Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

66

the heaviest of God's judgments," (p. is the development of the principle laid 14); and again, "Others, as you know, down by the Bishop of London, in his of whom I am one, simply accept this Charge of 1842, pp. 10, 15, (Fifth doctrine, [i. e. Transubstantiation !] as Edition) that the Liturgy is to be the I do all other doctrines of the Roman interpreter of the Articles, instead of Church," (p. 44, and p. 36). Yet Mr. the Articles of the Liturgy. The evil Ward thinks it hard that he should be of this was pointed out by Rev. C. I. degraded as a dishonest man, and in Yorke, as follows: Attempts, you his Address, pp. viii. and 14, 15, says are aware, have been made by one much about inward sanctity and so school in the Church to render the forth; all I can say of this school is, Articles almost nugatory; and these "We are not disposed to rate them attempts have naturally led the lovers highly. A heart must be honest' of the Reformation to rally round the before it can be 'good'; and while Articles, being persuaded that the next every day that passes leads us more step to putting them aside in books, and more to question their integrity, would be, were the first successful, the we have little disposition to trouble putting them down by law.” (“Reourselves with their piety." (Church- spectful Address," p. 16. See also man's Monthly Review, for May, 1844, Dr. Holloway's letter to the Bishop, p. 317.) Twopence will procure the p. 51.) Accordingly, Mr. Ward havletter of Count Montalembert, (T.ing expressed himself a hater of the Jones, London, 1844) which certainly Reformation (p. 14), and having, by will prove Mr. Ward and others to be aid of the Bishop of London's principle, guilty of gross dishonesty in subscribing (p. 18) and much misrepresentation, to the Articles (p. 5), and to the Li- twisted portions of our formularies into turgy (p. 4). See also pp. 6, 9, 10, apparent countenance of Romish doc11, of it. Moreover, one of the Ply-trine, rejoices in the mischief he has mouth Brethren speaks of Mr. W.'s school of Divines, as "most dishonestly attempting to explain away the doctrinal articles to which they have subscribed." (The Surplice, p. 11. D. Walther, 42, Piccadilly). To the testimony of the Count, and the author of the Surplice, may be added that of Bishop Mant, in two tracts, published by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, viz., Romanism and Holy Scripture compared, and Romanism and the Church of England compared, besides his Sermon on 5th Nov. 1843. Mr. W. cannot include this Prelate among either "Evangelics," or "Low-Churchmen," and yet in his Charge of 1842, pp. 3-17, he severely rebukes the Romanisers.

But it may be asked by what principle of interpretation does Mr. Ward twist our formularies into apparent countenance of Romish doctrine? It

[ocr errors]

done, by saying, "if our formularies be really capable of so wide a latitude," (?) which he has attempted to show, "is not the existence of such formularies an extreme evil?" (p. 52.) Yet at p. viii. he pretends to wish "to heal the unhappy disorders of our Church," and that his Ideal has a "tendency to promote dutifulness to the English Church, unity among her members," &c. (p. 15)! Observe his dutifulness!" I may be allowed, however, in passing, to throw out merely a hint on the untenableness of any theory which I ever heard of, by which a Church can be defended for imposing such tests as our Articles," (p. 52. See also p. 54).

Protestant Dissenters agree with Mr. W. as to the evil of the existence of the Articles, &c., which exclude them from the University, because they cannot conscientiously subscribe

to them. The Chartist Rector of Hin- | the following, viz., that a non-natural ton Charterhouse, Rev. T. Spencer, sense should be put on the Articles, in Practical Suggestions on Church rather than the Liturgy, because it Reform, (J. Green) p. 13, 14, also seems more shocking to use words in wishes them abolished, but follows a non-natural sense when we address Mr. Ward's example of retaining his God in prayer, than when we merely preferment. Symptoms of the same subscribe a human formulary." (p. 18.) may be seen in❝ Modern Puritanism,” pp. 23, 30, 31; under pretence of applauding the Bishop of London's principle of interpretation, these men really wish to be freed from our Liturgy as well as our Articles. See, however, the remarks (especially Dean Comber's) prefixed to Bishop Mant's Prayer Book, p. i.—viii. We are satisfied with our Articles and Liturgy. "Evangelicals" could (I think) honestly subscribe to the Liturgy without the Articles, though they prefer both together; but Mr. Ward hints (pp. 18, 52) that he and others could not subscribe to the Articles alone, and that "if subscription to the one were retained, and to the other abolished," it "would wholly destroy the existing balance within our Church." (p. 52.)

Mr. Ward first assumes (p. vi. 17, 52) that it is impossible for any one to subscribe our formularies in a natural sense; and then because he boasts of his own evasion of an oath, (page 46), and "artifices of construction" (p. 29, also p. 48-51), in subscribing to Articles which are "fanciful, unscriptural, and immoral" (p. 26), and contain "blasphemy so fearful against the very elementary principles of morality," (p. 50), and to a Liturgy containing matter which he admits has so extremely strong a prima facie bias on the heretical side" (p. 45), he attempts to show that no one can honestly subscribe them! If he did not place the authority of the Liturgy before that of the Articles, he could not get even so far as he does; but all he can say for this principle of interpretation, has been already answered in my former papers,-except

This is plausible, and may have some weight with those who admire the fashion of reading the Prayers so rapidly, that no one can follow them,— in other words, the Romish opus-operatum system. Sincere worshippers, however, well know that prayer does not consist of mere words (1 Sam. i., 13-17), but is the expression of our sincere desires to our Heavenly Father. Spiritual worshippers will, therefore, necessarily use the same words in different senses, according to their respective desires. For instance, do all use the simple petition, "thy kingdom come," in the same sense ?* Do not

some

use it as beseeching God to gather out his elect, and hasten his kingdom at the pre-millennial advent of his Son? Do not others use it as praying for the gradual diffusion of the Gospel, which (they think) is to bring about the millennium? Again, do not others, who think (with Professor S. Lee) that the millennium is past, use it with reference to the coming of Christ, to take (as they suppose) his saints away to Heaven? Again, in the petition, that the queen may have victory over all her enemies, do not some refer the petition to her spiritual, some to her temporal enemies, and some to both? These specimens of the fallacy of Mr. Ward's theory will suffice.

As Mr. Ward justifies himself by

[blocks in formation]

saying, that "the parties which now divide our Church, are in the main representatives of parties which have existed within her, ever since the Reformation;" and consequently" that it has always been intended that they* should be subscribed according to an extremely lax and vague construction" (p. 17);-let him remember that his Church (i. e. the ROMISH) has to answer in a great measure for the existence of these " parties." In the numbers of the Churchman's Monthly Review, of 1844, from March to September inclusive, are some able papers, proving by details of the facts, that the Romish Church, by means of the Jesuits, caused most of these divisions; while one party "originated and fomented" the "insane fanaticism of the Puritans" (May, p. 343-4), it will be seen "also that another body of Jesuits originated a Romanising party in our Church,-the effects of which we suffer even now" (July, p. 510;) moreover, they were not to preach all after one manner, but to observe the places wherein they came. If Lutheranism prevailed, then they were to preach Calvinism; and if Calvinism, then Lutheranism. If they came into England, then they were to preach either of these, or John Huss's opinions, or Anabaptism, or any other doctrines that were contrary to the holy see of St. Peter, by which their function would not be suspected." Directions from the Council of Trent, quoted in May, p. 340.) This, then, was one of the greatest causes of our present divisions, and the Memoirs of Panzani disclose much more. The Bishop of Calcutta, (Charge of 1842-3. p. 66-69,) Rev. William Goode (Introduction to his edition of Two Treatises on the Church. Hatchard, 1843), Rev. Dr. Hampden, (Lecture on the Thirty-nine Articles, pp. 28

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

33, Fellowers, 1842.), Rev. E. M. Goulburn, (Reply to Ward, pp. 2931), Rev. J. Spurgin, (in Tractarianism at variance with our Formularies pp.26-35, Seeley,) and the Churchman's Monthly Review for September, 1843, pp. 660, &c., have shown how very similar the present Tractarian movement is to that in the reign of Charles I. Mr. Ward, and Mr. Oakley, in fact convict themselves of doing the very work which the Jesuits of old did. How can they be in our Church, unless they, too, have a dispensation from the Pope? "Lax construction* of our formularies was never intended; on the contrary, they are subscribed by very stringent declarations, to avoid, as far as possible, differences opinion.

of

Mr. Ward's misrepresentation of evangelical doctrine has been so well exposed by Mr. Goulburn, (p. 6-9, and 24-26,) that I need not say much on this point. Mr. Ward does not profess to understand the state of mind

* Lest it should appear that I here contradict my remarks at p. 66, on "latitude in subscription," it may be well to say that a certain extent of latitude, does not imply laxity. My first paper, pp. 34-5, will explain this, and the reference to Archbishop Magee, in which he states that our formularies are neither Calvinistic nor Arminian, but SCRIPTURAL, and hence, like the Scriptures themselves, are claimed by both parties. What is very plain to one wonder how any person who takes the man, is not so to another; e.g. some Bible for his guide, can avoid coming to the belief of the pre-millennial Advent of our Lord, while others equally wonder how anyone can believe it. Let us, however, remember that these differences result from human infirmity, and not from obscurity in God's Word. See some excellent remarks of Rev. J. G. Breay, at

In the second edition, they are at pp. pp. 388-9, and 394-5, of the Memoir. 429, and 437.) Our serious divisions result not because honest men take a certain but because dishonest men subscribe to latitude in interpreting our formularies, them, without believing them to be really on their side.

against which he writes; and, there- | 376-7, and 88; and on regulating the thoughts, as well as words and actions, (pp. 325, and 341-2;-the fourth edition is here referred to). Not to be tedious, the writings and lives of persons holding these views abound with similar passages, e. g. the life of Rev. T. Scott. Rev. T. Jones,

fore, we need not be surprised at his misrepresentations; Luke x., 21, 22; Matt. xi., 25-30; 1 Cor. i. 21-31; ii. 14-16. It is no new thing for evangelical doctrine to be charged with being unfriendly to practical holiness; Rom. iii. 7, 8. It rather proves that the doctrines of salvation, being scrip-in the True Christian; or the Way to turally set forth, Satan uses his old have Assurance of Eternal Salvation, device to bring them into reproach; says, "I know of no other way to ob"Let it be counted folly, or phrensy, tain assurance of salvation, but by or fury, or whatsoever else, it is our acting faith in Christ, and living to wisdom, and our comfort; we care him." (p. 19, see also p. 25.) The for no knowledge in the world but confounding of faith with feeling, is this, that man hath sinned, and God strongly opposed. Even Dissenters hath suffered; that God hath made oppose it, as may be seen in The himself the sin of men, and that men Anxious Inquirer, by J. A. James. are made the righteousness of God." As to the Sixteenth Article, part of (Hooker on Justification, s. 6.) While which is quoted at p. 20, if Mr. Ward Mr. Ward speaks of “ evangelical" had quoted the whole of it, and also the faith, as an 66 undivided trust for sal- Seventeenth, and then expressed his vation in the merits of Christ's atone-interpretation of them, the subject ment," (p. 19,) yet he elsewhere confounds it with "certain feelings," which will lead the possessors of them "spontaneously into all holy living, without special pains bestowed on their thoughts, words, and actions, one by one." (p. 48.) I can only beg my readers to peruse Rev. H. Venn's Complete Duty of Man,* as an admirable exhibition of evangelical doctrine; also Another Gospel, a sermon, by Rev. T. W. Carr; and the Necessity and Advantage of Christian Watchfulness, a sermon, by Rev. E. A. Litton, (Hatchard, 1841), price 6d. each. In the valuable and interesting Memoir of Rev. J. G. Breay, also, much may be learnt. Space will not allow me to quote his remarks on the doctrine of final perseverance, (pp. 16, 17); and his inward struggles against sin, and occasional fears, (p. 348-9,) and

*The best edition of this admirable work, is that published by the Religious Tract Society, containing the memoir of the author, which I have never seen in any other edition.

66

might have been worth noticing. Mr.
Ward contends that the Prayer Book
knows nothing of "evangelical" faith;
he says, not trust then, but belief, is
the Prayer Book version of faith,'
(p. 23); and accordingly assuming that
the Prayer Book is on his side, he
says, "how" on the hypothesis of the
plain doctrine of our Articles, "the
justified and unjustified could unite in
prayer at all, it is difficult to fancy" (p.
21). The fallacy of this is exposed by Mr.
Goulburn at p. 6-10, and he sums up as
follows: "IT IS AN ASSUMPTION COUCHED
UNDER THE WHOLE PRAYER BOOK,
THAT THEY WHO USE IT ARE JUSTIFIED
BY FAITH. That the justified should
not dwell upon their justification in
their prayers, but reach forth to those
things which are before, is surely in
nowise unintelligible or 'non-natural',"
(p. 10) as Mr. Ward had intimated at
p. 21. I may add that it is not
merely "an assumption," since in the
Te Deum CHRIST is addressed "
our trust is in thee;" and, "O Lord in
thee have I trusted;" and, "help thy

"as

66

66

66

[ocr errors]

certainly "the doctrines taught to the young. It may be questioned how far the Catechism is intended for the very young; moreover, deacons promise to instruct the youth in the Catechism," and the Rubric directs the curate to "instruct and examine" the children "in some part of the Catechism," which, according to Bp. Mant, means not merely to teach "the Catechism to our children by rote," but "to render them assistance towards understanding it, and to be satisfied that they do understand it." (Cler

[ocr errors]

66 con

servants;" and again in the Litany, as we do put our trust in thee;" and again in the 2nd Collect in Morning Prayer, "O God, in knowledge of whom," &c. The Christian knows that "knowledge of God," Col. i. 10; 2 Pet. i. 2, (though some professing Christians to their shame have it not, 1 Cor. xv. 34) and of Christ, 2 Pet. 1. 8; iii. 18, differs widely from knowledge about God; yes, as much as to know our Sovereign, differs from knowing about her, which latter knowledge any one who reads the papers may obtain. Trust in God is also ex-gyman's Obligations, c. v. p. 71-2.) pressed in the Marriage, Churching, and Commination Services. The incidental manner in which these passages are introduced, shows that the Prayers are framed FOR believers; if unbelievers can join in them, who wishes to prevent them? It is their business to see to this; the Prayers were not framed for them, and we usually see from their posture and inattention that they have no heart for them. Still even a Dissenter could tell Mr. Ward that persons may pray for faith and pardon before they are believers, as Mr. James teaches in the Anxious Inquirer, p. 97, 98. "Prayer," says he, "is your duty, and it is your privilege; and let no speculative difficulties have a moment's influence to induce you to suspend it. If you cannot yet pray as a believer, cry for mercy as a sinner. But do not remain in unbelief, supposing that prayer can be a substitute for faith; for, as I said before, so I repeat, God does not bind himself to answer any prayers but those of faith," (p. 98).

As favouring his own view of faith, Mr. Ward takes the CATECHISM, and Visitation of the Sick. If it can be shown, that he fails in establishing his point from these (since of course he select what appears most favourable to his views), we may presume that he would fail equally in other parts of our Liturgy. He takes the Catechism, as

Hence the true doctrine of the Cate-
chism must be taught. Mr. Ward
says, "the description given by the
Prayer Book of our Christian course,'
as contained in the Catechism,
sists of three parts: repentance, faith,
obedience;" and that renouncing our
own merits and looking for salvation
to Christ only," finds not so much as
a passing mention in that outline of
the Christian life, which our Church
has ordered to be impressed on her
children's minds;" and that the ex-
pression, to "believe all the Articles of
the Christian faith." implies, that "not
trust, but belief is the Prayer Book
version of faith," (p. 23,) and that the
Creed contains no
66 explicit mention”
or "special reference" to the Atone-
ment (p. 25). Mr. Goulburn well
remarks that this we must 66 regard as
miserably shallow," (p. 14.) and
this, as well as the Athanasian Creed,*

on

Mr. Ward says, "Can any religious service be less edifying to you than the Athanasian Creed?" (p. 25.) How is it then that the Rev. M. Prock prefaces his excellent tract, "The Lord's Coming a Great Practical Doctrine," (J. Nisbet, 1845) with a quotation from this Creed? Though alas! we may and do too often repeat the Creeds without feeling the full force of expressions of believing in Christ; "the resurrection of the body," 2 Cor. iv. 14, 15; and the coming judgment, v. 11 ; and

« AnteriorContinua »