« ZurückWeiter »
chiefly to rely, unanimously and decidedly judged publication most desirable for that end, which was the guide of his life, and which they too esteemed paramount to all others. Imagine the papers appearing to them so valuable, that they feel as if they had no right to withhold such aid from the cause to which he was pledged : would it, or would it not, be their duty, as faithful trustees, in such case to overcome their own scruples? Would they, or would they not, be justified in believing that tbey bad, virtually, bis own sanction for publishing such parts, even of his personal and devotional memoranda, much more of his letters to his friends, as they deliberately judged likely to aid in the general good effect? This case, of a person sacrificing biinselt altogether to one great object, is not of every-day occurrence ; it is not like the tou frequent instances of papers being ransacked and brought to light, because the writer was a little more distinguished, or accounted a little wiser or better than his neighs bours: it cannot be fairly drawn into a precedent, except in circumstanceequally uncommon.-Preface, pp. V.-viii.
The following is to rebut the anticipated charge of popery.
These “ Remains," it will be found, bear a peculiarly strong testimony against the actual system of Rome; strong, as coming from one who was disposed to make every fair allowance in that Church's favour; who was looking and longing for some fuller development of catholic principles than he could easily find, but who was soon obliged to confess, with uudissembled mortification and disappointinent, that such development was not to be looked for in Rome. Let the following passages be well considered : they tell but the more decisively against the Papal, or Tridentine system, from the veneration shown in other places towards those fragments of true catholicism, which Rome, by God's providence, still retaius.
“[On a friend's saying that the Romanists were schismatics in England, but Catholics abroud.] – No, H.; they are wretched Tridentines everywhere." (Vol. i. p. 434.)
“I never could be a Romanist; I never could think all those things in Pope Pius's Creed necessary to salvation.” (Ibid.)
“ How Whiggery has by degrees taken up all the filth that has been secreted in the fermentation of human thought! Puritanism, Latitudinarianism, Popery, Infidelity: they have it all now, and good luck to them !" (l'ol. i. p. 340.)
"We found, to our horror, that the doctrine of the infallibility of the Church made the acts of each successive Council obligatory for ever; that what bad been once decided could not be meddled with again: in fact, that they were committed finally and irrevocably, and could not advance one step to meet us, even though the Church of England should again become what it was in Laud's time, or indeed what it may have been up to the atrocious Council ; for M. admitted that many things, e.g. the doctrine of the mass, which were fixed then, had been indeterminate before. So much for the Council of Trent, for which Christendom has to thank Luther and the Reformers. .... I own it has altogether changed my notions of the Roman Catholics, and made me wish for the total overthrow of their system: I think that the only Tónos now is the ancient Church of England;' and, as an explanation of what one means, • Charles I. and the Nonjurors.'” (Vol. i. pp. 307, 308.)
“ I remember you told me that I should come back a better Englishman than I went away; better satisfied, not only that our Church is Dearest in theory right, but also that practically, in spite of its abuses, it works better; and, to own the truth, your prophecy is already nearly realized. Certainly I have as yet only seen the surface of things; but what I have seen does not come up to my notions of propriety. These Catholic countries seem in an especial manner κατέχειν την αλήθειαν εν αδικία. And the priesthood are themselves so sensible of the hollow basis upon which their power rests, that they dare not resist the niost atrocious encroachments of the State upon their privileges. . . . I have seen priests laughing when at the Confessional; and indeed
it is plain, that unless they habitually made light of very gross immorality, three-fourths of the population of Naples) would be excommunicated. .... Tbe Church of England has fallen low, and will probably be worse before it is better: but let the Whigs do their worst, they canuot sink us so deep as these people have allowed themselves to fall while retaining all the superficials of a religious country.” (Vol. i. pp. 293, 294.)
To these extracts may be added the following, from a letter (also from Naples) which did not come to band until after the first volume had been printed.
“Since I have been out here, I have got a worse notion of the Roman Catholics than I had. I really do think them idolaters, though I cannot be quite confident of my information as it aff cts the character of the priests. ..... What I mean by calling these people idolaters is, that I believe they look upon the Saints and Virgin as good-natured people, that will try to get them let off easier than the Bible declares; and that, as they don't intend to comply with the conditions on which God promises to auswer prayers, they pray to them as a come-off. But this is a generalization for which I have not sufficient data."Preface, pp. X.--xiv.
The following is to rebut the anticipated charge of not being "a sound and attached member of the English Establishment.”
The view which the author would take of his own position was probably this ; that he was a minister, not of any human establishment, but of the one Holy Church Catholic, which, among other places, is allowed by her Divine Master to manifest herself locally in England, and has in former times been endowed by the piety of her members : that the State has but secured by law those endowments which it could not seize without sacrilege ; and, in return for this supposed boon, has encumbered the rightful possession of them by various conditions calculated to bring the Church into bondage: that her ministers, in consequence, are in no way bound to throw themselves into the spirit of such enactments; rather are bound to keep themselves from the snare and guilt of them, and to observe only such a literal acquiescence as is all that the law requires in any case, all that an external oppressor has a right to ask. Their loyalty is already engaged to the Church Catholic, and they cannot enter into the drift and intentions of her oppressors without betraying her. For example : they cannot do more than submit to the Statute of Præmunire ; they cannot defend or concur in the present suspension in every form of the Church's synodal powers, and of her power of Excommunication, nor can they sympathize in the provision wbich hinders their celebrating five out of the seven daily services wbich are their patrimony equally with Romanists. Again ; doubtless, the spirit in which the present Establishment was framed, would require an affectionate admiring remembrance of Luther and others, for whom there is no evidence that the author of these volumes ever entertained any reverence, Prefuce, pp. xiv. xv.
We now come to the work itself. The following extracts are chiefly taken from the “ Letters to Friends," and we shall begin with his startling language in reference to some of the principal reformers of our Church.
.... I have been looking into Strype's Memorials and Burnet a good deal, without finding much to like in the Reformers; but I do not see clearly the motives of the different parties. The sincerity of the leading men on both sides seems so equivocal, that I can hardly see what attached them to their respective positions. I have observed one thing, and only one, in favour of my guessed-at theory, that is, that Cranmer had a quarrel with Gardiner about admitting poor people's children to a foundation-school at Canterbury; the latter insisting on their exclusion. Certainly this was a change in the tone of the High Church party since William of Wykeham's time. Also I have read a volume of Froissart, and been much entertained with it. Edward and his court were on the whole a poor set. They allied themselves with a rascally brewer of Ghent, who had just got up an insurrection in Flanders, as villanous but more successful than this Belgian business; and treated the brewer and his crew as ceremoniously as any nobles. I see also that when Flanders was under excommunication, Master Edward promised to send over English clergy who would perform the offices of the Church, in spite of the Pope, for the abovementioned scoundrels. In support of Sharon Turner's notion, that the wars of York and Lancaster were religious, I see that the heretics got off very easily in Edward the Fourth's reign. Burnet does not give his authorities, nor does he seem aware that the cases he mentions are not samples of what generally took place. (Vide Hist. Ref. quarto ed. p. 26.) .... T'he person wbom I like best of all I have read about is Cardinal Pole. He seems a hero of an ideal world, an union of chivalrous and Catholic feeling, like what one hopes to find people before one reads about them. I wish I had his book against Henry the Eighih; Strype gives little more than some letters and a speech.-Vol. i. pp. 253, 254.
Imprimis as to — 's friend Jewell. He calls the mass “ your cursed, paltrie service," laughs at the apostolical succession both in principle and as a fact, and says that the only succession worth having is the succession of doctrine. He most distinctly denies the sacrament of the Lord's Supper to be a means of grace as distinguished from a pledge, calling it a “ phantasie of M. Harding's.”+ He says the only keys of the kingdom of heaven are instruction and correction, I and ihe only way they open the kingdom is by touching men's consciences; that binding and retaining is preaching that “God will punish wickedness;" loosing and remitting, that “God will pardon on repentance and faith;"justifies Calvin for saying that the sacrament of the Lord's Supper “ were superfluous,” if we remembered Christ's death enough without it;// ridicules the consecration of the elements, and indirectly explains that the way the body and blood are verily received is that they are received into our remembrunce. I have got chapter and verse for all this, and would send you my extracts, if it was not too much trouble to copy them out. Certainly the Council of Trent had no fair chance of getting at the truth if they saw no alternative between transubstantiation and Jewellisin.
Does not the Archbishop of Canterbury claim patriarchal authority (qualem qualem) over as large a portion of the globe as ever the Bishop of Rome did ? and are not the colonial Bishops just as much exonerated from their oath of canonical obedience, by proving that there is no universal bishop recognised in Scripture as ever Craumer was?
I have been much surprised to find that the first latitudinarians were Tories; e. g. Hales, Chillingworth, and that set. How Whiggery has by degrees taken up all the filth that has been secreted in the fermentation of human thought ! Puritanism, Latitudinarianism, Popery, Infidelity ; they have it all now, and good luck to them.-Vol. i. pp. 339, 340.
Jewell was what you would in these days call an irreverent Dissenter. His Defence of his Apology disgusted me more than almost any work I have read. Bishop Hickes and Dr. Brett I see go all lengths with me in this respect, and I believe Laud did. The Preface to the Thirty-nine Articles was certainly intended to disconnect us from the Reformers.-Vol. i. pp. 379, 380.
When I get your letter, I expect a rowing for my Roman-catholic sentiments, Really I hate the Reformation and the Reformers more and more, and have almost made up my mind that the rationalist spirit they set afloat is the
* Def, of Apol. p. 120, 123, 139, ed. 1611. Ib. pp. 149, 153.
§ Ib. p. 151. Ib. pp. 210--212.
+ Ib. p. 208.
Evdor poohons of the Revelations. I have a theory about the beast and woman too, which conflicts with yours; but which I will not infict on you now. I have written nothing for a long time, and only read in a desultory, lounging way; but really it is not out of idleness, for I find that the less I do the better I am, and so on principle resist doing a good deal that I am tempted to.-Vol.i. p. 389.
I am sure the Daily Service is a great point, so is kneeling with your back to the people, which, by the by, seems to be striking all apostolicals at once. I was very strongly impressed about it this time year at Caraccas. I was with when they were consulting how the Consecration Service should be performed at the new burial ground, so as to have the most imposing effect. One of the ends of the intended chapel was ornamented with an altar and cross over it in bas relief. It struck ---, as a matter of course, that this should be the station from which the chaplains should read service. At first--acquiesced, for baving lived very little in Protestant countries, the possibility that could intend the clergy to look towards the people never occurred to him : but when he found out what was meant, it was curious] to see his horror at the idea of praying with one's back towards the cross. He thought it would cause a sensation through all Caraccas. . . . . This fell in so much with my floating thoughts, that since then I have been convinced they were not idiosyncratic, however uncommon they may be among Protestants. So I rejoice to see other independent testimonies to the same point. . . . .
I am more and more indignant at the Protestant doctrine on the subject of the Eucharist, and think that the principle on which it is founded is as proud, irreverent, and foolish as that of any heresy, even Socinianism. I must write you out a sentence of Pascal on this. My edition is differently arranged from most, so I cannot refer you to it. Speaking of Isai. xlv. 15, he says, “Il a demeuré caché sous la voile de la nature, qui nous le couvre, jusqu'à l'incarnation; et quand il a fallu qu'il ait paru, il s'est encore plus caché, en se couvrant de l'humanité. . . . Enfin, quand il a voulu accomplir la promesse qu'il fit à ses Apôtres de demeurer avec les hommes jusqu'à son dernier avènement, il a choisi demeurer dans le plus étrange et le plus obscur secret de tous, savoir, sous les espèces de l'Eucharistie.” And then he goes on to say that deists penetrate the veil of nature, heretics that of the incarnation ; “mais pour nous, nous devons nous estimer heureux de ce que Dieu nous éclaire jusqu'à le reconnaître sous les espèces du pain et du vin.” I believe you will agree with me that this is orthodox.
Also, why do you praise Ridley? Do you know sufficient good about him to counterbalance the fact that he was the associate of Cranmer, Peter Martyr, and Bucer? N.B. How beautifully the Edinburgh Review has shown up Luther, Melancthon, and Co.! What good genius has possessed them to do our dirty work? . . . .
Pour moi, I never mean, if I can help it, to use any phrases even, which can connect me with such a set. I shall never call the Holy Eucharist “ the Lord's Supper," nor God's priests “ ministers of the word," or the altar 6 the Lord's table," &c. &c.; innocent as such phrases are in themselves, they have been dirtied : a fact of which you seemn oblivious on many occasions. Nor shall I even abuse the Roman Catholics, as u church, for any thing except excommunicating us.
( To be continued.)
Useful Knowledge, no Substitute for
Religious Knowledge, in a Scheme of National Education. A Sermon, preached at St. Peter's, Colchester, in behalf of the United National Schools of that Town, September 19, 1837. By J. J. BLUNT, B.D. Rector of Great Oakley, Essex, and late Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. London: Murray, 1837. Pp. 24.
This is a discourse full of sound learning, just reasoning, and practical, living Christianity. It is what a sermon should be; and nothing more comprehensive, nothing more appropriate, could bave been desired for the occasion upon which it was delivered. It should be circulated by thousands in our great towns and manufacturing districts. It is calculated to survive the occasion, and to remain as a perpetual bulwark in the defence of a christian system of National Educa
A Collection of Hymns for the Use of
Church of England Sunday Schools.
Cambridge. 1838. Pp. 134. This little volume contains 198 hymns. Many of these are admirably adapted to the design of this book. It is indeed an advance in this kind of publication. We would suggest, in a future edition, the omission of hymnos 135, 164, 183. There is no need of trifling, nor do we admire the singing of hymns to our national air. We are inclined to doubt the devotion that can sing song-like melodies to God, and for no belter reason than that they are popular. Ken's Morning and Evening hymns are omitted. We are at a loss to opine a reason for this.
We regret to find so scanty and poor a selection of hymns for “Particular Sundays and Remarkable Days." It appears that the compiler, who, we understand, is a clergyınan in Cambridge, rejects the more usual style of “ Fasts and Festivals,” “Sundays and Holy Days." It would have been tar more suitable to a work expressly designed for Church of England Schools, to have retained it.
We are the more anxious to point out these defects, because, as a whole, this little volume is a fair and successful effort; nor is any labour of the ministerial office more honourable than that which is bestowed upou the young. It is a labour, which, of all others, returns in blessings upon the head of the bumble pastor, and especially glorifies our religion as a yoke of meekness.
The Style and Composition of the Writ
ings of the New Testament no way inconsistent with the Belief that the Writers of them were Divinely Inspired. An Essay, which obtained the Norrisian Medal for 1836, in the University of Cambridge. By John Deck, Scholar of Christ's College, Cambridge. Printed at the
Pitt Press. 1837. Pp. 49. This Essay does great credit to the writer, whose style is at once simple and sufficiently ornate, and more formed than is usually the case with young authors. Extraordinary is the objection it refutes, and most extraordinary that it should be raised by men who could not have been insensible to the overwhelming sublimity and unrivalled pathos with which holy Scripture abounds. This is indeed the very fastidiousness of the pride of unbelief; the very folly of folly.
A Sermon, preached at the Visitation
of the Bishop of Lincoln at Amersham, September 12, 1837. By the Hon. and Rev. S. G. OSBORNE. London : Nisbet. 1837.
The author of this discourse, after a few introductory remarks upon bis text (Psalm cxxvii. 1), applies the words to our own Communion, and