saved
by the washing of regeneration, and renew-1
ing of the Holy Ghost, shed on them/' &c.
Nor is it otherwise when we come to the
seven churches of Asia ; proving of what
materials the New Testament churches were
composed. If we proceed forward to the
churches in the apostolic times or immedi
ately after as addressed by Clement, Ignatius,
and Polycarp, We shall Ard them the same.
Now look at those apostolical and primi
tive churches, and then at the church of
England established by law, in its constitu
tion) and in its several congregations, and

32

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

then at the dissenting churches, and see
which of these are the most " apostolical."
" But ours is the only true apostolical
church," say our Anglican or Puseyite clergy,
" because it has its bishops, priests, and dea
cons, as the primitive church had." Was
the church at Philippi a true church ? The
apostle Paul, in addressing himself to it,
says, " with the bishops and deacons " only.
Not a word about " priests !" Then again,
since " the kingdom of God " and " the
church of God " are one and the same thing
¦ — the apostle, in writing to the Roman be
lievers, xiv. 17, 18; according to the exclu
sive pretensions of our high-church people,
should have said, " The kingdom of God "
is a society ruled by bishops, priests, and
deacons ; not a society under the rule of
" righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy
Ghost ;" for according to them, any society
under the rule of " bishops, priests, and dea
cons," is a church — is of " the kingdom of
God ;" so exclusively, that out of the pale
of such a church, they will scarcely allow
that there is salvation ! But no matter — let
me abide by the apostle ; if I have the rule
of " righteousness, peace, and joy within
me," I am of" the kingdom of God" — I am
of the church ; and, as the same apostle
tells me, " in these things I serve Christ,"
and am " acceptable to God," and I ought to
be " approved of men ;" even of those high-
churchmen. But no ! " unless you are of a
church under the rule of bishops, priests,
and deacons, you are not ' acceptable • to
God,' nor ' approved by us ;' we unchris-
tianize you — you are not of ' the kingdom
of God ?' " But men not of the established
Episcopal church, who have " the kingdom "
of " righteousness, and peace, and joy, in
the Holy Ghost " set up " within " them,
will set at naught all such arrogance and ex
clusiveness, and rejoice to think that they
are deemed by an apostle "in these things
to serve Christ," and are declared to be " ac
ceptable to God" And " if God be for us,
who can be against us ?" This exculsive-
ness reminds us again of the passage in
Isaiah lxvi. 5, " Your brethren that hated
you, that cast you out for my name's sake,
said, Let the Lord be glorified ; but he shall
appear to your joy, and they shall be
ashamed." But let us examine this pretension. We
have " bishops, priests, and deacons," &c,
1. Bishops." Are they New Testament bi
shops ? or taking them upon their own
ground, as appealing to antiquity, are they
such bishops as the churches had in the
apostolic days, or just after them ? They

are not so. Those bishops were over one
church, were pastors of one flock, which
they themselves fed, watched over, and
lived with. Are Anglican bishops so ?
2. " Priests." Was this the appellation of
the presbyters or elders in the apostolic or
primitive churches ? There were " presby
ters" in a church, but they were not called
" priests." Those presbyters belonged to
the same single congregation or church, and
were not ministers of separate churches.
3. Deacons. They are neither in Scripture,
nor ¦ in the first churches, considered as
preachers of the word, but as men whose
concern was about the needy and indigent,
" serving tables," according lo their original
appointment. Now put those things toge
ther, look at the bishop, presbyters, and dea
cons ; they were, very different from the
three orders in the established church of this,
realm, and particularly in this one respect
— that they all belonged to one church or con
gregation. That they did so, a ppears not only
from the New Testament churches, most, if
not all of which, had its " bishops and dea
cons," as the church at Philippi and at Ephe
sus, but from this circumstance — that, as at
Corinth, they " came together into one place."
As to the churches immediately after, and
which were written to by Clement, Ignatius,
and Polycarp, called by Archbishop Wake
"Apostolical Fathers," the same fact appears
concerning them. Thus Ignatius to the
Ephesians : " Let it be therefore your care
to come oftener together, to the praise and
glory of God. For when ye meet together
in the same place, the powers of the devil
are destroyed, and his mischief is dissolved
by the unity of your faith." " That ye all by
name come together in common in one faith,
and in one Jesus Christ, who was of the race
of David according to the flesh ; the Son of
Man and Son of God ; obeying your bishop
and the presbytery with an entire affection,
breaking one and the same bread." To the
Magnesians : " So neither do ye anything
without your bishop and presbyters : neither
endeavour to let anything appear rational to
yourselves apart ; but being come together
into the same place, have one common play
er, one supplication, one mind, one hope, in
charity and in joy undefiled. There is one
Lord Jesus Christ, than whom nothing is
better. Wherefore, come ye altogether, as
unto one temple of God." To the Philadel-
phians : " But come all together, into the
same place, with an undivided heart." To
show what sort of oversight those bishops
had — not only that it was over one church,
but over all in that church — Ignatius, writing

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

83

to his brother Polycarp, says, f Let your as--
semblies be more frequent ; inquire into all
by name. Overlook not the men and maid
servants.'* Another thing remarkable is this; that
even at the end of the Becond, and the be
ginning of the third century, we find no men
tion in Eusebius of any other bishops than
such as were over the church in any given
place, to feed them, to watch over them, to
preside over them, and to live among them.
Again and again, we meet with this expres
sion — " the bishops of the neighbouring
churches," as though all had their distinct
charges. Nor is it less remarkable, that
when a church became vacant, these neigh
bouring churches concerned themselves
about filling up the vacancy. Thus when
Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, withdrew
from the church, it is expressly said ; Nar
cissus having retired from the world, and no
one knowing whither he had gone, it seemed
proper to the neighbouring churches to pro
ceed to tlie ordination of another bishop."
Speaking of one Alexander, " who was bi
shop of another church," the historian adds,
that he " was called to the office of bishop
of Jerusalem at the same time with Narcis
sus, with the common consent of the bisbops
of the neighbouring churches ; they con
strained him to stay among them," and as
afterward appears, to be " colleague with "
Narcissus. Origen is also said to have " re
ceived the ordination to the priesthood at
Cesarea, from the bishops of that country."
Concerning Fabianus, bishop of Rome, Eu
sebius thus writes : " When all the brethren
had assembled in the church, for the purpose
of ordaining him that should succeed him,
though there were very many eminent and
illustrious men in the expectation of. many,
Fabianus being present, no one thought of
any other man." It is added, " without de
lay they took and placed him upon the epis
copal throne."
We see then what sort of bishops there
were in the earliest ages of the Church, and
how they were ordained ; nor ought we to
omit, that they wefo then ordained with the
consent of the Church.
Now reviewing this whole subject, what
inferences can we draw but these ?
1. That the Christians in a city or town
were considered as the Church in that city
or town, however numerous.
2. That( however great the number of the
Christians, and of the presbyters Or bishops
over them, yet that originally there was but
one presiding bishop.*
* "Wa say *' originally," because, at length, the
8

'3. That this bishop was over one church
only, feeding, watching, and ruling over it ;
exercising nd authority over any other church.
4. That such presiding bishop was ordain
ed by the bishops ofthe neighbouring churches.
5. That it was with consent ofthe Church
Remarks.
I. In the first two hundred years of the
Christian era there was no Lord bishop ; nd
" unpreaching " bishop ; no bishop but such
as " fed the flock over which he was an over
seer," watched over it, presided in it, and of
course resided among them.
II. There was no bishop over a plurality
of churches, much less over twenty or thirty;
or a hundred, or more churches, with whom,-
and with their ministers, he could not be
cognizant ; nor that assumed authority over
any church but his own.
III. Presbyters and deacons belonged to
the same church as that over which the " bi
shop " presided, and not to other and separate
churches. IV. Ordination was not by one bishop, but
by many " neighbouring bishops," who might
be acquainted both with the people, and with
the bishop that was to be set over them.
V. In not one case, even in the time of
Constantine, do we find that a bishop was
chosen by the civil authority.
Nowfrom this, let the reader judge whether
the argument urged by our Puseyite and
High-churchmen, that the church of Eng
land, as governed by " bishops, priests, and
deacons," is the true apostolical Church, be
a valid argument for it or not ; yea, let hirr!
judge whether the churches among the Dis
senters have not the best claim to be con-*
sidered as " apostolical churches," as being
constituted in a way more accordant with the
apostolical and primitive model. If so, let
us hear no more of " The temple of the Lord
are these ; The temple ofthe Lord are these."
" We are the people; and wisdom will die
with us."
Christians in a city became so numerous, that they
had several bishops in one city. For Constantine
writes td Theodosius, Theodorus, Narcissus, Actius
Alpheus, and the other bishops at Antioch. — Eusebius1
Life of Constantine, p. 53. And these formed a
Synod. So there was a Synod at Tyre, p. 66.
In the church at Rome, in the third century, therfc
were 46 presbyters, 7 deacons, 7 sub-deacons, 42
acoluthi, clerks, 52 exorcists, readers, and janitors,
1,500 widows, afflicted and needy. — Cruse' s Euse
bius, p. 327, 243:

34

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

Tenet VI. »
We are not to expect that the Word and Sa
craments will be effectual out ofthe Episco
pal Church.
" The gift of the Holy Ghost has been
preserved in the world solely by means of
the episcopal succession ; and to seek com
munion with Christ by any other channel is to
attempt an impossibility."* " The only mini
stration to which the Lord has promised his
presence, is to those of the bishops, who are
successors ofthe first commissioned apostles,
and the other clergy, acting under their sanc
tion, and by their authority." " It is needful
to continue in a church possessing an apos
tolical succession."! Many warnings are
given to people by Puseyite clergymen
against attending other ministry than that, of
the Church, as dangerous to their souls.
Refutation of Tenet VI.
" Where two or three are gathered together in
my name, there am I." — Matt, xviii. 20.
Puseyites would make us believe that sav
ing benefits are not to be expected but from
the episcopal clergy. Then how came it to
pass that the declaring of the glad tidings of
the gospel, and the discoursing of the word
of salvation by the thousands that were scat
tered abroad at the persecution of Stephen,
became so effectual ? Why did Philip, a
deacon only, appointed to " serve tables," so
succeed, when he preached the " things con
cerning the kingdom of God" at Samaria?
How came it to pass that " Apollos, a certain
Jew, born at Alexandria, " knowing only the
baptism of John," who had hot ever been bap
tized with Christian baptism, and who had
never seen an apostle to lay hands upon him
- — how came it to pass, that he should so
" mightily convince the Jews," showing pub
licly that Jesus was Christ ? On none of
these does it appear that apostolical hands
were laid. Eusebius, the ecclesiastical
historian, says, that " the most of the dis
ciples, at the earliest times, animated with
a more ardent love of the Divine word, had
first fulfilled their Saviour's precept by dis
tributing their substance to the needy ; after-
ward,leaving their country, they performed the
office of evangelists to those who had not yet
heard the faith ; whilst with a noble ambi
tion to proclaim Christ, they also delivered
to them the holy gospels. After laying the
foundation of the faith in foreign parts, as the
particular object of their mission, and after
* Preface to Froude's Remains.
t Hook's Sermons.

appointing others as shepherds of the flocks,
and committing to them the care of those
that had been recently introduced, they went
again to other regions and nations, with the
grace and co-operation of God."* Now is
there any probability whatever, that multi
tudes of disciples, thus going forth to preach
the gospel, would go through the form of
episcopal ordination ? And yet how effectual
was their preaching ! During the twelve
years that presbyterian government prevailed
in Britain, and the government by bishops was
deemed unlawful, were there none converted ?
Since the English church cast out their
brethren by the "Act of Uniformity," have
those brethren's ministry been ineffectual ?
Rather, whose ministry has been so effec
tual ? Was not the ministry of Watts and
Doddridge effectual ? Is the ministry of our
Independent, Baptist, and Wesleyan brethren
of no avail ? Whence originated the Baptist
Missionary Society, the London Missionary
Society, and the Wesleyan Missionary So
ciety, but from the successful exertions and
preaching of the unauthorized teachers ? Are
the labours of Carey, of Morrison, of Philip,
of Williams, of Moffat, to be considered as
of no account ? Let our self-called " apos
tolical-succession "-preachers produce any
thing like it among the men of their spirit.
One question more we will ask : How comes
it to pass that those who have "joined them
selves to the Lord," and to his people, should
be so much more numerous under the preach
ing of the cast-out brethren, the " unautho
rized teachers," than under thai of the so-
called " authorized teachers " at the present
day ? Ye " unauthorized," let them cast you
out, but regard it not, since among you is
most eminently fulfilled that promise, " I will
pour out toy spirit upon thy seed, and my
blessing upon thine offspring. And they shall
spring up as among the grass, and as willows
by the water courses. One shall say, I am
the Lord's, and another shall call himself by
the name of Jacob ; and another shall sub
scribe with his hand unto the Lord, and sur
name himself with the name of Israel."
Tenet VII.
The Church has the gift of blessing and hal
lowing the rites and ceremonies which it has
decreed.
" Unless the Church has the power of dis
pensing grace through rites of its own ap
pointing, or is endued with the gift of blessing
and hallowing the rites or ceremonies which,
according to Article xx., it hath power to de-
* Cruse's Eusebius, p. 106.

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM

35

cree— but we may believe that the Church
has this gift."*
Refutation or Tenet VII.
• " Wherefore are ye subject to ordinances —
after the commandments and doctrines of
men ?" — Colossians ii. 20 — 22.
" There the Lord commanded the blessing."
— Psalm cxxxiii. 3.
It is not enough, it seems, that the church
of England has assumed the right of decree
ing rites and ceremonies ; but according to
the Tractarians, it must assume also the gift
of blesssing and hallowing them.
Let us first examine this right of decreeing,
for if it can be proved that this claim is un
founded, the other will fall to the ground of
course. Unhappy assumption this of a right
to decree rites and ceremonies ! What a
fruitful source of offence and division has it
been in the church of Christ ! No sooner
does the Church think proper to exercise this
right, but through supineness, or Jove of ho
nour or emolument, or fpom a mistaken re
gard to unity and peace, the major part of the
community will comply. But what if another
part of the Christian community, through
fidelity to their Lord, who has taught them
not to " add to " or " diminish " from his laws,
not to •' add to his words," not to receive
¦*? the doctrines and commandments of men "
-r-what, if another part of the Christian com
munity should see it their duty to refuse com
pliance ? The obvious result will be " divi
sion and offence." Who that is conversant
with the history of the Church knows not,
that in the sixteenth and seventeenth centu
ries, divisions did take place, that are even
yet far from being healed ? But is such de
creeing in accordance with Scripture ? No
such thing. Look at the church of Rome in
ihe days of the apostle Paul. There, some
ofthe church were for abstaining from certain
meats, and for observing certain days, while
others were for maintaining no such distinc
tion concerning either meats or days ; and it
so happened, that those who were for making
ao distinction despised those who did distin
guish as inferior in knowledge and weaker
in faith ; while on the other hand, those who
¦did distinguish judged those who did not, as
offending their Lord in eating things forbid
den. How does Paul decide concerning
these dissentients ? Does he say that this
party should " decree * what was to be done,
and that the other party must conform ? Does
he even say, that the weaker party must give
way to the stronger ? No ; so far from it, he
« Tract 90.

judges that since each party acted as appear
ed to them to be the Lord's will, neither of
them should enforce compliance on the other,
and that " every one should be fully persuaded
in his own mind," and act accordingly. Nor
indeed would he suffer either party to judge
or despise the other in thus doing ; but re
quires every one to leave the judgment to
God, seeing that " every one must give ac
count of himself to God." So much stres3
does he lay upon every one acting according
to his own conscientious conviction, that he
insists upon it that a man must act according
to it ; " For," say6 he, " whatsoever is not of
faith, is sin." As if he had said, " Whatso
ever a man does that he does not believe to
be right, to him it is sin." How far is all
this from one part of the Christian churcjh
decreeing for another part ! How far from
decreeing at all !
But if assuming to decree be an error, the
assumption to bless and hallow must be ano
ther error. As the former cannot be proved
from Scripture, so neither can the latter ;
and the same objection lies to the one as to
the other ; for how can a Bible Christian
accede to such a proposition as that the
Church hath the gift of blessing and hallow
ing its rites and ceremonies ? If the Church
can decree as she pleases, and then bless
and hallow as she pleases, then the injunc
tion of the apostle Paul, " Prove all things :
hold fast that which is good," is nugatory.
Nor indeed can [the direction, " Let every
man be fully persuaded in his own mind,"
be availing. Power thus assumed is cort-
trary to the mind of the Holy Spirit, as thus
speaking by Paul ; and it is contrary to
Paul's own spirit and practice, for he would
not have " dominion over the faith of the
Corinthians." Is if not " lording it over
God's heritage " — a thing forbidden by the
apostle Peter ? Besides, the church of
Christ, in its aggregate capacity, and in its
best state, is only the body of which Christ
is the head ; and who would think of the
body " decreeing ;" and who would think of
the body " blessing and hallowing ?" If not
the Church, much less the State.
We object to this power of decreeing rites
and ceremonies, and of blessing and hallow
ing them, because it favours the pomp and
pagentry and processions of the church of
Rome, and the introduction of them hereafter
into the church of England. Alas ! much
as it may please the multitude, a religion of
this kind withers and destroys the religion
of the heart; and every one who would not
be " corrupted from the simplicity that ,is in
Christ," should be upon his guard against it.

86

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

Tenet VIII.
To the priests of the Church belongs venera
tion in their ministration of blessings,
prayers, and absolution, on account of their
office as priests, whatever be their charac
ter as men.
Knojlis exhorts parents, in reference to
their children, to ask themselves. " Have
I jmplg,nted in them a deep reverence for the
office of the priests of God, whatever may be
their character as men ? Have I led them
to value their prayers, ap4 blessings, and
absolutions ?"*

Refutation of Tenet VJH-

Ye

serpents, ye generation of vipers, how
can ye escape the damnation of hell?"— *-
Matthew xxiii. 3$. N. B. Said to office
bearers.We pbject to ministers being called
" priests " at al}, under the Christian dispen
sation- If is trup, Isaiah, looking forward to
the Christian dispensation, says, " Ye shall
be named priests pf the L°rd," but this re
lates to Christians in common. " Your
ploughmen and your vine-dressers " implies
that they whose the ploughmen were, whose
the vjne-dressers were, should be called
" The priests," &c. So we find it, in the
New Testament. " Ye are a holy priest
hood," says Peter to the believers in com
mon. Paul, in the epistle to the Hebrews,
represents believers as persons who draw
nigh to God, and offer sacrifices. Peter
says that Christians are " Elect — unto the
sprinkling of blood " — a thing which-none
bi}t priesfs under the Jewish economy dared
to do. The whole church of God are re
presented to bp celebrating the praises of
the Savjpur as having made them priests
unto God- " Unto Him that loved us, and
washed us from our sins in his own blood,
and hath made us kings and priests unto Gqd.
They sang a new spng, saying, Thou art
worthy to tal^p thp bopk, and to open the
seals thereof, for thpu wast slain and hast
redeerned ps to Gpd by thy blood out of
every kindred, and tongue, and people, and
najion, andhasf made us unto our Qod kings
and priests."^—" Blessed and holy is he that
hath part in the first resurrection, on such
the second defttb, hath no power, but they
shall be pri,esj,s pf God and of Christ."
To the saints under the Christian dispensa
tion, is this appellation to be given, and to
them alone, for tp no others is ;t applied in
* Sling and Stone.

the New Testament. It is ,not then on ac
count of their being " priests," that the mi
nisters of the' Anglican church are to be
venerated. But are they, on account of their office as
dispensers of the word and sacraments?
Because the Scribes and Pharisees " sat in
Moses' seat," and thence declared the mind
of God, as far as they did declare it, their
instructions were to be received, but not
when they became " blind leaders ;" and so
far only are the instructions of those who
sit in Christ's seat to be regarded. If called
unhappily to hear the word of God from a
minister who was intoxicated at the time,
could we even venerate and receive the word
that came out ofhis lips, we could not vene
rate the man. Did our Saviour teach his
disciples to reverence or to " greet " the
Scribes and Pharisees "in the markets,"
merely because of their office ? Far from
it. To reverence " hypocrites," and such
as " devoured widows' houses ?" On the
contrary, he often warned them against them
and their doctrine, calling them " blind lead
ers," " blind guides ;" and as common
sense teaches us not to follow blind leaders
in the literal sense, so he cautioned his dis
ciples from following these guides, lest they,
as well as the leaders, should fall into the
ditch. If then they were to view them as
" blind leaders," how could they reverence
them ? There is an appalling description
of certain leaders of the Jews given us by
Isaiah. " His watchmen are blind : they
are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they
cannot bark ; sleeping, lying down, loving
to slumber. Yea, they are greedy dogs,
which can never have enough, and they are
shepherds that cannot understand : they all
look to their own way, every one for his
gain, from his quarter. Come ye, say they,
I will fetch wine, and we fill ourselves with
strong drink, and to-morrow shall be as this
day, and much' more abundant !" Can we
venerate, can we " greet " such characters ?
When we meet with " men of -God," who
" labour among us, and are over us in the
Lord, and admonish us," we should " esteem
them very highly in love for their work's
sake ;" but for what " works " can we thus
esteem the contrary character ? Besides, if
we are to '' try the spirits whether they are
of God," and to try such as say " they are
apostles and are not," of course we are to try
them as to their office, and whether respect
is to be paid to that. The apostle John
teaches us, that supposing a man comes to
our house, pleading his office as a teacher, if
he teach not according to the apostolic

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

37

doctrine, we are not to "receive him or
bid him God-speed." I want to be led to
Christ, to God, to heaven, by them ; but if
they know not the way to either how can
they show it to me ? If they themselves
are not in the way, but are going in an op
posite direction, I surely can owe them no
regard as " guides." They may indeed, as
Henry says, be " so proud as to think that
they see better and further than any, and
therefore undertake to be leaders of others,
to show others the way to heaven, when
they themselves know not one step of the
way, and accordingly prescribe to all, and
proscribe those who will not follow them ;"
however, the counsel of Jesus is to be taken
how much soever they may be offended.
Yet they should be prayed for, that their
eyes may be opened, and their hearts
changed. Alas for the cause of truth, alas for the
purity of faith, of worship, of discipline, and
of practice, in the church of God, if we are
to venerate, or even to receive, all teachers
that are sent us, when those who send are
of the wordly and carnal ! How, as led by
such, leaders, shall the people avoid falling
into the ditch ? So that we may say, Alas,
for the people also ! This Puseyite, this
High-church doctrine, that we are to listen
to, that we are to venerate our teachers, and
respect their ministrations, their prayers,
their absolutions and their blessings, what
ever be their character, in connection with the
doctrine that the people are to receive what
soever ministers are sent to them, sets aside
the exhortations of Scripture to " beware of
false prophets," to " try the spirits," and to
" prove all things, and hold that which is
good." It reproves the great""Head of the
Church himself for praising the church of
Ephesus, that they " tried them which said
they were apostles and were not." More
over, where is the conservative principle of
" the church of the living God ?" Ah, mis
chievous decree of the council of Laodicea,
in the year 368, that " the laity should not
choose the priest !" Self-elected bodies will
not long preserve their purity either in ecclesi
astical or civil communities.
Tenet IX.
The Sacraments are the principal means of
Salvation ; are effectual to salvation, ai?d
are generally necessary to it.
The principal means. — After mentioning
"assembling ourselves together in public
worship and reading the word of God, and
hearing it read and preached," the Oxford

Catechism adds, " but the holy sacraments
are the special means of grace."* " While
the subordinate means of grace are prayer,
the study' of the Scriptures, and meditation,
the chief means of grace are Baptism, Con
firmation, and the Lord's Supper."t
Efficacious means. — " This exposition
again harmonizes with the true doctrine of
the sacraments, in that it separates the two
great sacraments of the Gospel from every
thing else which God has made a means of
grace ; and as these two, Baptism and the
Lord's supper, communicate Christ to the
soul."f " The two sacraments of the Gos
pel, as they may be emphatically styled, are
the instruments of inward life, according to
our Lord's declaration, that baptism is a new
birth, and that in the eu char ist we eat the
living bread— They are the only justifying
rites or instruments of communicating the
atonement, which is the one thing necessary
to us." Means generally necessary to salva
tion — " What we do determine is that Christ
has ordained two special sacraments as ge
nerally necessary to salvation."^
Refutation of Tenet IX.
" Ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin,
but have omitted the weightier matters " — ¦
Matthew xxiii. 23.
" The sacraments are the principal means
of salvation !" What ! are they to be exalt
ed above the word, and meditation upon it ?
Did David think so when he penned the
first Psalm, the nineteenth Psalm, and the
hundred and nineteenth Psalm ; According
to him, it is " the law of the Lord " that
" converteth the soul," and " that maketh
wise the simple ;" and where does he attri
bute such effects to the sacraments of circum
cision or the passover ? Did David's " Lord"
think so when he prayed that his disciples
might be " sanctified through the truth," even
God's " word ?" For whom did he pray 1
Not for those who should receive the sacra
ments, but for them " who should believe on
him through their word." Did the apostle
Paul think that the sacraments were superior
to the word ? Did he not say, that " the
gospel was the power of God unto salvation,"
and that " faith cometh by hearing, and hear
ing by the word of God ?" As to prayer, we
are told, that " whosoever shall call upon the
name of the Lord shall be saved ;"• and that
our Heavenly Father will " give the Holv
Spirit to them that ask him ;" but where do
* Oxford Catechism, page 20.
t Hook on Training, page 10.
t Pusey on Baptism.
<j> Tract, Number 90.

38

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

we find such saving blessings connected with
the baptismal ordinance, or the reception-,qf
the Lord's Supper, when the passages of
Scripture concerning them are rightly under
stood ? Oh! to set the sacraments above
the word and prayer runs counter to the
whole Scripture. They are instructive signs
— they are appendages to the word ; but
they neither bring to faith, as the word
" searched " and " heard " is said to do ; nor
is there in them a natural or constituted
"power " to salvation."
" But they are effectual means," say our
opponents. But why should Baptism and
the Lord's Supper be any more effectual
means to Christians, than were Circumcision
and the Passover to Jews ? If grace was
communicated with circumcision, why is
Israel so often upbraided with being " un
circumcised in heart," " with being uncir
cumcised in heart and ears ;" and why
" punished," though " circumcised with the
uncircumcised ?" If grace were communi
cated by or in taking the Passover, why
should " the whole house of Israel and the
whole house of Judah" be denounced as a
people that " would not hear ?" Grace was
not then communicated in those ordinances,
though denoting the same things as Baptism
and the Lord's Supper ; why should we con
clude that grace is communicated in these
lattpr ? Fact does not prove that it is so, but
both fact and Scripture prove the contrary.
As to fact, we need say nothing, it is so
manifest : and as to Scripture, Simon Magus
and Judas may be mentioned ; and so may
#11 those passages that indicate a want of
saving faith, a living faith, in the professors
of faith, even in those baptized, and in those
who were in the habit of receiving the Lord's
Supper among the churches to which the
apostles wrote. Thus for instance, the
apostle Paul knew that the Corinthian church
had all been baptized, had all received the
Lord's Supper, yet he plainly intimates to
^hem that, as in the case of Israel, they might
jpaany of them fail of salvation. After having
reminded them, thaf they which run in a
rtice, run, all, yet one receiveth the prize, he
proceeds to, caution them by saying, " More
over, brethren, 1 would not that ye should be
ignorant how that all our fathers were under
the cloud, and al} passed through the sea, and
were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud,
&n4 in the sea ; and did all eat the same
spiritual meat, and did all drink the same
spiritual drink ; for they drank of that spi
ritual rock that followed them, and that rock
was Christ ; but with many of them God was
not well pleased ; for they were overthrown

in the wilderness." As if ye had said, " Ye,
Corinthians, have been baptized unto Christ,
as Israel was baptized unto Moses ; ye eat
pf bread which may be called " spiritual
bread," inasmuch as it signifies the broken
body of Christ, as the manna was called
'spiritual meat,' as signifying Christ the
bread of life ; and ye drink of wine, which
may be called ' spiritual drink,' inasmuch as
it signifies the shed blood of Christ, as the
water from the rock was called 'spiritual
drink,' as signifying ' the water of life ' from
Christ : but consider this, that as the partici
pation of those outward signs did not save
many of them, because they possessed not
the things signified, but they were destroyed
in the wilderness ; so in your case, although
you have been made partakers of the signs,
for want of the things signified, you may not
be saved, but after all be destroyed." What
else can be the meaning of the apostle ?
And if so, does it not prove that the signs of
themselves do not communicate grace?
Who participated more fully in the signs
and sacraments of the Jewish religion than
the Scribes and Pharisees ; and yet had they
the grace communicated to them ? Ah,
righteous as they were in their own eyes,
and righteous as they were too in the eyes
of thepeople, our Lord calls them a " gene
ration of vipers," " hypocrites," " fools and
blind," "children of hell," who could not
" escape the damnation of bell !"
Moreover, the Oxford school represents
the sacraments as necessary to salvation, or
at least, as " generally necessary." That to
observe all divine ordinances is the duty of
a Chrstian, there cannot be a doubt ; and that
the omission of them, when they can be ob
served, might fairly induce a question as to
the sincerity of the Christianity of the indi
vidual thus omitting them, must be admitted;
but tp insist upon their observance, as the
Puseyites do, is unscriptural and uncha
ritable. If they communicated grace, and
were the sole means of communicating it,
there would be some colour for the sentiment;
but we have shown, not only that they are not
the sole means of communicating grace, but
that they do not necessarily communicate it at
all. If these were thus necessary to salva
tion, why did not our Lord, when he said,
' He that believeth and is baptized, shall be
saved," say also, He that believeth not, " and
is not baptized, shall be damned ?" And
why omit it in all other similar conditional
Impressions ? Besides, if there be any mean
ing in the passage before quoted from the
close of the second chapter of the epistle to
the Romans, it is to teach us the doctrine,

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

39

that God regards the thing signified rather
than the sign, the circumcision and baptism
of the heart by the Spirit, rather than the
circumcision and baptism of the flesh by the
element of water ; and accordingly, that he
may be a Jew or a Christian in covenant
with God, who has neither been circumcised
nor baptized outwardly, if his " heart " has
been " circumcised to love God," or he has
received the " baptism of the Holy Spirit "
inwardly ; while on the other hand, he is
neither a Jew nor a Christian, in the true
sense, whose heart has not been circumcised
to love God, or who has not been baptized
with the Holy Spirit, although he has been
circumcised or baptized outwardly. Abra
ham was justified and possessed the circum
cision of the heart, before he was circum
cised in the flesh. For forty years the or
dinance of circumcision was discontinued in
the wilderness. Many of Abraham's de
scendants died before the eighth day. The
thief upon the cross was never baptized, and
never received the Lord's Supper. Thou
sands of children have died in the Lord,
who never received Christian baptism : so
of adults, who yet having received the bap
tism of the Spirit, and the blessing of the
new covenant, were received up into glory.
On the other hand, many to whom both the
sacraments have been ministered, have been
destitute of saving grace, and of the hope
of the gospel. Witness Simon Magus, Ju
das, hypocrites, and such at last, notwith
standing sacraments and church-membership
too, who will be found " reprobates." To
which we may add, that we know the cha
racter of God too well, to suppose that he
would cut off infants and others from the
blessings of grace, because they were not
baptized, it being no fault of their own.
What ! shall the fate of children be dependant
upon the convenience or wills of nurses and
parents? Alas, for the haste with which
some infants are baptized ! Alas, for the
distress that some ignorant parents fee), be
cause it so happened that their children were
not baptized! Alas, for the hurry with
which the Lord's Supper is administered to
dying persons, to persons never designed to
participate in it, to persons that do not under
stand its meaning, or fall in with its design !
But why all this ? It has been impressed
upon their minds, that the sacraments are
necessary to salvation ! What mean, what
unscriptural thoughts must such persons pos
sess of that God " with whom we have to
do," who " is a Spirit," and " looketh at the
heart"

Tenet X.
In the baptismal ordinance of water, there are
communicated also " the Spirit," and spi
ritual regeneration.
" This is our new birth, an actual birth of
God, of water, and of the Spirit, as we were
actually born of our natural parents." " Bap
tism is a saci ament which God hath institut
ed in his church, to the end that they who
receive the same might be incorporated inta
Christ, and so through his most precious
merit obtain, as well that saying grace of im
putation wliich taketh away all former guilti
ness, as also that infused virtue of the Holy
Ghost, which giveth to the powers of the soul
the first disposition toward future newness,
of life." " Our life in Christ is throughout
represented as commencing when we are by
baptism made members of Christ and chil
dren of God. That life may, through our
negligence afterwards, decay ; or be choked,
or smothered, or well-nigh extinguished, and
by God's mercy again be renewed and re
freshed ; but a commencement of life in Christ
after baptism, a death unto sin, and a new
birth unto righteousness, at any other period
than at that one first introduction into God's
covenant, is as little consonant with the gene
ral representation of Holy Scripture, as a
commencement of physical life long after our
natural birth is with the order of his provi
dence." " Not the life only which we are
to live, but the actual life which, by baptism
was infused into us." " What he worketh
in us by his Spirit in baptism." " It is his
baptism, not theirs ; they baptize as the ser
vants, He, as the Lord ; they with water,
He, with the Holy Ghost and with fire ; they
touch the body, He applies it to the soul ;
they visibly, He invisibly ; they in obedience
to him, He accepts the obedience of his
Church, and cleanseth each new member
which she presents unto Him ' with the wash
ing of water by the word.' lt is He who
cleanseth. And this amid the imperfections
of his ministers is our comfort, that our bap
tism, though ' by man,' is not ' of man ;' that
to whomsoever he may have committed the
ministry of his sacrament, Himself retaineth
and sendeth forth its power."
It seems the water having been consecrat
ed, is sacred, and sanctified by the Spirit.
" This regeneration is the being ' born of
water and the Spirit,' or by God's Spirit again
moving on the face of the waters and sancti
fying them for our cleansing, and cleansing
us thereby." This moving of the Spirit on
the face ofthe waters and, cleansing them for
our cleansing, is, it seems, upon pronouncing

40

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

the word of consecration — " I baptize thee in
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost ;" for, says Dr. Pusey,
" In that he says, the apostle Paul, with the
washing of water by the word, he means, as
appears both by the force of the term and the
authority of the ancient church, the divine
word which renders the element of water
efficacious to our regeneration." " So then
there is no difference between, whether one
be baptized in sea or lake, stream or fountain;
nor is there, so far, any difference between
those whom John baptized in Jordan, or Peter
in the Tiber. Unless indeed, that the eunuch,
whom Philip baptized in some chance water
by the way, was more or less saved. So
then, all waters, when God has been invoked,
from that first prerogative, at their very origin,
obtain the sacramental power of sanctifying.
For immediately the Spirit cometh upon them
from heaven, and is upon the waters sancti
fying them, from himself ; and so sanctified,
they imbibe the power of sanctifying." Pu
sey on Baptism.
Refutation of Tenet X.
" In Christ Jesus 1 have begotten you through
the Gospel." 1 Corinthians iv. 15.
We have been wont to consider the bap
tism of water as an " outward and visible
sign of an inward and spiritual grace," the
thing signified : but the Oxford doctrine
teaches us that in the ordinance itself is con
veyed the inward and spiritual grace. We
have supposed, also, that if the twenty-se
venth Article of the church of England speaks
of saving benefits being " signed and sealed,"
yet that the framers meant only, as indeed
they express it, to such as " receive baptism
rightly ;" that is, to adults who receive it with
" repentance toward God, and faith toward
our Lord Jesus Christ ;" and when they say
in the Catechism, that it is " a means where
by we receive the same," that they meant
that it is to such adults as rightly receive it,
and not that it actually confers the benefits
on infants baptized; and when in the same an
swer it is added, " and a pledge to assure us
thereof," that it was intended conditionally,
that is, upon such baptized persons afterward
believing and seeking. At least we are wil
ling to put this favourable construction upon
the meaning of our pious reformers. Such
has been our hope also, with reference to
the answer in the Catechism, where the child
is instructed to say, that, in baptism he " was
made a member of Christ, the child of God,
and an inheritor of the kingdom of hea
ven," that is, visibly and outwardly ; and to

enjoy the privileges that belong to svlcrl, corf*
ditionally, on believing and receiving the
grace. But Puseyism .teaches that the Spirit is
given in baptism with the water, and makes
no distinction between baptism with water
and baptism with the Spirit, viewing them
as inseparable. Whether it be so or not
however, let the reader judge, after maturely
considering the following discourse upon the
subject. It will be most satisfactory to state the
Scripture doctrine of baptism ; and afterward
to form our judgment of the " baptismal re->
generation " in question.
Baptism is two-fold. There is the baptism
of water, which we consider as a means of
grace, introducing us into the visible kingdom
of Christ ; and the baptism of the Spirit,
which introduces into the invisible and spi
ritual kingdom of Christ. " I baptize you
with water," says John, " but he shall bap
tize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire ;"
manifestly making a two-fold distinction.
Probably the Saviour had both these ideas
in view when he said, " Except a man be
born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God ;" intending
by the former the being " born of water," to
signify the entrance into the kingdom visibly y
or entering the visible kingdom ; and by the
latter, the being " born of the Spirit," to sig^
nify the entrance into the kingdom invisibly
or spiritually, or entering the invisible or
spiritual kingdom.
I. What then is the baptism of the Spirit
or the baptism that saves ?
Since our Saviour says, " That which is
born of the Spirit is spirit," we conclude
that he intends to convey the idea, that the
Spirit begets a new nature in the soul, by
which Christ saves his people from their
sins ; and in consequence of which, they
" wash the heart from wickedness," so that
no longer will they suffer " vain thoughts to
lodge within them ;" by which they wash
their hands from " the evil of their doings,"
and by which they wash their feet, and so
" cleanse their way." So that it is the same
as the apostle intends by the " washing of
regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy
Ghost, which God sheds on us abundantly
through Jesus Christ our Saviour," and by
which he " saves " us. Now revert to this
latter passage. The apostle had been
speaking of the former state of the persons
intended, as " foolish, disobedient, deceivedj
serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in
malice and envy, hateful and hating one
another." God of his mercy had " saved

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

41

them "— frorrl what ? frOm this " foolish, dis
obedient, deceived," &c. state. But how ?
By this " washing of regeneration and re
newing of the Holy Ghost," by which they
both "hated evil, and ceased to do evil," and
loved good, and " learned to do well." This
is the baptism that the apostle Peter intend
ed, when he said, " Baptism doth also now
save us " — and being thus "saved from their
sins," and " renewed in the spirit of their
mind," they become fit subjects for " the
kingdom of God ;" that kingdom which is
"righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy
Ghost." How is this baptism of the Holy Spirit
effected ? Other Scriptures, explanatory of
our Lord's discourse with Nicodemus, show
us ; for this doctrine of the new birth is
mentioned in many places, and indeed was
no new doctrine, as our Lord's reply to Nico
demus intimates. It was expressed in Old
Testament Scripture by " circumcision of
the heart to love God," by " giving a heart
to know the Lord," by a " new heart and a
new spirit," and still more to the purpose, by
being " born." Thus, speaking of Zion,
says the Psalmist, " This man was born
there — and of Zion it shall be said, This
or that man was born in her." " The Lord
shall count when he writeth up the people,
that this man was born there." What birth
could this be, a birth in Zion, in the house of
God, but the spiritual birth ? And how this
spiritual birth ? By the word of God preach
ed there, whereby the Spirit of God discovers
to the man the filthiness of sin, his own
filthiness of heart, of hands, and of life ;
and disposes him to " wash his heart from
wickedness," to " wash his hands," of all
his filthy doings, and to •' cleanse his way."
Hence, both the apostles James and Peter
give us to understand that the new birth is
by the word. Says James, " Of his own
will begat he us with the word of truth :"
and Peter speaks of believers as being
" born again, not of corruptible seed, but of
incorruptible, by the word of God, which
liveth and abideth for ever." Paul also
Speaking of himself as the instrument of the
conversion of the Corinthians, says, " In
Christ Jesus I have begotten you through
the gospel." Why ? Because by him they
had believed that gospel, which is the
" power of God unto salvation to every one
that believeth." The " words " of Christ,
applied by the Spirit to the soul, became
" spirit " and " life." Thus a new living
nature is produced which our Lord Calls
" spirit," and the man thus born, " walks in
newness of life." O blessed, " holy bap- 1
6

tism " this ! " As many of you," says Paul,
" as are baptized into Christ are baptized
unto his death," even to " die unto sin and to
live unto righteousness." — " As many of you
as are baptized into Christ have put on
Christ." — " By one Spiritare we all," whether
Jew or Gentile, bond or free, " baptized in
to one body." This is the true spiritual bap
tism, the " baptism that doth also now save
us," and that causeth to return " the answer
of a good conscience toward God," and the
" confession that is unto salvation." And
the man that has the faith that purifieth the
heart, when bid to " arise and be baptized,
and wash away his sins, calling upon the
name of the Lord,*' in connexion with his
outward baptism of water, will " wash away
his sins," of heart, of hands, and of feet,
" calling Upon the name of the Lord," to
enable him to do so. This is " holy bap
tism " indeed !
II. The Baptismal Ordinance.
We are now prepared to speak of the bap
tism of water, or of the baptismal ordinance.
To distinguish this from the baptism of the
Spirit, the apostle Peter had no sooner spoken
of " baptism," as " now saving us," than he
adds, as if he would caution us against rely
ing on the mere sacrament, " not the putting
away of the filth of the flesh." Why distin
guish thus, if he did not really put a differ
ence between the ordinance and the thing
signified by the ordinance, even that baptism
ofthe Spirit, which, as he afterward intimates,
disposes to return " the answer of a good con
science toward God?"
The baptismal ordinance by water is a fit
sign of the baptismal regeneration by, the
Spirit. It appears to be in strict analogy
with the " doctrine of baptism," and the
" diverse," dtdcpopot, " baptisms," panriofiot,
belonging to the Levitical law. As' by water
poured out from the braifen laver upon the
body of the priest, he was washed, and wash*
ed himself, to enter upon the service of God
in the tabernacle ; so it is by the " washing1
of regeneration," and by our " cleansing our-.
selves from all filthiness of the flesh and of
the spirit," that we are fit, as Christians, to
serve God, who is of purer eyes than to be
hold iniquity. As the priests were flrstwash-
ed by Moses in their consecration, so are the
people of God, who are to be to him " priests,"
washed with "the washiffgof regeneration ;"
and as those pfiesfe for their daily service
themselves washed1 their hands and their feet,
so do God's spiritual, priests cleanse them
selves from all filthiness' in their works and
walk. Thus, as is the Christian baptism, so
were the Jewish baptisras/f signs of the true

42

COMPLETE VIEW 'OF PUSEYISM.

spiritual baptism, inasmuch as they both sig
nify the necessity of our being sanctified by
purifying for the service of and communion
with God. And viewed thus, it becomes an
instructive lesson to all who are baptized, or
who are connected with the ordinance, for
teaching our filthiness and God's purity; and
likewise the necessity of " the washing of
regeneration of the Holy Spirit" to, be
" shed " upon us, or of the " baptism that
saves us," in order to such service and com
munion. But did Moses, who prescribed the Jewish
baptisms, or taught the " doctrine of baptisms "
— did the priests who observed them — did
John in his baptism, or the disciples of Christ
in their baptisms — or did our Lord in his in
stitution of the Christian baptism, once think
that the ordinance^ and the baptism of the
Spirit were inseparably united? that the thing
signified was necessarily communicated with
the sign ? that in receiving the baptism —
which was " the putting away the filth of the
flesh," the baptized received the baptism that
saves ?< No such thing. Certainly John did
not, for he carefully distinguished between
his baptism " with water," and his Master's
baptism " with the Holy Ghost and with fire."
Nor did our Lord himself; for, says he,
" John truly baptized with water, but ye shall
be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many
days hence." How did Peter his apostle,
understand it, after Simon Magus had been
baptized ? So far from concluding that the
baptismal grace had been communicated to
him in the ordinance — so far from supposing
that the baptism of water had been the bap
tism of the Spirit that saves, Peter address
ing him says, " Thou hast neither part nor lot
in this matter, for thy heart is not right in
the sight of God ;" adding, " I perceive that
thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the
bond of iniquity." Peter also cautions against
resting in the baptism that " puts away the
filth of the flesh, as distinguished from that
which saves." As it was with circumcision,
the originally-instituted ordinance of dedica
tion to God, there is observed in Scripture
an essential distinction between the outward
ordinance and the inward grace, so is it in
baptism, the Christian institute. That out
ward ordinance was a sign of the necessity
of the " putting off the body of the sins of
the flesh," and of the " circumcision of the
heart to love God ;" and this, of the " putting
away the filth of the flesh," and the " renew
ing" of the soul by the shedding abroad of
the love of God in it ; but it is remarkable,
that as Paul, in speaking of the former, dis
tinguishes between it and the " circumcision

of Christ," so Peter, in speaking of the latter,
distinguishes between it and " baptism that
saves" The great apostle of the Gentiles
knew, that the ordinance of circumcision only
made a " Jew outwardly," while it was " the
circumcision of the heart by^he Spirit "that
made a " Jew inwardly ;" and so he knew, as
did his brother Peter, that the ordinance of
baptism only makes a Christian outwardly,
while it is the baptism ofthe Holy Spirit that
makes the Christian inwardly.
The two-fold baptism being thus scriptur-
ally understood, we see how erroneous, and
how dangerous, it is to confound the saving
baptism with the baptismal ordinance, and
to connect with the latter all those spiritual
blessings which belong only to the former !
Besides the obvious distinction which the
Scripture makes between the sign and the
thing signified, it must appear to common
sense and reason, that' since the spiritual birth
is a birth of the mind and heart, a change of
views and disposition, a " new heart and a
new spirit," this cannot be effected by a mere
sacrament. Knowledge must be communi
cated, the understanding must be enlightened,
a new taste must be given : and in the very
nature of things, how can these" things be
imparted by a mere ordinance — an outward
ordinance, applied to the body ? No ! we
are therefore taught, that the new birth is in
Zion ; that it is by " the word of truth," and
that people are " begotten " by " the gospel."
We might as well represent religion as creat
ed in us by a mere spell or charm !
From the whole we learn, in opposition to
the Oxford School —
1 . That we are to distinguish between the
baptism of water— the sign — and the baptism
of the Spirit — the thing signified ; and that
the former may be administered and yet not
the latter bestowed, while the latter may be
bestowed where the former is not adminis
tered ; and that therefore, the virtue which
the Puseyites ascribe- to the sacraments is
altogether unscriptural as well as the senti
ment injurious.
2. That the baptism which is saving, by
the word of God, is understood, believed, and
received, and not by the application of water;
such understanding, believing, and receiving
the word, producing that change of heart and
life which is signified by the new birth, and
by which we become fitted to be the
subjects of God's " kingdom " of " righteous
ness, and peace, and joy."
3. That while their doctrine is contradict
ed by fact, ours is in accordance with fact. '¦

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEHSM.

43

• Tenet XI.
Justification takes place in Baptism.
" Justification is imputed to us, not through
the feelings, but through baptism." " Bap
tism is the means ordained by Christ himself
for the remission of sin, or for justification."
" Justification by Faith does not exclude jus
tification through or by baptism." " They
reject justification through the sacrament of
Baptism." " Justification was conferred upon
them through the one baptism for the remis
sion of sins."* " Baptism conveys it," justi
fication.! " Baptism and not faith is the
primary instrument of justification."!: " Bap
tism is our new birth ; herein, we are then,
also justified, or both accounted and made
righteous, since we are made members of
Him who is alone righteous. "§
Refutation of Tenet XL
" All who believe are justified." Acts iii.
39.
What is Justification of Life ?
It is nothing less or more than this : God,
the great King, Lawgiver, and Judge, pro
nouncing the man righteous, and accordingly
adjudging him to life, the promised reward
of righteousness. Than which can there be
anything more desirable ?
Now, that man cannot be thus pronounced
righteous for his own righteousness, is mani
fest, inasmuch as it is declared by an infalli
ble writer, " There is none righteous, no, not
one :" that is, There is none that is perfectly
conformable lo law, as to its prohibitions and
requirements, as to its spirit as well as its
letter : no, not one. A man must therefore
be accounted so in another way, if he be
really declared so. With reference to that
way the Scripture teaches us, that it is the
way in which mankind became sinners.
And it is thus expressed : " So, then" — I
render the words precisely as they are in the
Greek — " as by one offence judgment came
unto, stq, all men unto condemnation, so by
one righteous sentence, StKaitifiaTOc, judg
ment came unto, etc, all men unto justification
of life." Whence it appears manifest, that
the righteousness or justificatory sentence,
dtKat,G)[ia, pronounced upon the " last Adam,"
or " the second man," is the ground of our
"justification of life," as the " offence " of
the first Adam was the ground of our con
demnation of death. Such is the legal ground
* Pusey on Baptism. t Tract 90.
t Neunnan on Justification.
$ Pusey on Baptism.

— such is the judicial ground of man's justi
fication of life, now that he is fallen ; and
if he " receive the abounding of grace and
the gift of righteousness " he shall, in fact,
" reign in life through Jesus Christ our Lord ;"
so that as " sin hath reigned in,ev, the death,"
so also was it designed that " grace might
reign through righteousness unto eternal life
by Jesus Christ our Lord." This then is our
legal position, as fallen creatures in Adam.
It is not by virtue of personal righteousness,
but it is by virtue of relationship to Christ as
" the second man " and the " last Adam," that
we are justified. So it has been with man
ever since the fall, as connected with "the
promise of life in Christ Jesus." Very well
is this expressed by Clement, one of the ear
liest writers, in his epistle to the Corinthians :
" We are not justified by ourselves, neither
by our own wisdom, or knowledge, or piety,
or the works which we have done in the
holiness of our hearts ; but by that faith by
which God has justified those also who were
from the beginning ; to whom be glory for
ever and ever. Amen." By that " faith,"
he means faith in Christ, in his redemption
and righteousness.
Thus then it is, " As by one offence judg
ment came unto all men unto condemnation,
so also, by one righteousness, judgment
comes unto all men unto justification of life.
For, as by the disobedience of one many
were constituted sinners, so by the obedience
of one shall many be constituted righteous."
The former verse speaks of the judicial
award, and the latter of the actual fact, such
" many" having " received the abounding
grace, and the gift of righteousness."
But it is by virtue of relationship to Christ,
"the second man," that we have this "justi
fication of life," as it was by virtue of rela
tionship to Adam, " the first man," we fell
into condemnation of death, its opposite — by
being "in Christ," that second man, as we
were in Adam, the first man ; there being a
divinely- constituted oneness in the former
case, as there was in the latter ; so that the
justificatory sentence, 6iKatu)p,a, passed upon
Christ the [lead, when he was "jusiifiedby
the Spirit" at his resurection, becomes avail
able to all that are "in him," as his body.
Hence, is not only the expression of being
"justified in the name of the Lord JeSus
" by his blood," &c. but of being justified as
"in" him, and of there being "no condem
nation to them that are in Christ Jesus,"
Well might the apostle Paul so intensely
desire to be " found in him !"
But how come to pass this union and con
nexion ? It is by that faith which " receives.

44

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

the abounding grace and the gift of righteous
ness." When a sinner, '? believing with
the heart" the word of God as to his "con
demnation," believes with the heart also the
testimony of God concerning his abounding
grace and righteousness, and so receives
them, he shall "reign in life through Jesus
Christ our Lord." Thus is he justified, and
as justified, is adjudged to life, the reward
of righteousness. Hence it is called " Jus
tification of life."
Justification of life ! What is this " life?"
It is the believer's well-being, as to his whole
constituted nature, " spirit, soul, and body,"
under the favour and blessing of God. 0
glorious state ! for it is life everlasting.
Upon such as possess it, God, in whose
favour is life, " commands the blessing, even
life for evermore." To carry out this design,
or in execution of this judicial sentence to
" life," the last Adam, " in" whom he is,
having been "made a quickening spirit,"
actually does give life to the spirit and soul
by his " words," which are "spirit and life"
now ; and at the resurrection morn, by the
same Spirit, he will give life to the body
also. Thus by Christ's righteousness, the
believer has not only " justification but " jus-
fication of life." Now, the Spirit of God
imparts " the life of God " to the soul, and
hereafter will he impart life to the mortal
body: What is the result of this "justifica
tion of life" here ? The " spirit" becoming
" life," and " the life of God" being within
him, the man becomes " dead to sin and
alive unto God," living no, longer to the will
of man, but to the will of God ; and so maybe
said to " walk in newness of life," until his
soul is taken to live with God in heaven,wait-
ingfor the completion of the "adoption, to wit,
the redemption of the body," at the resurrec
tion. O glorious justification, to be followed
by such a life, permanent as eternity !
Justification being thus scripturally ex
plained, it will not be difficult to detect the
error of Puseyism, in maintaining, that it is
simultaneous with, and conferred in baptism,
instead of being connected, in adults at least
only with believing. Conferred in baptism !
Not justification of life surely. ' Appeal to
fact. Take a whole town for example.
Nearly alj of them have been baptized with
Water : where is the manifestation of the
"life of God" in the soul, by their " walking
in newness of fife," as all the justified do?
On the contrary, are not th,e greater part of
them " alienated from the life of God ?" How
can we conclude that they are justified, as
Dr, Pusey maintains, because they have re
ceived the baptismal rite ?

How can it be proved that justification is
connected with baptism, and flows from it ?
In no one scripture out of the great number
that speak of justification is it so connected,
for it is uniformly connected with faith. See
Paul's epistle to the Romans, and also that
to the Galatians, where the subject is also
particularly treated. " Therefore , we con
clude that aman is justified by faith." "See
ing it is one God, which shall justify the
circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision
through faith.'" " Abraham believed Gpd,
and it was counted to him for righteousness."
That whole fourth chapter is to the same
purpose ; and then, in the beginning of the
next, as an inference from the whole . argu
ment, the apostle says, " Therefore being
justified by faith, we have peace with God,
through our Lord Jesus Christ." When he
is contrasting the two Adams, after showing
that sin and death came by the first, and
that righteousness and life came by the last,
he connects justification with " receiving the
abounding grace and the gift of righteous
ness." See also the tenth chapter. In Gala
tians iii., and Philippians iii., it is.clearly the
same. And taking our opponents oh their
own ground, as resting upon antiquity, we
refer them to the very earliest writer, Cle
ment, who in his epistle to the Corinthians
affirmed decidedly with us.
Tenet XII.
Sanctification takes place in Baptism.
" Sanctify the church with the washing of
water by the word." Paul in this place
dwells on the value of the gift of baptism,
and ofthe sanctification ofthe church there
by conveyed. In that he says, with the
washing of water by the word, he means, as
appears both by the force ofthe term and the
authority of the- ancient church, the divine
word which renders the element of water
efficacious to our regeneration, our blessed
Saviour"s word of consecration. By what
word ? ' In the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,' says Chry
sostom ; and so Theodoret — " That saying,
having cleansed in the washing of water by
the wprd,' stands for, 'In the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost/ — Baptism is essential to her sanc
tification-" — Pusey on Bpatism.
Refutation of Tenet XII.
" Sanctified by faith that is in me." Acts
xxvii. 18.
What is Sanctification ?

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

4S

Sanctification is God's setting apart a per
son for himself by the blood of his Son, and
the work of his Spirit, whereby, removing
his guilt and defilement, he prepares him to
glorify and enjoy him,
It is God's setting apart an individual for
himself. Setting apart for God is the radi
cal meaning throughout Scripture, both as
applied to persons and things. So the priests
and Levites of Israel were separated from
the rest of the people, and set apart for God ;
and so the vessels of the tabernacle, so are
God's people, his spiritual Israel, now "sanc
tified by God the Father."
It is to be set apart by the application of
the blood of Christ, for the removal of their
guilt. Thus of old were persons and things
set apart by the sprinkling of blood, or of the
water of purification, which, being made of
the ashes of a red heifer, predicated the same
thing. Israel was so set apart in covenant
with God. " Moses took the blood and
sprinkled it on the people." When the Le
vites were set apart, water of purifying was
sprinkled upon them. In both these cases
it was to sanctify. So as to the Christian
sanctification, Christ is said to sanctify the
people with his own blood."
It is by the work of the Spirit, removing
their pollution. Thus under the Old Testa
ment, as to the flesh, washings for cleansing
were common, in order to sanctification.
Moses washed Aaron and his sons with wa
ter at their consecration. The priests wash
ed themselves before they accomplished the
service of God. And so how, God's people
are not only " sanctified by God the Father,"
and " sanctified by Christ's own blood," but
they undergo " the sanctification of the
Spirit, by the washing of regeneration,
and the renewing of the Holy Ghost," in
order that they may be set apart for God.
Nor is this all ; there is besides a continu
ous work of the spirit of God upon the church
of Christ, which is called " the washing of
water by the word," that Christ " might pre
sent it to himself a glorious church, not
having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing ;
but that it should be holy and without
blemish." Here an important question arises bearing
fully upon this controversy. How does the
Holy Spirit effect this great purpose ? We
answer, It is by the word. It is by the
word received in faith that he purifies the
heart, that they " wash their hearts from
wickedness," not allowing " vain thoughts
to lodge within them ;" that they "wash their
hands" from evil deeds, and that they wash
their feet, or "cleanse their way." " Sanc

tify them through thy truth; thy word
is truth says Christ, in his intercessory
prayer for his people. So the apostle
Paul gives us to understand in the passage
of Scripture above cited. " Christ loved
the church, and gave himself for it,
that he might sanctify and cleanse it with
the washing of water by the word." Afflic
tion is another mean by which the process
of salification is carried on, for God chas
tens his children to make them " partakers
of his holiness."
Thus it is that God's people, the church
are so sanctified as at length to be presented
to the royal bridegroom at the last day. O
glorious destination of the church and people
of God ! glorious sanctification in connex
ion with justification !
Now Dr. Pusey maintains that the " sanc
tification of the Church " is conveyed by
baptism, and that " baptism is essential to
sanctification." So it is, if we take baptism
for the inward baptism of the Holy Spirit;
but we deny that the outward baptism is so ;
that which Peter calls " the putting away
the filth of the flesh." Frequently is that
done when there is no " sanctification of
the Spirit "unto salvation; where there is
no purifying of the heart, no washing of the
heart fiom wickedness, no washing of the
hp.nds from evil deeds, no cleansing of the
way. Appeal to fact as well as to Scripture.
But after what has been' said on regenera
tion, we assuredly need say no more on the
necessity of distinguishing between the out
ward and visible sign and the inward and
spiritual grace.
Nor can we at all agree with Dr. Pusey
that the sanctification is by the word of con
secration, " In the name of the Father, and
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." We
cannot suppose, as he does, that Paul meant
such a thing, when he said, speaking of the
church, " Christ would sanctify and cleanse
it with the washing, of water by the word."
We believe that he meant the same thing as
his Lord, when in his intercessory prayer
he prayed that his Father would " sanctify
through his truth;" adding, " thy word is
truth." Is it not fact that Christ's church is
thus sanctified by the word ? We appeal to
Christian experience. But this sacrament
of baptism, according to Dr. Pusey, is to do
everything for us. We repeat the remark ;
however he may imagine that he has antil
quity on his side, he mistakes the meaning
of the ancient Fathers ; for they intend the
baptism which the apostle means, the bap
tism into Christ by the Spirit, and not the
mere baptismal ordinance, for if they do in-

48

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

tend the baptismal ordinance, they refer to
adult- proselytes, supposing that when they
received the ordinance, they did it with that
faith in and by which we are sanctified by
ihe Spirit. Tenet XIII.
All spiritual blessings are connected with
Baptism.
*' Baptism;" says Dr. Pusey, " as the
means of our union with Christ, is the act
which conveys to us either in immediate
possession, or as an earnest, all our subse
quent spiritual blessings." " Baptism is the
instrument whereby God communicated to
us the remission of sins, justification, holi
ness, life, communion with the Son and with
the Father through the Spirit, the earnest of
the Spirit, adoption of sons, inheritance of
heaven, all which our Lord obtained for us
through his incarnation and precious blood-
shedding." " Is it no cause of thankfulness
to our heavenly Father, to have to look back
upon a definite act of God, whereby He
placed us in a state of salvation, there by
his grace to continue ; that independently
of any feelings of ours, which may not be
so vivid as they once were, antecedently to
ak of error, infirmity, and sin, which there
may have been in our course hitherto, and
the imperfections which have cleaved, and
it is to be feared do cleave to all our acts,
marring our repentances, our faith, our works
of love, there is still one bright spot whereon
to look back, when God the Father chose us
to be his sons in his Son, and the Holy
Ghost sanctified and sealed us as his ? Is it
nothing to bear his mark upon us, which his
mercy has been more powerful to retain, we
trust, than our sins to efface '!" " It is not
then in vain surely, that throughout his whole
church he has blended with that early past,
one brighter spot, which sheds its lustre over
all, and from which the light of their sun
shines seven-fold, our baptismal morn ; an
oasis, it may be, in a wilderness, but a spot
on which our memory may, without misgiv
ing, repose ; because all its brightness comes
directly from him, and in it the light of his
countenance shone, and still shines upon us,
if we look back for it. Our baptism is of
inexpressible value and comfort, even be
cause it is the act of God ; it has nothing
earthly mingled with it ; it was simply his,
who chose us, according to his eternal pur
pose, to the sprinkling of the blood of JesUs
Christ, and predestinated us unto the adop
tion of children by Jesus Christ unto him
self, making us in the beloved his own sons, I

members of his Christ, heirs of the king
dom of heaven. Our comfort, our joy, our
peace, our consolation our glory is,- to have
what we have purely from him, to have the
foundation of our hope out of ourselves, and
conveyed by a formal act of his, whereby,
not according to works of righteousness
which we did, but according to his mercy
he saved us, through the washing of regene
ration and the renewing of -the Holy Ghost."
" Does he, Paul, disparage outward ordinan
ces ? or dread that the exaltation of the ordU
nance should lead to a depreciation of Christ ?
Rather he shows them how everything
which they sought, or could need, was com
prised and had already been bestowed upon
them in their Saviour's gift,- in his ordinance :
that this ordinance was moreover a signifi
cant rite, but contained within itself the strip
ping off of the body of sin, death, Tesurrec-
tion, new life, forgiveness, annulment of the
hand-writing against us, despoiling of the
strong one,, triumph over the powers of dark
ness. We also have been thus circumcised,
have been buried, raised, quickened, pardon
ed, filled with Christ : all this God has done
for us, and are we not to prize it ? not to
thank God for il, established in the faith
which we have been taught, and abounding
therein with thanksgiving ? And are we,
for fear men should rest in outward privi
leges, to make the Lord's sacrament a mere
outward gift, deny his bounty, and empty his
fulness ? or rather ought we not, with the
apostles, to tell men of the greatness of what
they have received, and repeat to them his
bidding, ' since then ye were raised together
with Christ, seek what is above, where
Christ sitteth at the right hand of God ;' ye'
did die, slay then your earthly members ; ye
were stripped of the old man, and were
clothed with the new, and that made new in
its Creator's image, which has now again
been restored to you : ' put ye on them, as
having been chosen and loved of God,' the
ornaments befitting this new creation in you,
mercy, gentleness, and the other graces : ye
have been forgiven, forgive. Thus does
Paul obviate the resting in outward ordi
nances, by showing that the Christian ordi
nances are not outward ; that they are full of
life and honour and immortality^ for that they
are full of Christ ; since Christ is all things
and in all. Is, there not danger of losing -
our treasures by a voluntary humility ? Is
not our dread of the consequences of exalt-!
ing Christ's ordinances ' after the rudiments
of the world,' and earthly wisdom, ' and not
after Chrtst ?' " — Pusey on Baptism.
Thus does Dr. Pusey represent baptism

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

Al

not only as giving a right to such blessings
as forgiveness, justification, adoption, &c,
which may be said to be .blessings without
us, but he represents it as actually effecting
a work in us, that of causing us to be quick
ened, to rise, to live, to possess the Divine
image, &c. ; and he felicitates the baptized
on their most blessed state in having been
thus baptized ! Alas, that passages which
related to the baptism of the Spirit, the thing
signified, should be thus attributed to the
baptism by water, the sign !
Refutation of Tenet XIII.
" To the faithful in Christ Jesus — who hath
blessed us with all spiritual blessings."
Ephesians i. 1 — 3.
According to Dr. Pusey, in baptism are
all things necessary to salvation and life, all
spiritual blessings are conferred ; and he
impugns the idea of baptism being consider
ed only- as an ordinance, and maintains that
it contains within itself all that we can need
or desire. But, alas ! for the consequences
of not distinguishing between the ordinance
of baptism, which is but fhe sign, and the
baptism itself of the Spirit, which is the
thing signified ! True it is, that " as many
of us," baptized professors, " as are baptized
unto Christ Jesus," by this latter baptism
" are baptized unto his death," and life, and
all the blessings of that life ; true it is, that
as many as are by one Spirit " baptized into
one body," are one with Christ, and of the
mystical body of which he is the head, and
so have fellowship with him ; true it is, that
" as many as have been baptized into Christ
have put on Christ ;" true it is, that believers
are buried with him in baptism ; and true it
is, that " baptism also now saves us :" but
the apostles, Paul and Peter, in these passa-1
geSj intend the spiritual baptism of " the
washing of regeneration," &c, and not " the
putting away of the filth of the flesh " by the
outward ordinance. In the first of them,
Paul says, " As many of us ;" why this
limited expression if he meant the outward
water baptism ? for they all had been thus
baptized. In the second, he expressly men
tions the Spirit as the efficient in baptism.
In the third,- be uses the limited expression,
again, as when writing to the Romans. In
the fourth, he speaks of them as having
been cireumcised " in putting off the body
of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision
of Christ," which elsewhere he says was
" by the Spirit ;" and therefore, as analogous
to it, considers them as "baptized with

Christ ;" and Peter' declares that it was not\
the " putting away of the filth of the flesh "
that he intended ; and of course,- by the
" baptism that saves us," mentioned just be-"
fore, he must intend the spiritual baptism —
that which causes to return " the answer of
a good conscience toward God."
The subject thus understood, how errone
ous must be this sentiment — that the ordi
nance itself comprises within itself all those
saving operations and spiritual blessings of
which Dr. Pusey so much speaks ! And
when we consider that he recommends us to
" tell men of the greatness of what they have
received" in this ordinance, how awful must
be the consequences !
We mast also remark, that while Dr. Pu
sey bolsters himself up in this sentiment by
the ancient Fathers, we are of opinion that
in many of his quotations, they themselves"
had a reference to that same spiritual bap->
tism to which the apostles referred, and of
which we have been speaking: and if in
others of his quotations, the intention of the
writer apparently accords with Puseyism, we
have only to regret that so many of the Chris-*
tian church, both in ancient and modern
times, after the example of the Jewish
church, should fall into such injurious and
dangerous errors. The good Lord open
men's eyes to see it !
Tenet XIV,
The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper not
only shows forth the Lord's death, and is
commemorative of it, but actually imparts
life to the soul.
The two sacraments ofthe Gospel are the
instruments of inward life, according to our
Lord's declaration, that " baptism is a new
birth, and that in the Eucharist we eat the
living bread."* " In the holy Eucharist
giving us to 'drink of his blood' and 'quicken
ing us by his Spirit,' and making us to
' drink into one Spirit,' " " His sacraments
the vehicles of his grace."t
Trusting thus to the conveyance of grace
in and by the sacraments, they repudiate the
doctrine " that God conveys grace only
through the instrumentality of the mental
energies, through faith, prayer, active spritu-
al contemplations, or what is called commu
nion with God." Indeed this may even be
set down as the essence of the sectarian doc
trine " to consider faith and not the sacra"
ments as the instrument of justification and
other Gospel gifts." Hence they do not ap'-*

* Tract 90.

t Pusey.

48

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

pear to discountenance the administration of
the Lord's Supper to infants, or to the dying
and insensible. " And," say they, " both
practices have the sanction of primitive
usage." The clergy were " entrusted with
the awful and mysterious gift of making the
bread and wine Christ's body and blood."*
Refutation of Tenet XIV.
" This cup is the new covenant by my blood ;
so the Greek ; this do ye, my disciples." —
1 Corinthians xi. 25.
What is the nature and design of the
Lord's supper, according to Scripture ?
The Lord's supper is a gracious ordinance
of the new Covenant, that God has made to
and with the spiritual Israel ; wherein, by
breaking of bread and pouring out wine, are
signified the broken body and shed blood of
Christ ; and it is designed to show forth and
to keep in memory that death by which such
covenant was dedicated, and the mutual com
munion of those who receive it in its benefits.
This definition we will explain in its
several parts, and thus show that it is the
true Scripture doctrine.
1. We begin with the covenant, of which
it is an ordinance. This covenant was pro
mised by Jeremiah, and is cited and applied
in the epistle to the Hebrews thus : " Be
hold the days come, saith the Lord, when I
will make a new covenant with the house of
Israel and the house of Judah : not accord
ing to the covenant that I made with their
fathers in the day when I took them by the
hand to lead them out ofthe land of Egypt; be
cause they continued not in my covenant and
1 regarded them not, saith the Lord. For
this is the covenant that I will make with
the house of Israel after those days, saith
the Lord ; I will put my laws into their
minds, and write them in their hearts ; and
I will be to them a God, and they shall be to
me a people. And they shall not teach
every man his neighbour, and every man his
brother, saying, Know the Lord ; for all
shall know me from the least to the greatest.
For I will be merciful to their unrighteous
ness, and their sins and their iniquities will
I remember no more." Glorious covenant !
This covenant is said to be " cut" by Jeremi
ah, and by Paul to be " perfected ;" the lat
ter expression explaining the former. Jeremi
ah's expression shows, that it was not only
a " covenant by sacrifice," but alludes to
the manner in which, from the time of Abra-
* ham, it had been customary to make cove
nants. This was by cutting asunder into
* Tracts for tho Times.

two parts the sacrificial victim, and placing
them in juxta-position, in order that the par
ties covenanting, might signify their adher
ence by passing between the parts. Paul
expresses the thing as actually and perfectly
done by Christ the victim being virtually,
though not literally, " cut assunder" in his
vicarious sufferings.
Now that the Lord's supper is an ordi
nance of this covenant appears from the
words of the institution in all the four places
where the institution is mentioned, " This is
my blood of the New Testament," or cove
nant, for the word is rendered " covenant"
more frequently than " testament." As if
onr Lord had said, " This wine which I now
hand to you is the sign of the blood by which
the new covenant is about to be ' dedicated,' "
alluding to the dedication of the covenant at
Sinai, which, as the apostle says, " was not
dedicated without blood ;" or it is as if he
had said, as Paul does after, " This
is the blood of the everlasting covenant."
Precious must be that covenant which was
dedicated by such blood !
2. We also consider the Covenantees.
These are " the house of Israel and the
house of Judah." Not " Israel after the
flesh," but the Israel and Judah." that are
born supernaturally, " after the Spirit."
These include, those whom the apostle calls
the Israel, who are of Israel naturally : that
is, such as are the true Israel, but of the
"Israel after the flesh;" and then, since
"there is no difference between the Jew and
the Greek," but " all are one in Christ Je
sus." also all those of the Gentiles who are
born of the Spirit ; for all are of the same
body, and partakers of God's "promise in
Christ Jesus by the gospel." Such then as
are born of the Spirit, whether Jew or Gen
tile, are " the house of Israel and the house
of Judah," spiritually considered, and as
such are the covenantees. These are in cove
nant with God as to this new covenant, and
alone are the persons who are to partake of
the Lord's supper, its appropriate ordinance.
3. The sign for showing forth the death
of Christ.
This is the breaking of the bread and the
pouring out of the wine, showing us that
Christ's body was broken at the crucifixion, for
" all his bones were out of joint ;" and that
his blood, his life,\vas poured out at the same
time. In this way his death is showed forth
and it must be so until his second coming.
4. The Commemoration of that death by
which the covenant was dedicated.
" Do this," said Christ, " in remembrance
of me." Do it in remembrance of my dying

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

49

love in thus interposing on your behalf, so
that my Father, through my blood-shed
ding, having become "merciful to your un
righteousness," &c. might enter into a new
covenant with you, putting his laws into
your mind and writing them in your hearts,
and so, while he becomes to you a God,
you might become to him a willing and obe^
dient people. Such is my design in dying,
and do you observe this ordinance in grate
ful remembrance of it.
5. Another design of the ordinance was to
signify the communion which believers, or
those born of the Spirit, the covenantees
have in the benefits of this death. " The cup
of blessing which we bless, is it not the
communion of the blood of Christ? the
bread which we break, is it not the commu
nion ofthe body of Christ ?" Thus meeting
together, as at a table — for it is called the
" Lord's table" — the people of God signify
their mutual interest in the death of Christ
and in its benefits, and particularly pin the
benefits of the covenant.
6. It is a gracious ordinance, inasmuch as
by all the true "Israel of God" partaking of it
worthily, it is found, under the blessing of
Christ, a soul-nourishing ordinance. It helps
to increase their faith, to enliven their hope
and to inflame their love to Christ, to God,
and to one another. Nor is it calculated
to promote their faith and hope and love
only but their humility, reminding them of
their sin as the cause of Christ's death.
Now all these things tend to nourish the
piety of the soul, and therefore, we may call
it a soul-nourishing ordinance ; and conse
quently, a gracious one, instituted by our
Lord, out of his grace or kindness to his
church. Such is the Scripture doctrine of
the Lord's supper.
Now upon a review ofthe above, as to
the nature and design of the Lord's supper
— its being an ordinance appended to the
new covenant — its being intended for those
" born of the Spirit" — its being an appropri
ate sign — its being a commemoration — its
being a communion-^and its being gracious
ly designed to nourish the life of the believer
— we see the fallacy of the Puseyite and
High-church notions concerning it. They
seem to overlook the peculiar nature of the
covenant to which the ordinance belongs —
to mistake with reference to the " peculiar
people" who are to receive it — to consider
it as actually conveying the thing signified
rather than as a sign, and greatly to Over
look it as a commemoration and a commu
nion. But that which we shall particularly
notice is, that they consider the ordinance as
7

the instrument of conveying inward life. It
will indeed under the blessing of God nou
rish life, where that life is already received ;
but it does not impart life to sUch as do not
receive it in faith, nor was ever designed to
do so. Nor is there any passage of Scrip
ture upon which such sentiment can be
founded, but one ; and the meaning of that
appears to be egregiously, as well as most
injuriously mistaken. It is that in the sixth
chapter of John, where our Lord, after dis
coursing of himself as the bread of life, speaks
of his flesh and blood as meat and drink ;
" except ye eat of my flesh and drink of
my blood ye have no life in you" — which
words they apply to the sacrament of the
Supper, and infer that life is given by the
participation of it. But we do not believe
that it relates to the Lord's supper at all.
The assertion was made a considerable
time before the Lord's supper was instituted ;
and from the connexion, it is evidently de
signed to be taken spiritually and figurative
ly ; as if our Lord had said, " I am about
to give my flesh for the life of the world,"
and to shed my blood for the remission
of sins, and for the confirmation of the new ,
covenant ; therefore, except ye believe and
receive this doctrine of my coming in the
flesh and shedding my blood for such pur
poses, ye have no life in you, no spiritual
life." Such must be his meaning. It is
true, the words eating and drinking are used;
but to those who are acquainted with the
phraseology of Scripture, that will present
no difficulty, inasmuch as they know that
such terms indicate no more than the "re
ceiving the truth in love," and digesting it
as food by meditation. Thus Job " es
teemed the words of " God's mouth more
than his necessary food ;" thus Jeremiah
" found God's words, and did eat them :"
which sense is confirmed by our Lord
himself ; " The flesh profiteth nothing : the
words that I speak unto you, they are spirit,
and they are life." Away then with that
delusive and dangerous sentiment, that these
words relate to the taking of the sacrament
and that thereby men are saved, and have
' life." Besides, where is the evidence of
this " life of God" in the soul of numbers
who have taken the sacrament ? Do they
appear to have that knowledge of God,
and of Jesus Christ, which is " eternal life,"
or that " love of God shed abroad in the
heart by the Holy Spirit," which becomes
an active principle there, stirring up to live
to the will and the glory of God ? When"
persons have this life, as the result of this
knowldge, then the participation of the

so

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

ordinance may be a means of nourishing
this life, but nowhere is such participation
said to communicate it.
To none but such as profess to "join them
selves to the Lord in this perpetual covenant,"
ought it to be administered. Search through
the.Acts ofthe Apostles as well as the Epis
tles, and where will you find a place which
intimates its ministration to others ? We
therefore draw the following inferences : —
1. That persons who have no desire for
the grace of the covenant, or to perform the
obligations of the covenant, of which we are
reminded in the ordinance — whodo notinfact
wish to "join themselves to the Lord in a
perpetual covenant," have nothing to do with
the ordinance. They do not, as the Scrip
ture expresses it, " take hold of God's cove
nant," or wish to "join themselves to the
Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of
the Lord, to be his servants " — they do not
even wish that God should " put his laws
into their minds, or write them in their hearts,"
or to be brought to " know the Lord," as this
covenant promises and provides. How then
can they be considered as covenantees, and
worthy partakers of its appropriate ordinance ?
Alas, for those who either take or wish to
take the Lord's supper, while they neither
have the grace of the covenant, nor wish to
have it ! Alas, for those who either take or
wish to take the sacrament while they neither
do fulfil, nor wish to fulfil ito engagements !
2. We see the impropriety, and indeed
danger, of urging upon persons, whether in
health or at death, to receive the sacrament,
so called, or even of administering it to them
while they give no evidence that they are
heartily willing to take hold of this covenant,
or to " subscribe with their hand to the Lord,"
and'to " surname themselves by the name of
Israel." Who would not dread thus to de
lude souls, and by thus causing them to rest
secure in a false hope, prevent their seeking
after a good hope ? What shall we say of
the custom of administering the sacrament to
condemned persons, and to the dying ? In
most cases, do such persons wish to enter
into covenant with God, according to its true
tenor ? Do they wish to have God's laws
put into their minds and written in their
hearts, in order that they may be his willing
and obedient people ? Nothing of the kind,
it is to be feared, is thought of by the clergy
man or the unhappy culprit ! The latter wish
es to escape the punishment of sin, not its
power ; to enjoy happiness in heaven, not its
holiness: and the former to compose a distur
bed mind, and to do what ho considers his
duty : but, alas ! both are in dangerous error.

3. From the above Scripture doctrine of
the Lord's supper, it appears that the ordi
nance is a social ordinance, and therefore for
true Christians assembled together, in society.
It is called a "supper;" the believers at
Corinth are supposed to gather together into
one place to partake, of this supper, and. to
tarry for one another. It is likewise called
a " communion," which implies fellowship
as at one table. It is called " the table of
the Lord." It must then be intended as a
social ordinance. Where in any one case do
we read of it as administered or received indi
vidually, in Scripture ? Nowhere. Whence
then such a use of it ? Alas, that any should
expect to settle their accounts with God in
this way, on a dying bed ! How many thou
sands are lulled to sleep by it !
What shall we say — That an ordinance
which requires understanding, faith, hope,
love, and fixed choice, should be administered
without respect to these, and yet be repre
sented as giving life? giving, as though it
acted as a charm or spell ! Is this honoura
ble to a God pf infinite wisdom, dealing with
intellectual and reasonable creatures ? But
the Tractarians or Puseyites impugn the doc
trine that " God conveys grace only through
the instrumentality of the mental energies —
that is, through faith, prayer, active spiritual
contemplations ;" and maintain that " the
Church and her sacraments are the ordained
and direct visible means of conveying to the
soul what is in itself supernatural and unseen;"
and upon this ground allow of administering
the Lord's supper to infants, and to the dying
and insensible ; if the latter have been " con
sistently pious and believing in their past
lives." " What ! an unreasoning infant,
which knows no speech ; a sick man, whom
the approach of death has bereft of intelli
gence and consciousness, will receive grace
by the mere external application of the sacra
ments — the will and the affections need not
be touched to effect sanctification ! What
a debasement of man, and of the religion of
Jesus ! Is there any great difference be
tween such rites, and the mummeries or
charms of the corrupt Hindoos, or the rude
Africans !" D'Aubigne.
Tenet XV.'
Justification includes inherent righteousness
as well as imputed, and rather depends on
the former than the latter.
" In the doctrine of justification by faith, a
mind which should mainly fix itself on our
being accounted righteous, by degrees would
lose sight of that other portion of it, the hav-

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

51

ing righteousness actually imparted the being
made righteous."*
" Justification is a continuous work ; it is
to be held as the work of the Spirit, not of
Christ. The distinctions between deliver
ance from the guilt of sin and deliverance
from sin itself is not seriptural."t
"Justification is the indwelling in us of
God the Father, and of the incarnate word
by the Holy Spirit, and the two acts distin
guished by the Bible and our Theologians in
truth Yorm only one."J
Refutation of Tenet XV.
"Justified by Christ." — Galatians ii. 17.
" Through sanctification of the Spirit." — 2
Thessalonians ii. 13.
The Puseyites consider justification as in
cluding inherent righteousness, as well as
imputed righteousness, and indeed seem to
refer it rather to the former than the latter.
As this error consists in the confounding
of things that differ, it will be most satisfac
tory to state the difference between justifica
tion and sanctification, and then to draw the
obvious inferences.
Justification is an act of God toward us,
sanctification is the work of God in us. Jus
tification is through the Son, sanctification is
by the Spirit. Justification is a matter of
law, sanctification is a matter of fact ; the
former is a thing " de jure," the latter a thing
" de facto." Justification is a. judicial verdict
in court, sanctification is an actual work in
and upon the subject of such verdict. Justi
fication is imputing righteousness, sanctifica
tion is making righteous. Justification is the
awarding the " blessing of life for evermore "
to the man as declared righteous, sanctifica
tion is the putting in possession of the bless
ing. We are justified by the blood, we are
sanctified by the water. Justification frees
from the charge of the law, sanctification fits
for performing the duties of the law. Justifi
cation brings us into favour with God, sanc
tification restores us to the image of God.
Justification, as a judicial sentence, is passed
at once on believing, sanctification is a con
tinuous work on the person thus believing.
Upon a review of this statement, can there
be a doubt that the Oxford school confounds
the two doctrines ? that it even turns justifi
cation into sanctification, when it says, " It
is to be held as the work of the Spirit, not
of Christ " — " Justification is the indwelling
in us of God the Father, and of the incarnate
* Pusey on Baptism, page 19.
t Newman.
t Pusey's Letter to the Bishop of Oiford.

Word by the Holy Spirit ?" But is this the
scriptural view of it ? Let the reader atten
tively examine the Epistle to the Romans,
particularly from the twentieth verse of the
third chapter to the end of the fifth chapter ;
and let him keep constantly in mind that the
apostle has reference throughout to law and
justice, and to the state of a sinner as before
the great King, Lawgiver, and Judge of man ;
and then he will see that justification has re
lation to judicial verdict, and not to sanctify
ing agency ; to the " imputing righteousness
without works," fo the " ungodly ;" not to the
making the ungodly righteous. That subject
comes afterward in the sixth and seventh
and eighth chapters, as the result of being
" baptized into Christ," by what is called
elsewhere the " washing of regeneration, and
the renewing of the Holy Ghost."
We conclude then, that we are justified
before God, not by an imperfect righteous
ness, such as inherent righteousness is ever
in the best, but on account of a perfect
righteousness, such as is that of the last
Adam ; and that the instrument of it is faith,
and faith alone ; a»d yet such a faith as is
connected with and causes the sanctification
of the Spirit, inasmuch as it " works by
love," and " purifies the heart." Assuredly
the righteousness of the last Adam, which
is said to' be to "justification of life," neither
included, nor need to include any righteous
ness in us ; and if the righteousness of God
revealed is, sk, out " of faith," and etc, " to "
or unto " faith," we must conclude that jus
tification is by faith.
Tenet XVI.
Christ's Body and Blood are really present
in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper,
though net locally — and so present as to
act upon and influence us.
" The true determination of all such ques
tions may be this, that Christ's body and
blood are locally at God's right hand, yet
really present here, but not here in place —
because they are spirit." " A thing is pre
sent which is so circumstanced as to act
upon and influence us, whether we are sen
sible of it or not. This is what the Catho
lic Church seems to hold concerning our
Lord's presence in the sacrament, that he
then personally and bodily is with us in the
way an object is which we call present :
how He is so, we know not; but that He
should be so, though He be millions of miles
away, is not more inconceivable than ihe in
fluence of eyesight upon us is to a blind
man." — "In answer then to the problem,,

54

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

how Christ comes to us, while remaining on
high, I answer just as much as this — that
He comes by the agency of the Holy Ghost,
in and by the sacrament. Locomotion is the
means of a material presence ; the sacra
ment is the means of His spiritual presence.
Let them but believe and act on the truth that
the consecrated bread is Christ's body, as
He says, and no officious comment on His
words will be attempted by any well-judging
mind." The writer admits, at least, of " a
real superlocal presence in the Holy Sacra
ment."* " Christ is present under the form
of bread and water. "t " The clergy are in
trusted with the awful and mysterious gift of
making the bread and wine Christ's body
and blood. "J " One who looks upon the
Lord's Supper as little more than a com
memorative sign of an absent thing, passes
lightly over our Saviour's words. ' This is
my body !' "§. — " Receiving the body of our
Lord."
Refutation of Tenet XVI.
" This is my body ;" i Corinthians xi. 24 ;
compared with " That rock was Christ."
1 Corinthians x. 4.
Why is such a mystical meaning put upon
our Lord's expressions, " This is my body "
— " This is my blood ?"— What difficulty is
there in supposing that he meant, This sig
nifies my body — this signifies my blood ?
But " to the law and to the testimony."
" What saith the Scripture ?" We must
look to its phraseology in other similar cases
to ascertain its meaning in this.
In the case of the Passover, which the
Lord's Supper was to succeed. With this
ordinance, and with the Scripture phraseology
concerning it, our Lord's disciples, to whom
the words were addressed, were well ac
quainted. Speaking of the paschal lamb,
Moses says, " It is the Lord's passover."
Did he mean that it was the passover itself?
No — he meant that it was the sign of the
Lord's passover ; and doubtless so the chil
dren of Israel at first, and in their succeed
ing generations, understood it. Why should
we understand Christ otherwise, when he
says, taking the bread, " This is my body,"
or taking the wine, " This is my blood ?"
But we will adduce another case perhaps
plainer still. The apostle Paul, alluding to
the rock smitten in the wilderness, and ap
plying it to Christ, says, " That rock was
Christ." He did not think it necessary to
* Tract 00. t Linwood.
t Tracts for the Times.
$ Pusey on Baptism.

say, That rock signified Christ, because he
concluded that all would so understand him.
So assuredly we ourselves do. What diffi
culty then, is there in supposing that Christ,
in the matter in question, meant, " This sig*
nifies my body " — " this signifies my blood?"
If so, why seek for another, for a mystical
signification ? Understood as Protestants
understand it, it answers all the purposes
which our Lord intended, affectingly to show
forth and to remind us of his broken body
and his shed blood.
But it seems, according to Puseyism, that
in the Lord's Supper, after consecration of
the elements, although the bread and wine
are not changed into Christ's body and blood,
yet Christ is spiritually present in them, as
though they were turned into Spirit, to act
upon us and influence us. But what warrant
is there in Scripture for this doctrine ? Christ
is indeed present with his people who re
ceive the elements in faith and love, but not
in the elements themselves ; nor is he present
at all at the administration, however conse
crated, and by whomsoever consecrated, un
less the communicants are true believers in
him, and communicate in faith ; for there is
not a word in Scripture whence we may
gather that the bread and its eating, or the
wine and its drinking, are anything more than
signs ; or that the bread and wine are any
thing more than natural bread and wine.
Far from us then be such superstitious no
tions of the spirituality of the bread and
wine, or of the efficacy of them. Just so far
as we look through the signs to the things
signified, and make a believing scriptural ap
plication of them to our case, so far are they
effectual and no further — to suppose more, is
to encourage superstition and to promote de
lusion. It reminds us of the folly of heathen
idolaters, who, while they did not consider
the stone for worship to be a god, until con
secrated or dedicated, yet after such conse
cration or dedication, considered it as such,
thinking that the spirit of the god it repre
sented was in or about it !
Tenet XVII.
The Sacrifice of the Mass may be used, pro
vided it be only commemorative, and not
used for emolument.
" The article before us neither speaks
against the Mass in itself, nor against its
being an offering for the quick and the dead
for the remission of sin ; especially since
the decree of Trent says, that the fruits of
the bloody oblation are through this most
abundantly obtained ; but against its being

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

S3

viewed, as independent of or distinct from
the sacrifice on the Cross, which is blasphe
my ; and its being directed to the emolument
of those to whom it pertains to celebrate it,
which is imposture." — Tract 90.
Refutation of Tenet XVII.
" By one offering he hath perfected for ever
them who are sanctified." Hebrews x. 14.
This doctrine cannot be granted, because,
1. No such offering is enjoined in Scrip
ture : on the contrary, the apostle, in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, teaches us that the
offering of Christ was for " once," and that
" by one offering he hath for ever perfected
them that are sanctified." Nor is any sign
or ordinance enjoined in connexion with
such offering besides that of the Lord's
Supper. 2. It calls off the attention, especially of
the vulgar and uninformed, from the true
sacrifice to such supposed sign of it, causing
men to trust in the priest's or representative
sacrifice, rather than in Christ's true original
sacrifice. Moreover> i* has given great oc
casion to the indulgence of the love of
filthy lucre in the priesthood, as well as to
idolatrous worship and numberless supersti
tions and impostures. For these reasons,
and because we are not to receive " the doc
trines and commandments of men," we re
ject the tenet, and say with Watts,
" The death of Christ shall still remain
Sufficient and alone."
Tenet XVIII.
Purgatory of some kind may be admitted,
though not the Romish Purgatory.
'' Here was a primitive doctrine, whatever
its merits, concerning the fire of judgment,
which is a possible, or a probable opinion,
and is not condemned. That doctrine is
this — that the conflagration of the world, or
the flames which attend the Judge will be
an ordeal through which all men will pass :
that great saints, such as Mary, will pass it
unharmed : that others will suffer loss : but
none will fall under it who are built upon
the right foundation. Here is one purgato-
rian doctrine not Romish."
" Another doctrine, purgatorian but not
Romish, is that maintained by the Greeks at
Florence, in which the cleansing, though a
punishment, was but a pmna damni, not a
pmna sensus, not a positive sensible inflic
tion, much less the torment of fire, but the
absence of God's presence. Another pur
gatory is that in which the cleansing is but

a progressive sanctification, and has no pain
at all. None of these doctrines does the
article condemn — any of them may be held
by the Anglo-Catholic as a matter of private
belief ; not that they are here advocated, one
or other, but they are adduced as an illustra
tion of what the article does not mean, and
to vindicate our Christian liberty in a matter
where the Church has not confined it." —
Tract 90.
Refutation of Tenet XVIII.
" Was buried ; and in hell he lifted up his"
eyes, being in torments." — Luke xvi.
22, 23.
" Willing rather to be absent from the body,
and present with the Lord." — 2 Corin
thians v. 8.
Having discarded tradition, we of course
pay little regard to what Tract 90 is pleased
to call a " primitive doctrine," concerning a
certain purgatory. Its author calls it primi
tive, but it would not be primitive doctrine to
talk of " Sainte Mary," for " St. Mary " was
not so honoured in the primitive or first ages.
However, there is no evidence in Scripture
of such doctrine : on the contrary, the rich
man is represented as being in hell, imme
diately upon his death, and the pious Laza
rus as equally soon in Abram's bosom. Paul
believed that he should be " present with the
Lord," when " absent from the body ;" and
therefore " desired to depart and be with
Christ " as " far better " than being here.
Nor have we any reason to suppose his case
to be peculiar. Moreover, primitive antiqui
ty, to which the Puseyites so often appeal,
is in our favour.
Tenet XIX.
Veneration for Relics and Images may be al
lowed, though not the Romish adoration.
" The Homilies do not discard reverence
toward Relics." — " By the Romish doctrine
of the veneration and worshipping of images,
the Article means those idolatrous honours,
which are paid to them throughout the Church
of Rome, with the superstitions, profanities,,
and impurities consequent thereupon." — Im
plying that though the sort of regard which
the Romanists support should not be encour
aged, yet that some extraordinary venera
tion is to be paid to relics. Tract 90.

«4

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

Refutation of Tenet XIX.
" He brake in pieces the brazen serpent that
Moses had made : for unto those days the
children of Israel did burn incense to it :
and he called it Nehushtan." — 2 Kings
xviii. 4.
In the minds of the common people, ve
neration will soon make progress to adora
tion, as was the case with reference to the
adoration of stocks and stones : for the Phoe
nician worship of stones originated in vene
ration for the stone pillar which Jacob set
up at Bethel as a consecrated place of wor
ship for himself and his household after his
return from Padan-aram. Having been the
place of worship, and on account of God's
appearance to Jacob there, becoming a
sacred place, the people of the country held
the stone or stones of Bethel in veneration ;
and this in process of time grew up to adora
tion. So was it also with the Israelites in
regard to the brazen serpent in the wilder
ness. It became at length an object of wor
ship. Have we not seen such results in the
Papal history ?
Tenet XX.
Invocation of unseen beings may be allowed,
though not in the Roman idolatrous sense.
They may he invoked as interceding, though
not as giving.
" Nor is it a fond invocation to pray that
unseen beings may bless us. Bishop Ken
does this in his Evening Hymn —
* 0 may my guardian, while I sleep,
Close to my bed his vigils keep !
His love angelical instil,
Stop all the avenues of ill.'
" Though we may not invoke them to give
or to do — for that is God's — yet we may in
voke them to pray that God may give or do
so and so."— Tract 90.
Refutation of Tenet XX.
" There is one Mediator between God and
man." 1 Timothy ii. 5.
What does calling upon a Saint merely to
intercede suppose ? — A belief that such saint
knows, and hears, and sympathises, and
cares for, and may be trusted in, to interest
himself in our case. But who told us that
they are thus capable ? Where is it to be
found in Scripture ? What says the church
by Isaiah ? . " Abraham is ignorant of us,
»nd Israel knoweth us not." Moreover, it

is God's prerogative, and his alone, to "heat
prayer " — his prerogative, and his alone, to
" look from heaven, to behold all the sons of
men," and to " know the thoughts that come
into the mind ;" and shall we ascribe these
things to a creature ? Would it not be blas
phemy, a " provoking the Lord to jealousy,"
who has said, " I will not give my glory to
another ?"
It is also dishonouring Christ our Inter
cessor, as though his love, his sympathy, his
care, his intercession, were no! sufficient.
When once you begin to invoke saints, you
know not where it will stop. Hence the
thousands of demi-gods among the heathen ;
hence the multitude of saints among the Ro
manists. " Every artificer and profession
hath his special saint, as a peculiar god.
As, for example, scholars have St. Nicholas
and St. Gregory ; painters, St Luke : neither
lack soldiers their Mars, nor lovers their
Venus among Christians. All diseases have
their special Raints, as gods, the curers of
them .... the falling evil, St. Cornelio ; the
tooth-ache, St. Apollin, &c. Neither do
beasts nor cattle iack their gods with us ;
for St. Loy is the horse-leech and St. Antho
ny the swineherd." Homily on the Point
of Idolatry.
Tenet XXI.
We are to renew j>ur attention to certain
forms and ceremonies, that have got into
disuse, and consider them as means of
grace.By these we mean, besides those used in
consecrations of persons, of churches, and
of burying-grounds, the changes of clerical
apparel, the genuflexions, the position of the
altar, the turning of faces, the placing of
lights on the altar, &c.
" We must come to the conclusion," says
Dr. Hook, " that they are not mere forms,
that theyare means of grace — means through
which the Church interposes in the degree
she is appointed to interpose between the
soul of the individual and its God. Now
that they are not regarded as mere forms is
clearly evident ; because in ordaining a
priest, the bishop gives to thcperson ordained
the power to remit or to retain sins ; and to
qualify him for so doing, confers upon him
the gift of the Holy Ghost. Let us look on
this subject fearlessly and honestly, since it
is one of the points of attack upon the Eng
lish Church by the Protestant sects around
us." — " All that we would ask is this, that
there should be at least as much of ceremony
in the sanctuary as in the royal palace ; until

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

55

Ceremony is dispensed with there, we shall
insist that ceremony shall be observed here.
We think it hard that we should be supersti-
tiously forbidden lo bow to the altar of the
Church, styled by the Ancients, ' Solium
Christi, the throne of Christ,' while to, the
empty chair of our earthly sovereign, obei
sance is still made in the house of peers.
We like not to yield the one until the other
has been discontinued. We choose not to
turn our back upon the altar, while it is
deemed disrespectful to turn our back upon
the throne !" — Hook's Sermons."
Refutation of Tenet XXI.
" Having a form of godliness, but denying the
power thereof: from such turn away." —
2 Timothy iii. 5.
Forms and ceremonies of divine appoint
ment are doubtless of great use in religion ;
and it is a divine rule, that " all things, should
be done decently and in order :" but the
danger is, lest the handmaid should usurp
the place ofthe mistress ; and for this plain
reason, that mankind are generally averse
to heart-work in religion ; and that atten
tion to the " form of godliness " being much
more congenial to our senses than is atten
tion to the " power " of it, men, if they possi
bly can quiet their consciences thereby, will
do so. Survey the history of the church' of
Israel, and indeed of the Christian church,
and you will find that such has been the
case in all ages. How zealous were the
Jews about ceremonies, about their temple
services, their sacrifices, their baptismal pu
rifications, their meats and their drinks, their
feasts and their fasts, while at the same time,
their " heart was far from " God. So was it
before the first destruction of their city and
temple, and so was it before their second
destruction : and so has it been in the
Christian church from early times down to
the reformation. The Protestant churches
are not cured of this folly to the present day*;
but, of late, in the Oxford school they seem
to be returning to it with renewed zeal.
Hence that increased attention to forms and
ceremonies ; and well it will be if in the
midst of all this zeal about the form of godli
ness, the power be not denied — if in so great
attention to signs, the things signified be not
disregarded — if in the use of the means of
grace, the grace of the means be not in a
great degree left out of the question.
It was on account of this disposition in the
ancient Jewish church that the Lord ex
horted the people to " break up the fallow
ground, and sow not among thorns ; to cir

cumcise themselves to the Lord, and take
away the foreskin of their heart." The
Searcher of hearts knew that, while their
heart was like " fallow ground," producing
nothing but the thorns of wickedness, vain
were all their religious observances ; that
even the rain of his word would answer no
valuable purpose ; and therefore he exhorts
them to think of and to concern themselves
about the state of their hearts : he knew that
while their hearts were " uncircumcised,"
vain was the " circumcision of their flesh,"
much as they trusted in it, and therefore he
exhorts them to concern themselves about
"the circumcision of the heart." Ezekiel,
after having exhorted the Jewish people to
" turn from their wickedness and live,"
closes by saying, " Make you a new heart
and a new spirit, for, why will ye die, O
house of Israel ?" Nor was the design
otherwise, when he promises to give to the
remnant of Judah " a new heart and a new
spirit." He knew very well, that until
there was a work upon the heart, until he
had given them "a new heart and a new
spirit," a " heart to perceive," a " heart to
know the Lord," had circumcised their heart
to love God," they would never be sound
converts, they would never have the power
of godliness.
What shall we learn from all this ? That
it is a dangerous thing to lay so much stress
upon the forms and rituals of religion, lest
the power of it be overlooked; lest men
should lull their consciences to sleep in it,
and they themselves sleep the sleep of eter
nal death. But, supposing the power of
godliness be not disregarded by either priest
or people, yet still there is danger of a pre
ponderating regard to the form.
To all this we add, that man is a creature of
sense, and that a religion of sense will capti'
vate him rather than a religion of faith ; and
therefore, form.ceremony, variety, pomp, and
pageantry, while it may greatly increase the
votaries of religion, may yet leave the heart
unrenewed and ungodly ; and the more
a " child of the devil" and a " child of hell:"
It may be said of ritual observances, that
they awake and keep awake attention ; and
that they inspire with awe for the solemnities
of religion. True, they may, when proper
to the holy religion of the Bible, when such
as are prescribed there, when decency and
order require them, when not in excess ; but
if they are jejune and trifling, if they are not
understood, or are ill understood, if they call
off the heart from communion with God, and
have no tendency to produce or maintain
"the life of God" in the soul, they are injurious.

56

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

If they awake attention for the present, of
what use is this attention, if the impression be
transient, and the mind uninformed, and the
heart and life unimproved? Ifthey inspire with
awe, weare to distinguish between a supersti
tious awe, thatgenderethto bondage, and that
reverence and godly fear which lies at the
foundation of all religion. Moreover, how
ever men of enlarged minds may rise supe
rior to such attractions of sense, yet it is
otherwise with the mass of mankind, who
scarce look beneath the surface of things,
and are carried away with exhibitions that
excite their senses and their passions.
Never should it be forgotten that religion is
a religion of the heart and life ; that as
" God is a Spirit," so he seeks such to wor
ship and serve him, as would worship and
serve him " in spirit and in truth ;" and that,
therefore, if we pray, it must be " with the
understanding ;" if we sing, it must be with
the understanding ;" and that all Christians
should, " in understanding be men" — and
that it so has its seat in the understanding
as to make us willing to " deny all ungodli
ness and wordly lusts, and to live soberly,
righteously, and godly in this present world,
looking for that blessed hope, and the gkf-
rious appearing of the great God and our
Saviour Jesus Christ, who gave himself for
us, that he might redeem us from all iniqui
ty, and purify unto himself a peculiar people,
zealous of good works." This is the religion
without which all the forms and ceremonies
in the world, and all the sacraments however
and by whomsoever administered, will be of
no avail.
Tenet XXII.
Scripture must be interpreted more as mysti
cal and allegorical.
Making baptism almost the whole of re
ligion, and adhering to the Fathers, Dr.
Pusey adopts with delight the allegorical
interpretations of the Fathers from the third
to the sixth centuries. Not content with
seeing baptism in the Flood, the passage of
the Red Sea, circumcision, and the Levitical
washings, he remarks — " It were an arbitra
ry and unphilosophical proceeding to stop
here, and to refuse to see other types of bap
tism, because Scripture compels us to acknow
ledge no more. It is a cold, stiff and lifeless
system, so to bind ourselves to take the
letter of holy Scripture, as to refuse to
stir hand or foot, even when that Scripture
seems to beckon and invite us, and to point
the way ! — " Since the passage of the Red
Sea figured our baptism, why should we

restrain that ofthe Jordan, which transmitted
the people of Israel from the wilderness
into the promised land?" — But here would
be no end to quotation ; even the very mi
raculous recovery of. the iron from the Jor
dan .by Elisha, — the restoration and cure
of the blind man'at the pool of Siloam — the
water from heaven on Elijah's sacrifice — the
waters in Ezekiel's vision, and even the waters
at the Creation, are all made to connect them
selves with baptism, or to represent it. Such
are some specimens of the typical system ofthe
ancient Church, lamenting, at the same time
that the moderns have suffered this mode of
interpretation to drop. " Certainly, a gra
dual abandonment of the types, and a less
reverential and thoughtful appreciation of the
reality, have gone together. In both we have
declined, step by step, from the ancient
Church." — Pusey on Baptism.
Refutation of Tenet XXII.
" i" speak forth the words of truth and sober
ness." Acts xxvi 25.
The great apostle of the Gentiles, speak
ing of himself and ofhis fellow-labourers in
the gospel, says, " We are not as many
who corrupt the word of God, but as of sin
cerity, but as of God speak we in Christ;
and furtheronin this same epistle, discoursing
ofthe manner in which they discharged the
ministry they had received, he declares that
they had renounced the hidden things of dis
honesty, not walking in craftiness, nor hand
ling the word of God deceitfully, but by
manifestation of the truth to every man's con
science." Herein are they patterns for every
one who ministers in holy things, either
from the pulpit or the press. Not only
should we therefore most carefully shun per
versions of Scripture, but likewise a fanci
ful allegorical interpretation of it, where the
Holy Spirit intended no allegory ; for we
acknowledge that some parts are allegorical.
In this Tenet XXII., it can be seen how
Dr. Pusey allegorizes ; but the reader can
form no adequate conception to what extent
he is disposed to do so unless he reads the
latter part of his work on " Baptism." We
do not mean to say that the Doctor design
edly " corrupts" the word of God, or
" handles it deceitfully." Many good men,
with the best intentions, have gone into this
method of interpretation ; and in Dr. Pusey
it appears to originate in his fond attach
ment to the writings of the fathers, so called;
but we protest against it. There are so
many temptations to such a mode of treating
Scripture, however, that we had need be on

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

67

our guard. It gratifies the curiosity of
the listening multitude ; it may minister to
the vain-glory of the preacher, inasmuch as
the hearers look up to him as a man singu
larly endowed with understanding ; it is
likewise an easy way of preaching ; and of
propagating error ; for any heretic in this
way may cause the Scripture apparently to
favour his doctrine. If then we would follow
the apostle Paul in his sincerity and fideli
ty, let no temptation induce us to speak what
the Holy Spirit did not intend to speak ; but
let us diligently and prayerfully endeavour
to ascertain what is his mind in the passage,
and as such to deliver it to our hearers or
readers. If we de not, we are in danger of
making the word the sneer of infidels; we
shall lead into error, we shall vitiate the
taste of our hearers, instead of causing them
to become " in understanding to be men ;"
we shall but minister to their humours and
passions, and at best, make them like the
stony ground hearers, who, though they
" immediately received the word with joy,"
yet it not having root in their understanding,
in time of temptation fell away. Nor let it
be forgotten, that " the wood, and the hay,
and the stubble, will not abide the fire in
that day, when "the fire will try every man's
work of what sort it is ;" and that " if any
man corrupt, (pOeipet, the temple of God,
him will God corrupt, (pdspsi." A solemn
warning this against corrupting the word of
God, inasmuch as by such means the temple
of God is corrupted !
Yet we do not mean to say that some parts
of Scripture are not allegorical, and therefore
to be treated allegorically ; but in this the
Scripture and sound judgment will be our
guide, especially if we are ever careful, with
Paul, when before Agrippa, to "speak forth
the words of truth and soberness."

CHAPTER III.

EXPOSURE OF THE TENDENCY OF THOSE TE
NETS.
" For ye suffer, ifa man bring you into bond
age, ifa man devour you, if a man take of
you, ifa man exalt himself, ifa man smite
you on the face." — 2 Corinthians xi. 20.
" To utter error against the Lord, to make
empty the soul of the hungry, and he will
cause the drink of the thirsty to fail." —
Isaiah xxxii. 6.
" Because with lies yt have made the heart of
the righteous sad, whom I have not made
sad; and strengthened the hands of the
wicked, that fix should not return from his
8

wicked way, by promising him life : there
fore ye shall see no more vanity, nor divine
divinations : for I will deliver my people
out of your hand : and ye shall know that I
am the Lord." — Ezekiel xiii. 22, 23.
"But though we, or an angel from heaven,
preach any other gospel unto you than that
which we have preached unto you, let him
be accursed. As we' said before, so say I
now again, if any man preach any other
gospel unto you than that ye have received,
let him be accursed." — Galatians i. 8, 9.
•I. — It exalts the power ofthe Clergy.
See the Puseyite clergyman of a parish.
He assumes to himself the sole direction of
his parishioners in their eternal concerns.
He alone has a right to make them " mem
bers of Christ, children of God, and inheri
tors of the kingdom of heaven " by the sa
crament of baptism j which, as administered
by him of the apostolical succession, not only
regenerates them, but justifies, and sanctifies,
and confers upon them all spiritual blessings.
No one but himself has authority to instruct
them in the way of salvation, or to direct them
in the way to heaven. At length, they draw
near to their final account, when it becomes
all-important that they have " administered
to them," as it is termed, " the consolations
of religion." He reads the prayers and ser
vice appointed, administers to them the sa
crament, which in his hands communicates
"life " to the soul, and having pronounced the
absolution of their sin as professing to be
penitent and believing, he dismisses them for
heaven. Now what is the obvious tendency
of such power as this upon the mind ? Feel
ing that their everlasting interests are in so
great a degree in his hands, they must of
course look up to him with a sort of awe,
bordering upon dread ; nor will they dare to
displease him. Nothing remains for them
but an implicit obedience to his injunctions,
and the reception of his sayings as unerring
truth. Still more will this be the case, if he
can persuade the congregation of his hearers
that he is a " successor of the apostles," that
there is an efficacy in the sacraments as ad
ministered by him ; and that by his conse
cration of the elements, he can bring down
the presence of Christ in the bread and wine !
How sacred must be the person of such a
man ! Can any one doubt then that these
tenets- exalt the power of the clergy ? That
they minister to the pride and ambition of
the human heart ?
Here we cannot refrain from insetting
some remarks of Bishop Burnet, in his advice
to the clergy, " Learn to view popery in a

59

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

true light, as a conspiracy to exalt the power
of the clergy, even by subjecting the most
sacred truths of religion to contrivances for
raising their authority, and by offering to the
world another method of being saved besides
that prescribed in the gospel — I see a spirit
rising among us, like that of the church of
Rome, of advancing the clergy beyond their
due authority to an unjust pitch. This rather
heightens jealousies and prejudices against
us than advances our real authority ; and it
will fortify the designs of profane infidels,
who desire nothing more than to see the pub
lic ministry of the Church first disgraced and
then abolished — Therefore, let the clergy
live and labour well, and they will feel that
as much authority will follow that, as they
will know how to manage well. To speak
plainly, Dod well's extravagant notions, which
have been too much drunk in by the clergy
in my time, have weakened the power of the
Church, and soured men's minds more against
it than all the books wrote or attempts made
agairist it could ever have done ; and indeed,
the secret poison of those principles has given
too many of the clergy a bias towards popery,
with an aversion to the Reformation, which
has. brought them under much contempt."*
Could any thing be more appropriate to the
times in which we live ?
Whether our Puseyite clergy cherish their
tenets with such views and feelings — yet,
such exaltation must be seen to be the natural
result ; and the temptation is great to avail
themselves of it. It may not be amiss how
ever to remark that it was not on such
grounds as the above, that Paul required that
the Christians at Thessalonica should " es
teem highly in love " those that were " over
them in the Lord ;" not on such grounds did
he himself claim the regard of those to whom
he wrote. He could appeal to the Ephesian
bishops, emoKOTTOVc, that, when among
them, he had been " serving the Lord with
all humility of mind ;" and to the church over
whom they had been made bishops, in writing
to them, he calls himself, " less than the least
of all saints." And when writing to the
Corinthian church, he possessed the same
spirit. Hence he uses such expressions as
these — " I have planted, Apollos watered, but
God gave the increase. So then, neither is
he that planteth any thing, neither he that
watereth, but God that giveth the increase."
" Not I, but the grace of God that was with
me." " By the grace of God I am what 1
am." * Burnet's History of his own Times.

II. — It enslaves the minds ofthe People.
The doctrines of grace, such as free for
giveness in the name of Christ, justification
freely by grace through the redemption that
is in Jesus Christ, salvation by grace through
faith, and eternal life as the gift of God, when
rightly understood and believed by a con
vinced sinner, will burst the bonds of sin, and
break the yoke of Satan ; and by causing the
Holy Spirit to take possession of the soul,
will introduce it into a state of sacred free
dom ; and the soul will delightfully say in
consequence, " 0 Lord, "truly I am thy ser
vant, I am thy servant — thou hast loosed my
bonds." But what else will produce such
freedom ? Not assuredly the sacraments —
the belonging to the so-called apostolical
Church — or a rigid adherence to rites and cer
emonies, &c. without the mind being inform
ed, or an intelligent faith produced. These
sacraments, these adherences, in themselves
have no adaptation for the purpose. They
communicate no knowledge, they give no un
derstanding, they impart no true faith, they
bring no promises, to the mind, that is, well-
applied promises, to fill it with joy and peace
in believing, nor can, in such cases, " the joy
of the Lord be our strength." Should the
conscience of a man be awakened, what must
he do ? " Do !" says a Puseyite, " he must
repent and believe, it is true ; but by all means
he must comfort himself with his baptism, with
his relation to the true Church, and he must
take the Lord's supper, and pray, and do as
well as he can." But what adaptation is
there in all this to ease his conscience, and set
his mind at liberty ? If he were led to the
cross of Christ, and shown that therein God's
holiness was cleared, his justice satisfied, his
law established, so that with infinite " wisdom
and prudence," God can "glorify his mercy"
in pardoning and saving the chief of sinners,
there would indeed be something to relieve
him : but not in the way above specified.
What adaptation is there inadvertingto sacra
ments, to church relation, to the power of the
ministry to induce him to renounce his former
servitude of sin, and to live as " the Lord's free
man ?" Ah, an apostle would teach us that it
is the blood of Christ blieved in, that while
it " purges the conscience from dead works,"
disposes " to serve the living God." This sa-
cramentarreligion, this trusting to the church
and its ministry, therefore, not only keeps the
sinner in his state of slavery, but stands in
the way of his being brought out into the
" liberty " " the Spirit of God."
But there is a direct mental bondage pro-

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

59

duced by this Puseyism of High-Churchism.
What is its language ? " To the episcopal
°iergy. and to them alone, belong the minis
try of the word and the sacraments ; and your
salvation is in great danger, to say the least,
if you attend to other ministrations." Sup
pose then that a man lives in a parish wherein
such a.clergyman resides. As his parishion
er, he must then receive him as his sole
spiritual guide. The man of course, if he is
convinced of sin, will desire " a servant of
the most high God," who can and will " show
him the way of salvation;" but alas! it so
happens, that his " authorized " guide does
not know the way himself. The parishioner
may be already in the way, and wishes to be
furthered in it — the same difficulty occurs.
The clergyman neither is in it, or knows it,
and of course is utterly unfit to guide or lead
others. Yet he must attend his parish church,
and sit under his ministry ! Is not this bond
age ? Does not such Puseyism and High-
churchism tend to enslave the mind ? But
what makes it more grievous — in the same
parish there is a ministry where I may not
only learn the way of salvation, but may be
furthered in it ; and under which I may be
quickened, comforted, and established ; but
the minister, as they affirm, is an " unautho
rized teacher " — " it is dangerous to hear
him " — if he hears him, he not only endan
gers his salvation, but the clergyman, and the
magistrate, and the churchwardens — all be
come his enemy ; and whatever charities
may exist in the parish he shall not partake
of them. Is not all this calculated to bring
his mind into a state of complete slavery ?
Nor is this all : the unhappy man has a feel
ing for his neighbours who are in the same
wretched situation ! The good Lord, in his
mercy, interpose to deliver our fellow-crea
tures and fellow-countrymen from such thral
dom !
The tenet concerning the general neces
sity of the sacraments, urged as they are as
necessary to salvation, induces mental slavery.
A child is born to a parishioner — it is unex
pectedly seized with convulsions — it is on
the point of death — that it may be saved, it
must be baptized ; but the minister who alone
can administer the ordinance effectually is
not at hand ! The father, the mother, the
nurse, are all of them concerned for the future
welfare of the child — but what can they do ?
They wait in vain ; and the child has expired
without the saving rite ! Is not an exposure
to such a state of mind, a bondage ? even
though the parents may hope that the will
will' be taken for the deed. The same may
be said in the case of the sacrament of the

Lord's supper, and its administration to the
dying. Both the dying man himself and his
attendant friends may suffer greatly in their
minds, having been taught by their minister
to lay such stress upon the sacraments.
Moreover I must surrender my private
judgment to the judment of the Church and
to my parish minister, and believe as they
believe. This doctrine may very well ac
cord with the feelings of the slothful who
will not take the trouble to think for them
selves ; but to one who knows how to value
his intelligent nature, and who deems him
self responsible for the use of his intellects
and will, it must necessarily be repulsive ¦;
and perpetually to have enforced upon his
belief what he deems absurd and unscriptural
can be considered as nothing less than a
state of bondage. God has made me a free
agent ; my body may be imprisoned, my
mouth may be gagged, but my mind must
think ; and if I am not allowed to think
freely, I am in bondage ; and this bondage
becomes more intolerable, when I consider
that the God who made me, and gave me my
thinking powers, requires me to search the
Scriptures for myself, to see whether the
things I am told are so or not — to " prove all
things and to hold fast that which is good,"
and not to " believe every spirit, but to try
the spirits whether they are of God." If
then I find myself forbidden by man to think
and judge, while I am required to do both by
my Maker, am I not held in mental bondage ?
But " whether it be right to hearken unto
man rather than unto God," let the reader
judge. To the clergyman himself I am in fetters ;
for since my spiritual welfare and comfort
depend ao much upon his ministrations, it is
my interest to please him, and upon any
terms to keep in with him ; and I cannot in
many respects do as I would, for fear of the
contrary. Still more is it so, if he can per
suade me that there is a purgatory after death
over which his prayers or absolutions nny
have any influence.. This Puseyism, when
thoroughly instilled into the minds of the
parish, puts the people into the hands of the
clergy to do with them almost as they please.
So was it in the days of popery ; for so great
was the ascendancy that the clergy gained
over the minds of the people, that property
was left to the Church to an immense amount,
and it became requisite for the civil govern
ment to interpose by the statute of mortmain.
The attempt to make the Church one — of
one form and order, one external hierarchy i
is another way of enslaving the people.
Pleasing idea, such a uniformity ! pleasing

60

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM-

reality, in heaven ! but on earth it is not to
be expected. The different constitution of
the human mind, our diversity of education,
our situation in society, and the unequalled
distribution of the means of information, for
bid such a uniformity. We cannot think
alike ; and if therefore any government re
quires us to act as though we did, it must
necessarily put a force upon our feelings, and
we must be in a state of mental bondage.
But is not this the tendency of Puseyism, and
High-churchism, which demands that all
should submit to what it calls the Catholic
Church ?
III. — It propagates a spurious Religion.
However upright may be the intentions of
our opponents — yet the tendency of their
doctrines is to substitute a counterfeit for the
real religion, and to propagate such spurious
religion. It will cause persons to rest in the
outward baptism of the body, as making them
Christians, irrespective of that inward bap
tism of the soul and indwelling of the Holy
Spirit, which alone can make them so ; for
has not Christ declared that we must be
" born of the Spirit ;" and has not the apos
tle Paul asserted, that " if any man have not
the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his ?"
The eating bread and drinking wine, though
but bodily actions, will pass for the participa
tion of Christ's spirit of life to the soul
through believing. It will cause union to
the visible church by baptism — pass for
union to Christ and to his invisible church by
a living faith. Ordination to the ministry of
religion, by the laying on ofthe hands of man,
will pass for the sanctification of a person to
the work by the grace and gifts of the Holy
Spirit. The doctrines and commandments
of men will be substituted for the doctrines
and commandments of God ; and the form
of godliness for the power of godliness.
Thus an outward religion will be rested
on, while the heart will remain unchang
ed, and even " alienated from the life of
God ;" for if the people are taught to con
sider the sacraments as more effectual than
the word, and that indeed such sacraments
are effectual without the word, they will of
course place reliance on the former, and ne
glect the latter. What must be the obvious
consequence of this ? They will not be so
licitous about being " begotten by the word
of truth," or even understanding what the
new inward birth is ; and those inward ope
rations of the mind and soul which constitute
the essence of true religion will be disregard
ed : nor supposing them Christians, would
$iey care about being " sanctified by the

word of truth." Content with their baptism,
their confirmation, their relation to the
Church, attendance at and zeal for it — es
pecially if their lives be moral — they will
consider themselves as truly Christians, and
as heirs of heaven ; while alas ! not being
born of the Spirit, and not having the Spirit
of Christ dwelling in them, they have no
claim to the name of the former; and not
having" the " first-fruits " or " earnest of the
Spirit," they have no fitness for the latter.
But a religion that thus disparages the
word of God is not only injurious, but con
trary to the Scripture ! There we are told,
that " The law of God is perfect, converting
the soul " — there we learn, that the Scrip
tures " make wise to salvation " — that the
" engrafted word " is " able to save the soul."
Nor only that they "convert," that they
" make wise to salvation," and that they are
" able to save the soul ;" but our Lord him
self, in his intercessory , prayer, teaches us
that it is by the word of truth that persons
already converted are sanctified — " Sanctify
them through thy truth," says he ; " thy word
is truth." Is all this to be attributed to sa
craments ; baptism for the one, and the Lord's
Supper for the other ! Is this the religion
of the Bible ? Is it not a spurious religion ?
It is true indeed, that they, Pusey and his
companions, do speak of the grace of the
Holy Spirit, as given in ordination, in bap
tism, in confirmation, and in the eucharist ;
yet this grace, instead of being the result of
the operation of one intellectual spirit upon
another intellectual spirit, appears to be no
thing more than a sort of mystical spell or
charm. It is neither light in the mind, nor
love in the soul, nor likeness to God in the
character ; nor is it to be seen in the " sober,
righteous, and godly life."
We have reason to fear that there will be
such interpretations of Scripture, both from
the pulpit and from the press, as will eat up
the vitals of religion. Take a specimen
from Dr. Hook, as brought forward with ap
probation, in a review of one of his sermons
in the Gentleman's Magazine. The passage
commented upon is one where we should
expect spiritual religion more than from
many others. It is that concerning predes
tination, calling, justification, and glorifica
tion, in the eighth chapter of the Romans.
" Now," says Dr. Hook, " comes the ques
tion, who are those predestinated to the glo
ries of the new heaven, the new earth, the
new Jerusalem", which is to come down from
above ? Let Paul give the answer. ' Whom
he did predestinate, them he also called.'
Called by the circumstances under which

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

01

he providentially placed them, either by the
appearance in the past ages of an apostle or
evangelist, or as is the case with us, by the
fact of being born in a Christian land : and
' whom he called, them he also justified ;'
receiving them, for Christ's sake, as his own
children in holy baptism ; he justified us for
the same Saviour's sake, counted us holy
then, who as yet were not actually so : and
those ' whom he justified, them he also glo
rified :' he glorified them by regenerating
them, and making them temples ofthe Holy
Spirit, than which what greater glory can
pertain to the sons of men ?' The forego
ing passage furnishes us with a description
of Christians, of baptized persons, and con
sequently, to Christians those other passages
refer which relate to God's predestination.
Them God hath predestinated ; and as such,
as God's elect people, predestinated not
merely to means of grace — for this was
clearly inadequate — but to glory in the king
dom of glory." — Now observe with regard
to this comment ; here is first the "predes
tination ;" Paul says, it was to be " con
formed to the image of God's Son," but not
so the Doctor ; and whatever might be his
own wish with regard to such an end, we
fear it would not be so of many of his bap
tized hearers, who would lay the flattering
unction to their souls, concluding that they
were "predestinated" to "the kingdom of
glory," as the Doctor speaks. Then there
is the calling. Would those who composed
the Article of the church of England " on
predestination," have given such a low exter
nai sense to the " calling " there mentioned ?
No ; " they through faith obey the call,
says the Article. Would the Westminister
Assembly of Divines? No! very far from
it. " Effectual calling," say they, " is the
work of God's Spirit, whereby, convincing
us of our sin and misery, and enlightening
our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and
renewing our wills, he doth persuade and
enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely
offered to us in the gospel." How different !
and of course, how different their sense ofthe
justification that is said to follow ! Where,
in the Articles of the church of England,
are we taught that justification 16 the being
" received, for Christ's sake, as God's own
children in holy baptism," and " counting us
holy " then ? Is this the religion that the
apostles would have taught ? a religion that
makes idividual readers, makes a whole con
gregation of hearers imagine, because they
were " born in a Christian land," because
they had partaken of " holy baptism," that
therefore they were the predestinated, justi

fied, and glorified people of God? What
will be the result of such views as these if
spread over the land ?
Thus do the Puseyite or High church
doctrines cause counterfeit coin to pass for
genuine. But " Every man's work shall be
made manifest ; for the day shall declare it,
because it shall be revealed by fire, and the
fire shall try every man's work of what sort
it is." IV. — It deludes and destroys souls.
Our Lord says, that " if the blind lead the
blind, both shall fall into the ditch " — not only
he who leads, but the individual led. How
important then to " take heed what we hear !"
How serious the results of Puseyism and
High-churchism, if its tenets are so errone
ous as has been represented !
We would ask then if the doctrine of
" apostolical succession " be admitted, are
not the souls of whole parishes in certain
cases in danger ? t Here is a clergyman
who entered college not from a desire to save
souls, but from a desire to procure for him
self a respectable living ; after having passed
through the requisite trials, he is inducted
into a living, and has the oversight of a parish
as a " successor of the apostles ;"• and he
gives his people to understand that the charge
of their souls is committed to him solely ;
but alas ! though professedly a " servant of
the most high God, to show unto men the
way of salvation," yet he is incapable of
doing so, not himself knowing the way.
What follows i The people are not led at
all ; or they are blindly led. The " gos
pel," which is " the power of God unto
salvation," they hear not, and therefore
they are not saved; or being led wrong,
they stumble and " fall into the ditch " — fall
into hell ! Who or what is to help it ? He
is their authorized teacher — he passes as a
" successor of the apostles ;" and though
there should be another teacher in the same
parish, who does know the way of salvation,
and who does preach the gospel, and who
is the instrument of saving many a soul yet
no matter ; as the priest says, he has no au
thority, and therefore the people are forbid
den to hear him ! Does not this " apostolic
succession," this exclusive succession tend
in such cases to ruin souls ? or which is the
same thing, leave them to perish ? They
are not " saved from their sins ;" they do not
" overcome the world ;" they are left a prey
to their lusts and passions ; they do not
" deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and
live soberly, righteously, and godly." Some

62

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

disgrace themselves by drunkenness, others
by fornication, and others by swearing and
Sabbath-breaking, and at length die in their
sins ; whereas, had they attended upon a
gospel ministry and a faithful minister of
Jesus Ohrist, though "unauthorized" by
a diocesan bishop, they might have been
saved. The efficacy of the sacraments is another
doctrine that proves delusive and destructive
By the sacraments, Dr. Pusey teaches that
we are united to Christ, chosen, justified,
sanctified, adopted, and become heirs of
heaven. Persuaded of this, will their
hearers " search the Scriptures daily," as the
noble Bereans did, so as to believe and be
saved ? Will they earnestly and persever
ingly pray that the Lord would open their
understandings, that they may understand
them ? will they " labour for the meat that
endureth to everlasting life?" will they
" strive to enter at the straight gate ?" No
such thing. " They are safe in Christ
already, as they fancy, and it will be all
well at last." Who sees not the end of this
delusion ? Whereas, had they considered
the sacraments only as signs and sealed
blessings conditionally, they would have
been concerned to acquire that understanding
and faith by which they might have posses
sed and enjoyed the things signified. Alas !
under such teaching, people may hope for
heaven when they have never " wrought"
for it ; may expect the inheritance, when
they have never received its " earnest ;"
and though going up to heaven's gate with
a " Lord, Lord, open unto us !" may be
spurned from the Saviour's presence with a
" Depart from me, ye that work iniquity !"
Perhaps there is no tenet of Puseyism
more delusive and dangerous than that
which holds that all spiritual blessings are
connected with this " holy baptism." Ac
cording to Dr. Pusey, we have the forgive
ness of sins, justification, sanctification,
adoption, heirship of the heavenly inherit
ance, and indeed all the privileges conferred
upon true believers. Now in Scripture, we
learn that these are uniformly connected
with repentance and faith: nor are any en
couraged to expect them but in such con
nexion. How delusive must it then be to
connect them with mere baptism, in the ab
sence of such qualities ! Nor can it be
much less dangerous ; for such persons,
concluding that they are safe and blessed
through baptism, will not concern themselves
about such repentance and faith, nor will
seek after them. Certain profligate and
abandoned sinners may indeed need them,

but not they ; and although such blessings
professed and enjoyed do in Scripture sup
pose that the happy subjects of them are the
" baptized by one , Spirit into Christ," and
not such as are merely baptized with water;
Puseyism teaches them, that they were bap
tized both with Water and the Spirit when
they were outwardly baptized ; and that
therefore all is settled and well.
The preachers themselves confirm this
delusion. For as they cannot say, "I have
begotten you through the gospel," so neither
can they seek to " beget them with the word
of truth," or to awaken their hearers to the
necessity of such regeneration. Why ?
They are regenerated already in baptism —
and being made Christians thereby, and
viewing their congregations as Christians,
they address them as such, exhorting and
comforting them accordingly, What is the
result of this ? A carnal, fatal security !
This reliance upon sacraments sets aside
the exhortations of Scripture to seek, ask,
knock, strive, labour ; for baptism has made
us Christians, and the Lord's Supper will
finish us as Christians ; as the people will
be in danger of inferring. Nor if the British
Critic speaks the mind of those brethren,
will the priests preadventure care much
about it ; " for," says he, " the notion of
getting religious truth ourselves, and by our
private inquiry, ' whether by reading, or me
ditation, or the study of the Scriptures, or
any other book ... is contained in none
of the precepts of Scripture. The grand
question which ought to be put before our
private judgement is this ; what is to be
considered as the voice of the holy Catholic
apostolic Church ?" If then, we are not to
care about "getting religious truth ourselves,"
but to satisfy ourselves with the voice of the
Church ; and, at the same time, as Dr.
Pusey says, " the Church and her sacra
ments are the ordained and direct visible
means of conveying to the soul" the " su
pernatural and unseen" grace, it is apparent
that the soul will settle on its lees, and let
the Church and her sacraments suffice for
its salvation, without asking, or seeking, or
knocking, or striving, in order that we might
believe and be saved, or that we might con
tinue in the faith. Well has D'Aubigne
said, " The tendency of Puseyism is to set
asleep the conscience by the observance of
external rites ; the tendency of the gospel
system is to awaken it incessantly."
The great stress that is laid upon forms
and ceremonies is also dangerous. Who that
is at all acquainted with human nature knows
not, that it is far more likely to be attracted

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

63

by form and ceremony, by pomp and parade,
than by things which tend to inform the un
derstanding and to renew the heart ; and that
mankind are more easily induced to attend
to things outward than to those which have
their place in the mind and heart? Who
knows not also, that to have the mind so dis
proportionately and inordinately directed to
ward the forms and ceremonies of religion,
divides and weakens its energies ? Let the
history of the church of Israel, as well as
that of the Roman chhrch, sound an alarm on
this head. Let the Pharisees, with their long
robes and broad phylacteries, and fondness
for pomp and show, in connexion with our
Saviour's representation of it, prove a warn
ing ! If the form of godliness be substituted
for its power, the soui is in danger ; and the
stress which Puseyism lays upon forms, par
ticularly with weak and ignorant minds, tends
to such a result. The form, as the handmaid
to the power, is a blessing ; but when it be
comes the mistress it is a curse. And we
are sure that we but breathe the spirit of the
religion which comes from that " God " who
is a " Spirit," when we remind our readers ;
that forms, and ceremonies, and sacraments
do " not avail anything, hut faith which work
eth by love ;" forms, and ceremonies, and
sacraments " avail nothing, but a new crea
ture ;" forms, and ceremonies, and sacra
ments are " nothing, but the keeping the
commandments of God," Galatians v. 6 ; and
vi. 15. Our great care should be to possess
a living "faith," even a faith which producing
" love," will set us upon " the work and labour
of love ;" a faith which will produce a " new
creature " as to the understanding of the
" spirit," and the disposition and affections of
the " soul," and instrumentality of the " body ;"
1 Thessalonians v. 23 ; a faith which, thus
" working by love," and producing a " new
creature," will cause to " keep the command
ments of God." Then shall we possess a
religion wrought in us by the Spirit of God,
and a religion which " God," who " is a
Spirit," will recognize as the true religion ;
and without which all the forms and ceremo
nies, all the sacraments, all the fastings, and
all the services of religion will be to Him as
" nothing." Absolution shall bring up the rear. How
far Puseyism will extend this ceremony we
are not prepared to say ; but we warn the
priest against having recourse to it, and the
individual against relying upon it. Why use
it at all ? If the dying person has truly re
pented and believed, is it not enough that
God has declared in his word that he is for
given ? If he has not— and how frequently

are we mistaken upon this point ! why pro
nounce a sentence upon earth that is not pro
nounced in heaven ? Is it not deceiving the
individual ? Is it not calculated to mislead
the bystanders ? Does it not tend to promote
carnal security and presumption in the living,
who will imagine that the prayers and abso
lutions of the priest, especially as accompa
nied with the sacrament, will relieve them of
the burden of their sins ? For alas ! how
ever our reformers, or the composers of the
Liturgy might understand the absolution as
conditional, yet it is to be feared that the dying
person and the survivors will not do so. flow
striking is that case mentioned by Calamy,
in his " Life and Times," concerning amis-
tress to King Charles II. , who on her death
bed was haunted with the recollection of her
crimes ! Having mentioned the introduction
to her of Mr. Sylvester, the friend of the
great Richard Baxter, Calamy says that he
" distinctly opened to her the terms of salva
tion, as they are laid down in the gospel.
She declared, that nothing of that nature af
forded her any comfort, she having oft re
turned back to the same abominable acts of
wickedness, after very strong convictions,
and most solemn vows, purposes, and resolu
tions of amendment. In the midst of this
discourse there entered a dignified clergyman
of the church of England. Upon his appear
ance, one in the company cried out, ' Madam,
here comes your guardian angel, pray listen
to him.' The curtains at the bed's foot were
presently thrown open, and the clergyman,
without any discourse foregoing, lifted up his
hands, and in a solemn manner uttered these
words : ' In the name of the Lord Jesus
Christ, I absolve thee from all thy sins !' "
Such is the statement of Calamy of this ab
solution ; but what was the result upon the
lady he does not say, only that Mr. Sylves
ter, perfectly astonished, left the room.
Now, if such power of absolution as this
be assumed by the " priest,' and the dying
individual admits it, it is easy to see what
must be the consequence upon survivors.
But who gave them this authority ? To the
apostles our Lord said, " Whosesoever sins
ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; and
whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retain
ed ;" but not to them. Are they apostles ?
are they inspired men, who can pronounce
by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? It
may be questioned whether our Lord intended
that even they should do so, otherwise than
by their inspired writings. But in this case,
evidence was not even sought of" repentance
toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus
Christ;" without which inspiration itself

64

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

would not pronounce absolution. Oh ! let
those who take upon them the charge of im
mortal souls, that surpass in value a whole
world ; let men, to whose hands God intrusts
his honour, take care how they delude and
destroy the former ; let them take care how
they pollute the latter !
Puseyism is destructive to souls ; because
it is destructive to morals.
" Depart from me all ye that work iniqui
ty," will be the awful declaration of the
Judge to the immoral at the judgment day :
of course, everything that becomes the occa
sion of such iniquity must therefore be pro
nounced destructive. We maintain, that to
call off the attention from heart-renewal to
outward ordinances and ceremonies, from the
substance of religion to its show or shadow,
has this tendency ; especially when men are
induced to place a reliance upon the latter ;
because in such case the gospel ceases to
be the power of God unto salvation. Look
at Italy, look at Rome, when at the height of
their glory, as to the forms and ceremonies
of religion. When was there greater attention
paid to the use of the sacraments, to rituals ;
and when were the ministers of religion
clothed with more outward dignity and glory,
than at the close of the fifteenth century ?
Moreover, where should we expect more of
the power of religion than where its popes,
its cardinals, and its most renowned priests
resided ? But what were the facts of the
case ? Nowhere was there less religion — no
where were the morals more corrupt ! Oh
how affecting are the accounts which that
eminent Florentine, Girolamo Savonarola,
gives of the state of things at that time !
That there was no want of a show of religion
appears from his account of the solemn festi
val held in honour of Saint George, the pa
tron of the city of Ferrara : — " On such illus
trious occasions," says he, " there are gor
geous processions of priests and singers,
canons and musicians, and masked men and
women, and boys with censers of incense,
dignitaries and ennobled persons attendant
upon crosses and statues of saint and confes
sor, and images of angel and archangel, of
virgin and child, with the bishop majestically
bearing the consecrated host — a visible god,
for the worship of a superstitious and idolat
rous populace. Nor are mere wordly amuse
ments wanting ; the splendours of the opera,
the passions "and humours of the theatre, the
drolleries of the punchinello, the vulgar
pleasures of houses of gross entertainment,
with licence and misrule abroad in the public
streets, or more retired revelling concealed
in the haunts of dissipation — all designed to

make the holy profane enough for the crowd,
whose appetites are their only deities. This
ended, the gOTged and flown multitude hasten
from their various sports to the church, where
they confess all the sins they have commit
ted during the festive period just closed."
Apologizing to his father for his choice of a
monastic life, he says, " The reason which
induces me to become a monk is this ; in
the first place the great wickedness of the
world, the iniquity of men, the violence, the
adultery, the theft, the pride, the idolatry, the
hateful blasphemy into which this age has
fallen, so that one can no longer find a righte
ous man. For this many times a day, with
tears I chanted this verse : —
¦ Heu, fuge crudelas terras, fuge litus avaram !'
Alas ! fly the cruel lands, fly the greedy shores !
And because I could not endure the great
distemper of some ofthe people in Italy ; the
more also, seeing virtue extinct, ruined, and
vice triumphant ; this was the greatest suffer
ing I could have in this world : therefore
daily I entreated of my Lord Jesus Christ,
that he would rescue me from this defile
ment." — " He who looks considerately, must
confess that Itajy is the acme of wickedness.
But when the measure is full, the sword must
clear away all that is wicked. Yes, thy
turpitude, It^ly, Rome, and Florence ! thy
godless life, thy unchastity, thy osuriousness,
bring ruin ¦!" — " Before all, the wicked
priests and servants of the church are the
guilty cause of this corruption, as also of the
coming misfortune. Some practise simony ;
others gambol iu the evening ; keep con
cubines in the night, and come with sin in'
the morning to mass. Others go from riding
and hunting to the sacred office. 0 ye
priests and heads of the church of Christ !
leave your benefices, of which you cannot be
rightly in possession — leave your wanton
pleasures — your clubs — leave your volup
tuous and unnaturally obscene life, while it is
yet time to repent, and keep your masses
with devotion." — "The scandal begins at
Rome, and goes through the whole ; they are
worse than Turks and Moors. Begin only
with Rome, and you will find that they have
now all their spiritual benefices by simony.
Many seek them for their children and bro
thers who enter them with insolence and a
thousand sins. Their covetousness is mon
strous ; they will do anything for money.
Their bells sound avarice — call to nothing
else but money and ease. The priests go
for money to the choir, the vespers, and their
office. They sell the benefices — they sell
the sacraments — they traffic with the mass

COMPLETE VIEW OF PUSEYISM.

65

— in short everything is done for money.
Then they fear excommunication. As soon
as evening comes, one goes to his gaming,
another to his concubines. When they go
to a funeral, where they should pray in still
ness for the dead, there are great entertain
ments, there is rich eating and drinking, and
much gossip ; and what scandalous vices do
they practise ! But they go in the day
adorned. They wear fine shirts, and are
otherwise richly appareled. Some know
nothing even of the rules of their order ;
know not what they are ; are altogether ig
norant. There is no more belief, no more
faith, no love, no virtue. Formerly the say
ing was, ' If not fair, then fine ;' now pru
dence is not needed, since it has become a
shame to live well. If a priest or canon
lives well, men will make game of him, and
accuse him of hypocrisy. Now the word is
no more, my nephew, but my son, my daugh
ter. Harlots go publicly to Peter, each
priest has his concubine ; they practise
infamy without concealment. This poison
has so accumulated at Rome, that France,
Germany, and all the world is infected with
9

it ; it has gone so far, that one must warn
each other against Rome ; and it has become
a saying, ' ff you will ruin your son, make
him a priest '.' " Life and Times of Gir ala
mo Savonarola.
Such are the results of the substitution of
a religion of form for a religion of power ;
of a religion of sense for a religion of faith.
Say not, such are not, such cannot be the ef
fects of Puseyism. True, not as yet; but be
gin to neglect the culture of the mind and the
heart — substitute the signs for the thing sig
nified — the sacraments for the word and Spirit
of God, and sense for faith ; and surrender
your souls and consciences to the guidance
of corrupt and misguided men, seeking only
for their own emolument and aggrandize
ment, then there is no security whatever, in
the absence of the counteracting power of
the gospel, that you fall not again under the
dominion of your appetites and passions, and
that society will not again become the " cage
of unclean birds." Nothing but the pure,
unadulterated gospel will save souls ! No
thing tends more to their destruction than
a gospel that is corrupted and preverted.

THE END.

CONTENTS,

Chapter I. — Origin of Puseyism, and thi
Causes of its Success,
Chapter II. — The Oxford Doctrines, con
taining TWENTY-TWO TENETS, STATED
FROM THEIR OWN WRITINGS, - 12
I. Tradition, primitive and catholic, must be
connected with Scripture in forming our
Rule of Faith, .... 12
II. Individuals should surrender their private
judgment to the judgment of the Church, 17
III. The Church of England can claim an
Apostolical Succession of Ministers, who
receive in Ordination Apostolical Grace, 23
IV. Episcopal Clergy have the sole right to
administer the Word and Sacraments, - 28
V. The Church of England is the only true
Apostolical Church, - - 30
VI. The Word and Sacraments will not be ef
fectual out of the true Episcopal Church, 34
VII. The Church has the gift of blessing and
hallowing the Kites and Ceremonies that
it has decreed, - - - - 34
VIII. To the Priests belongs veneration in
their ministrations, prayers, and absolu
tions, on account of their office, whatever
be their character as men, - - 36
IX. The Sacraments are generally necessary
to Salvation,  37
X. In the Baptismal Ordinance of "water,"
are communicated " the Spirit," and Re
generation, ----- 39
XI. Justification takes place in Baptism, - 43

XII- Sanctification takes place in Baptism, -
XIII. All spiritual blessings are given in Bap
tism, --....
XIV. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper not
only shows forth the Lord's death, but it
actually imparts life to the soul,
XV. Justification includes inherent righteous-
. ness as well as imputed, - - -
XVI. Christ's body and blood are really pre
sent in the Sacrament of the Lord's Sup
per, - - ...
XVII. The sacrifice of the Mass may be used,
provided it be only commemorative,
XVIII. Purgatory may be admitted, though
not the Romish Purgatory,
XIX. Veneration for Images and Relics may
he allowed, though not the Romish ado
ration, - - ...
XX. Invocation of unseen beings may be al
lowed, though not in the idolatrous sense
of the Church of Rome, ...
XXI. Attention to certain Forms and Cere
monies that have got into disuse,
XXII. Scripture must he interpreted as mysti
cal and allegorical, - -
Chapter III. — Exposure of the Tenden
cies of Puseyism and High-Church
ism 
1. To exalt the power of the Clergy,
II. To enslave the minds of the People, -
III. To propagate a spurious Religion,
IV. To delude and destroy souls,

44

46

4750

51

52

53

53

54 54

56

5757586061

3 9002