right and a left began to be visible among the Oxford men and their allies; and yet the movement was kept up, without a general recognition of this distinction, and it was credited alike with the good of the one and the evil of the the other, as if it were all one and the same movement. The right wing, however, was widely different from its counterpart on the left. It was sober, attached to the principles of the Reformation, well-read in the Fathers, deeply conversant with Holy Scripture, and truly Catholic: while the men of the left, though not without brilliancy and cleverness, were superficial, impatient, self-conceited, ignorant of their bearings, reckless in their driftings, and superciliously inconsiderate of wiser and better men. The right wing went to work to restore the Church to herself: the left began, very soon, to attempt its entire transformation. The one class loved the manna of our Prayerbook, and only sought to make others love it: the others craved leeks and onions, and began to praise the flesh-pots of Egypt. The incidental work of the one was a revival of the rubrics and of what may be called the Anglican maxims, while their great work was preaching the Gospel, restoring daily prayers and weekly communions, and everywhere renewing the Church. The whole soul of the other was speedily concentrated in Rome, in the introduction of Latinisms, in candlesticks and chasubles, and dalmatics, in flower-pots and thuribles. On went the movement; but the left wing often became confused as well as confounded with the right. Measures and men became inextricably commingled. The left wing helped on some blunder of the right, and the right could not refuse to aid in a good move of the left. At last, owing to some practical mistakes, the left began to lead before long, "servants were on horses and princes walking on the earth." A miserable apostasy followed and was checked; but, once more, the tail has begun to lead the head, and now the grand movement of the Restoration is threatened with self-defeat. Men have begun to direct it, who will cause it to perish, if they be not speedily checked; and perish it must, if it be left to them, in such an ill-savour as will indefinitely postpone a resurrection.

Now then there must be a drawing of lines, and this dangerous element must be eliminated. We must know, in short, who is who and what is what. The Trentine party is formed; the Catholic

the learned Dr., together, and refused to understand their wide differences: but now everybody may see that they have united in certain measures on different grounds and with a view to directing them to widely different issues. It cannot be so hereafter; sunt certi

denique fines," and persons must now define their positions, and let all men know where they are and what they are aiming at. The only oues who will object to this are they who claim to be "Catholics," thereby to get the credit of fol lowing Bull and Hammond, while at heart they are Papists, and are following Dr. Manning as fast as they think it safe, or can lead others after them. Now, then, I propose a Criterion, by which to divide between those claiming the name of Catholics, and by which the true men may be easily known from the false. Since these men claim to be "Catholics," as we do, let us first erect a standard of genuine Catholicity, such as nobody can deny would have been acknowledged as such by Bishop Bull, or by Archbishop Laud. Here are its notes, or characteristics, according to a natural classification of things and ideas:

I.

1. Ecumenical. 2. Primitive. 3. Vincentian. 4. Episcopal. 5. Liturgical. 6. Anglican. 7. Nicene.

But nobody can look at this table, without seeing that a whole hemisphere of things and thoughts, on which a soi-distant Catholic party most insists, has no part nor lot in such Catholicity. Their aims, their practices, their whole system, are quite another thing. Let us see how we can define it by seven notes, as we have the other. Here it is then, like Jeremiah's basket of naughty figs :

Il.

1. Occidental. 2. Mediæval. 3. Isidorian. 4. Papal 5. Ritualistic. 6. Gallican. 7. Trentine.

Now, let them be honest, and say whether this table does not fairly represent the hemisphere in which they move, and are trying to move others.

For example, what a great importance they have made, for twenty years, about the Council of Trent, and the harmonizing of our Articles with s articles. Then, how largely they have drawn their inspiration from Gallican sources; from breviaries and what not; until, lately, a learned doctor went over to France to arrange for a Concordat with the Pope. Their Ritualistic movement, wholly modelled upon the Romish ceremonies, is quite prominent; and their great tenderness about "the See of St. Peter," is hardly less so. Their Isidorian specialty is less visible to the naked eye; but, certain it is that they are never tired of appealing to maxims and customs, as "Catholic," which have no other Isidorian origin than that of the pseudo Decretals, or forged decrees of the early Bishops of Rome, in which the Papal imposture is founded. Their Medievalisms will not be denied; and their Occidental habits of thought are sufficiently established if my other notes of the party are justified by the facts to which I have referred. So that we have a party, or at least a set of men, engaged in this Victorian Restoration, who are clearly for restoring the Church to anything but the Catholicity of Laud,1 and Bull and Hammond. Surely, nobody can accuse these worthies of any sympathy with the ideas of Table No. II., unless the very simple Liturgical tastes and principles of Laud be confounded, as were his Patristic maxims by the Puritans, with the Popery against which he fought all his life long, and till he was regarded at Rome, as the worst enemy the Pope had in England.

2

Here, then, we have found our Criterion. Table No. I. is the touchstone by which we discover the whole counter-system of Table No. II.; and now let us set them all over one against the olher, that we may see how antagonistic they are and ever must be.

Now let us look at the two tables, and observo that the line a z represents a deep gulf between two sets of men, measures, sympathies and practical principles. You cannot read one of our old divines, Cosin, Bramhall, Taylor, Pearson, or the like, besides those already mentioned, without seeing that they are absolutely repretented by Table No. I. But take up one of the newspapers, magazines, or books of the class I have spoken of as now attempting to control the Church of England, and you will see as clearly that they entirely answer to the characteristics of the opposite table. The line once drawn there is no longer any difficulty in distinguishing men and measures, if the terms be understood: and nobody can be on both sides of the line except those peculiar people who believe equally in the Copernican and the Ptolemaic systems of Astronomy.

Here, however, it may be well to explain terms even for some who "ought to be teachers."

1. a. Ecumenical ideas are those which include impartially the Greek and the Latin Churches, and the Faith as professed by both, before the schism.

b. Occidental ideas are those which practically ignore the Catholicity of the Orientals, and which tacitly allow the claims of the Latins to be the essential part of Catholic Christendom.

2. a. Primitive ideas are those derived from Holy Scripture and ancient authors.

b. Mediaval ideas are those which are taken from Western writers, since the establishment of the Papacy.

3. a. Vincentian principles are those of the Primitive Church, as recorded by the great Vincent of Lerins, and which allow nothing to be Catholic that is novel, though all the world should adopt it, but define that as Catholic which was universally accepted from the beginning, though only a single Church should be faithful to it.

b. Isidorian maxims are those of the false Decretals, forged under the name of Isidore of Seville, and imposed on Western Christendom by Nicolas I., making communion with the See of Rome the test of Catholicity, and authorizing any novelty accredited by the Popo.

4. a. Episcopal principles are simply those of Scripture and of the Cyprianic age, that the Unity of the Church hinges on the solidarity of the Episcopate.

b. Papal principles are those which make the Papacy a divine Institution, and the base and centre of Unity to all Christians.

5. a. Liturgical ideas are those which seek to bring out the beauty and majesty of our Common Prayer, and other Services, in all their rubrical and Scriptural fulness, so as to edify and instruct, as well as to animate the worshipper.

b. Ritualistic ideas are those which aim at pageantry and ceremony, with an effort to in troduce Romish rites and illegal, discarded observances, into our worship, and to reduce the saying of the Prayers to an unintelligible performance.

6. a. Anglican ideas are those which have been known as such for three hundred years, and which are familiar in the sermons and teachings of all our great divines.

b. Gallican ideas are those imported from the French moderate Papists: and which, in the Exposition of Bossuet, for example, approximate to reformed principles, yet admit all that was absolutely exacted by the Papacy, before the late Dogma.

7. a. Nicene principles are those recognized by the Council of Nice and the other General Councils; as in the Nicene Creed, and in the Canonical regulation of the patriarchates.

b. Trentine principles are those set up by the Western Council of Trent, only 30 years since, in defiance of the Nicene Canons, and anathematizing all Christians who fail to accept its decrees.

The Criterion which I have thus presented admits of no evasion. Everyone who comprehends the terms may see their application to his own sympathies, and to the measures and the men of the times. Does he bring everything to the rule of Ecumenical Councils and the undivided Church, or does he attach importance and weight to a purely Occidental Theology, and to the assumptions of the Latin Councils to legislate for Christendom? Does he bring everything to the test of "Holy Scripture and ancient authors," or does he admit Medieval glosses and scholastic subtilties, unknown to the Primitive age? Is he honestly devoted to the Vincentian tests of Catholicity, so that he feels and adopts the principle that the true Catholics may become a minority in Christendom, or does he

attach great importance to numerical1 Cathoicity, if not actually accepting the pseudoIsidorian principle that he is the Catholic who obeys the Pope? Does he believe, with Cyprian, that the Episcopate is the divinely appointed hinge of the Church s Unity, or does he sink the Episcopate to a mere function of the Papacy, accepting the Papal Supremacy itself, "with a Concordat?" Are his Liturgical tastes regulated by Holy Scripture and the Primitive worship, and anchored in the Book of Common Prayer, so that he merely aims to bring out its richness and completeness, and to make it beautiful only by its own Laws and analogies, to the edification of the people; or does he, in his heart, desire chiefly a splendid ceremony, and, as near as possible, an imitation of the pompous Romish Ritual?2 Does he make the blessed Eucharist a reasonable service; a commemoration of our Paschal Lamb, in the solemn and edifying use of the words of our reformed office, so that all hearts may follow the solemnity, and be warmed and filled by its Scriptural richness and Liturgic decency and order: or does he make it a mere Rite, closely resembling the Latin Mass, gorgeous in its ceremonial, but almost inaudible and unintelligible in its words? 3 Is he an Anglican with Bishop Bull, or a Gallican with Bossuet, bringing himself to the test of their celebrated correspondence? Does he cultivate, in himself and others, the veritable Nicene spirit; the spirit of undivided Christendom, enthroning the Gospels in the midst of the Councils, and doing all things according to that Law; or does he perpetually recur to Trent, as if that were a Law to Christendom, and as if we were profoundly concerned to accommodate ourselves to its decrees? And there is another question I will ask, of very great practical importance in respect of the great want of a re

1 The numerical consequence of Rome is perpetually dwelt upon. It is a principle which would have rejected Elijah and also Athanasius; it would at one time have made Arianism Catholic. But see Vincent of Lerins, Commonitory, iii. 4.

2 One of the Ritualistic papers (English Church Times, August 11) contains a very offensive Ode on "the Assumption of our Lady," with many passages which are almost impious. It ends with these lines:

"And when to Jesus ye bow the knee,
Cry Ave Maria, ora pro me."

I regret to add that similar things are said and sung in some Churches in England.

3 See Hirscher's comments on the ceremonial of the Mass, in "Sympathies of the Continent;" how he groans over the pomps which destroy the spirit of the Holy Communion.

newed order of women, separated to good works, does he wish to see the primitive and Scriptural deaconess restored to her place and function in the Church; or does he aim to revive those nunneries and monastic institutions which even the Gallicans are exposing for their hypocrisy and cruelty, and which Italy 2 has just swept away with the besom of destruction, after the largest experience of their pernicious influences? Such questions as these must now be asked in all faithfulness, and answered without evasion. Here, if not in England, there should be no room for misunderstanding on these points, when any person is thought of for responsible positions, or when any plans are proposed for institutions of benevolence, and the like. No young man should be ordained a deacon; no deacon should be promoted to the priesthood; above all, no priest should be preferred to the Episcopate, in the present crisis, until his fidelity to the Church is proved, by some such examination, or by inquiries of similar import. Surely such is the spirit of our Canons and of the Ordinal.

The appearance of Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon, followed by a republication of No. 90, has made this crisis, or at least brought it clearly into view. Apart from the thoroughly Trentine character of the Eirenicon, its alarming feature is its confessed "audacity" in reviving the principle of subscription set forth by Dr. Newman, in No. 90, and renewing the claim of the Romanizers to be ordained, on such a scheme of evasion and equivocation. 4

As an American bishop I have taken my stand, and am resolved to carry out our Canons and the requisitions of the Ordinal, not only in their letter, but in their spirit. I have given notice that I shall reject any Trentine applicant

1 See Le Maudit and Le Religieuse.

21 am no blind admirer of Italia. legislation, in this matter: but such legislation would never have been thought of among hereditary Papists, had not the abuses been intolerable.

a leg to stand upon as regards what is known of the opinions of those who first drew up the Articles, or those who first imposed them upon the clergy. We do not want the support of either Edward's or Elizabeth's divines. We boldly assert that a sense of the Articles which they would have repudiated as ridiculous, is regarded in fact, as tenable by everybody, and will, we believe, soon be the recognized exposition of the Church."-C. Remembrancer, July, 1866, p. 178.

for Orders; and that any one proposing to me to make his affirmations on the scheme of No. 90, shall be rejected not so much for unsound doctrine, as for immorality. I call it immorality for any one to seek Holy Orders on such false pretences. It is also sacrilege, in view of the vows made to the Holy Ghost, and sealed by the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. On this point I care not who differs with me: I am strong in my appeal to the conscience of mankind, against any one who holds the doctrines of Trent, and yet seeks a cure of souls in our Church, 1 I do not think the case will arise in Western New York; but, when it does, I shall most assuredly reject the applicant, and notify his rector that I have so done on the ground of his scandalous immorality in seeking Holy Orders on the false pretence of having neither "written, taught, nor held anything contrary to the doctrine" of our Church. 2 There my duty will end. But should the Rector who gave him his testimonials in good faith, and the vestry who united in the same, find themselves justly scandalized, and the flock grieved and injured by such duplicity, and should the Rector proceed to suspend the offender accordingly under the Canon, for his "wickedness," I should sustain him canonically, and thank him personally for his fidelity to Christ and his Church. Such discipline is needed. I have known a little parish almost broken up by such conduct on the part of a young man; and well may the people tremble if they cannot be protected against teachers who would thus " 'creep and intrude, and climb into the fold."

3

Some affect to be surprised at my position, bccause in England it has not been so done. It is time they should be so surprised. For want of such dealing with Mr. Newman's disciples, at the outset, owing to the bonds of the Statelaws, a large body of youthful ecclesiastics made a mockery of their orders, and passed over to Rome fresh from the hands of their bishops, to the great scandal of the flock of Christ. Others, like poor Mr. Sibthorp, have gone to and fro, between England and Rome, like a shuttlecock, duplicating Orders, but resuming and renouncing

1 "After all the explanations given, and yet to be given, of the Catholic (Romish) mode of signing the Articles, it will still remain true that to most minds the interpretations of No. 90 will seem evasions rather than explanations,”-0. Remembrancer, July, 1866, p. 178,

2 Title I., Can. v., Sec. iv.

3 Title II., Can. xii., Sec. ii.

If

the Anglican ministry at will, no man forbidding. And so it has come to this, that men actually claim a right to be ordained on the plan of Dr. Newman,' himself an apostate and a gainsayer, and with his own presumptuous reservation in their mouths-"I will not hold office in a Church which will not allow my sense of the articles," that is to say, a Romish sense. such things are to be allowed in our Church, all confidence in the Episcopate will be forfeited, and justly so. The people look to their bishops for protection against such intruders, and they have a right to expect it. I know not what my venerated fathers and brethren in the Episcopate may think of the Eirenicon; but I venture to say there is not one of them that would ordain a man, openly avowing that his subscription is made on the scheme of Dr. Newman's No. 90 which the Eirenicon adopts and more than endorses.

2

For my plain words I make no apology; the adverse faction is not only downright, but arrogant and abusive. 3 It insults the whole Episcopate, but offers to make a great man of any bishop who will patronize the Trentine party. It commends Dr. Pusey's "audacity," in making 664 proposals for union with Rome;" and to make his own audacity complete, the reviewer affirms, unblushingly, that No. 90 is the first successful attempt to harmonize the Articles and the Prayer-book. Here are the astounding words of one of the leading periodicals of England:

"That interpretation (of the Articles by Tract 90) for the most part may be-we fully believe ourselves that it is-in diametrical opposition to what Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer meant. But it cannot be dislodged; and having made good its ground, it will make progress; and no considerable amount of teaching can go on at our Theological Colleges without its being seen and admitted that there is no other method af reconciling the Prayer-book and the articles than that advocated in the celebrated publication of Dr. Newman." 5

It follows that, for three centuries, our great bishops and divines have occupied an untenable

1" Beyond all question the securing a status for the Eirenicon has a fortiori secured the like standing ground for the interpretat.on of Tract 90,"-C. Remembrancer, July, 1866, p. 176.

2"It may be long before the Thirty-nine Articles are abolished; but the interpretation of them in Tract 90 is, perhaps, nearly equivalent to their abolition."-C. Remembrancer, July, 1866, p. 175.

3 See Christian Remembrancer for July 1866.

4 Christian Remembrancer, January and July, 1866. Ch. Remembrancer, July, 1866, p. 176.

position, and have vainly tried to reconcile their consciences with their subscription to Articles which were repugnant to the Prayer-book. They were the triflers with God and man: the author of No. 90 is the first to solve their problem; and the Gamaliel for whom our Andrewes and Pearson, and Wilson have waited, is the pervert Dr. Newman.

He who will not "hear the Church" is made to us, by our great High-priest himself, as a heathen man and a publican," He who accepts duplicate Orders is guilty of sacrilege. He who separates himself from the lawful authorities of a lawful Church is condemned by Inspiration, as "sensual, having not the spirit." He who is a "truce-breaker," and resists an Apostolic ministry, on its own Canonical ground, setting up antagonistic claims, and "leading captive silly women" and others, is classed with Jannes and Jambres by one apostle, and with Korah by another. Yet one who occupies just such a position, if the Anglican Church is a true Church, is the acknowledged oracle of the new party, and his plan of interpreting the Articles is claimed as the proper one to be adopted in our Theological Schools, and by our Bishops in conferring Holy Orders. Such are the counsels given to the Church, by a periodical of the first class, and which triumphs in its unrebuked effrontery.

All the names which Churchmen have been wont to venerate and to identify with the Church's cause, are habitually vilified by the party, or consigned to contempt with "faint praise." The martyrs of the Reformation, to whom the whole English-speaking world owes more than to any who have lived after them, amid the blessings purchased by their blood, even these venerated fathers are never mentioned without a sneer. It has come to this, that even the malicious policy of the Romanists, in making the martyrs' cause identical with that of Henry VIII. and his rapacious courtiers, 1 is adopted by the party, in terms that strongly attest their hatred, not only of the Reformers, but of the Reformation, and of all those great divines who have fortified it by their massive learning; who, for three hundred years have never been wanting in England, and who have never failed to command the reverence and admiration of Christendom.

1 Against which Latimer so faithfully bore his testimony, as is justly instanced by Southey in his "Life of Wesley." Vol. I., Notes,