in Parliament and in the public press, that several prominent members of the Society were compelled at once to withdraw from further connection with it.1 And what could be a more deliberate act of rebellion against all lawful authority, both in Church and State, than the shameful resolution of "The English Church Union" to support any clergyman who would continue to set the law at defiance, after the recent judgment of the highest Court of Appeal, deciding the ritual questions so long in dispute? Or lastly, as a crowning act, the formation, by the leaders of this party, of a "Church League," (by way of satisfaction for their legal discomfiture), making common cause with that most factious union of political dissent, "The Liberation

1 "No modest person could read the book without regret, and it is a disgrace to the community that such a work should be circulated under the authority of clergymen of the Established Church. It would be the duty of any father of a family to warn such clergymen never to approach his house again."— Speech of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

"My objections to the Society are founded on a careful study both of the book which it adopted and circulated (The Priest in Absolution,') and also of the rules imposed upon its members. As regards the former, The Priest in Absolution,' its teaching respecting confession, as well as on other points, appears to me to be definitively and unequivocally that of the Church of Rome as distinguished from that of our Church. It distinctly asserts in more than one passage, and evidently assumes throughout, the necessity of private and sacramental confession, and of the enumeration by the penitent of all his mortal sins at least, and consequently the necessity of that minute and detailed examination of the penitent in which this book aims at instructing the confessor. As regards the rules of this society, the least strict of these, which is obligatory on all its members, binds them to say mass and to practise sacramental confession at least once a year. This is Roman language and the Roman rule; it is not the language nor the rule of the Church of England. . . . It seems to me clear that those who do disapprove either of these rules or of The Priest in Absolution' ought publicly to sever themselves from a society which continues to impose these rules, and which has publicly refused to condemn this book. Certainly until they do this they cannot complain if they are regarded as approving of both.... I must plainly say that so long as any institution claiming to be conducted on the principles of the Church of England is connected in the person of any one of its officials with the Society of the Holy Cross, I cannot, as a Bishop of that Church, give it my public recognition or support."-Letter to Canon Lowe, from the Bishop of Peterborough, Sept. 15th, 1877.

·

[*e.g. "There is no resource for the spiritually sick but private confession and absolution, and the Priest is Judge in the place of God."-From a published quotation.-ED.]

Society," to "dis-establish" and spoliate the National Church !1

It has become, therefore, an all-important and anxious question, pressing on the minds of those who are responsible for the order and government of our Church—as of all her true members,-how this "counter-Reformation movement," so regardless of ecclesiastical authority, is to be resisted, without necessitating strong measures of repression, which, judging from the self-willed and party spirit that prevails, would probably end in another lasting schism. And the question is urgently asked, by what means shall we best counteract the baneful effect of those Romish corruptions of the Truth-reproduced in an Anglican dress-which, under deceptive forms, or with a bold assumption, are grievously in

1

"I by no means think that disestablishment is the greatest of the evils which threaten us, though the evil will prove much greater than most men think, bringing utter ruin on all the present constitution in state, in property, and in society. Yet, if it should come to us from the action of our enemies, I am prepared to accept it; and, if my life and life powers are spared me, to act hopefully under it. Indeed, I believe that in that case it would be far more fatal to those who should have effected it, than to those whom they hope to ruin. But I do most earnestly deprecate disestablishment from within. Coming from without it will unite us into a closer and more compact phalanx. Coming from within it will infallibly disintegrate us. Even so, I believe that dissent would be no gainer. In the course of time it would fade away before two greater powers. Romanism and Infidelity will be the residuary legatees of every thing left by the Church.

66

Again, I do not deny that in some respects the relations of Church and State, or more properly of the spiritualty and temporalty, are imperfect. They never in the history of any Church have been perfect. They are in many respects better than they were 30 years ago, much better than they were 300 years ago. But then, the unity of Church and Realm, the existence of "a Church-state" (I use Dr. Arnold's favourite phrase, though I may not adopt all his theory of it) gives such a power of good to the Church, produces such a salutary influence on the state, sends the Gospel so freely to the poor, that he who rends the union must indeed be a bold or a reckless man. If the mistake, irreparable as death, shall prove to be a mistake indeed, then it will be also a sin too terrible to think about. Surely it is wise, right, Christian, to act cautiously, constitutionally, patiently, hopefully, when impatience may destroy at one stroke a fabric which has had 1200 years of growth, and quench a flame which has warmed and lighted England since it first became a nation."— Extract from the Bishop of Winchester's answer to a Memorial as addressed by members of the Ritualistic party to the Archbishops and Bishops, dated 2 May, 1877.

2 See Supplement, Note C, p. 444.

fecting our religious literature, especially the many devotional guides for the young, and are thus undermining the faith of our Church?

Hence, the design which the Editor aimed to accomplish, was to form an antidote to these dangerous errors, by collecting together such a body of testimony to the true Catholic principles of the English Reformation, by eminent living Divines, as might afford to minds still wavering or harrassed by doubt, an effectual safeguard against their deceitful influence, and a means of gaining a firmer conviction of the truth.

Having obtained free permission from authors of learning and distinction, among the Prelates and leading Clergy of the Church, to republish portions of their works in defence or exposition of her doctrines, with promises also of special contributions, and with hearty expressions of sympathy, the Editor undertook the whole responsibility of the work in its collective form: resolved to adhere faithfully to the teaching of our Church in the spirit and plain meaning of the Prayer-book, and humbly trusting to the Divine blessing on his efforts in defence of the purity of her Faith and the Catholicity of her doctrine.

As a proper introduction to the doctrinal questions to be examined in this work of vindication, the first Part is appropriated to a review of the Anglo-Catholic Revival, the rise and progress of which have been briefly sketched above. For this purpose the Editor made choice of a treatise which sets forth with great ability and clearness the distinction between Primitive Catholicity and its Mediæval or Romish counterfeit, and in which is contrasted the high standard of doctrine maintained in the revival of our Church principles, with the errors in doctrine and practice that have sprung up with their growth. An American Bishop, well known for his brotherly feeling towards England, and hearty attachment to her Church, had long watched with deep interest the religious movements and course of events in this country affecting her spiritual life and progress. An ardent lover of the Mother Church, he saw and deplored the danger that threatened her from the false direction that had been given to her truly Catholic Revival, under the influence of leading men at Oxford, whose Anti-Catholic tendencies, scarcely more than suspected in the first instance, were at last glaringly manifested by open defections

to Rome. The opposition of a mere negative Protestantism by which they were at first encountered, soon proved unequal to the contest with writers so learned in the theories and speculations of Mediæval schoolmen, and consequently there was manifest danger of the Truth suffering from the conflict of opposite errors. Against this danger, clearly discerned by him from the vantage-ground on which he stood as a distant spectator, Bishop Cleveland Coxe (Bishop of Western New York), had, in the spirit of loyalty to the Mother Church which has ever characterized her American daughter, lifted up the voice of warning. His treatise, The Criterion," was therefore admirably fitted to lead the phalanx of authors whose aid was invoked for the vindication of Anglo-Catholic principles; and the publication of it (for the first time in this country), followed by two letters from his pen on the subject of Dr. Pusey's "Eirenicon," constituted PART I. of the collection of co-temporaneous testimony.

In PART II., the voices of Dr. Hook, late Dean of Chichester, and Dr. Wilberforce, the late Bishop of Winchester, (formerly of Oxford,) are blended together in solemn warning against the unfaithfulness of those sons of the English Church, who-some overtly and some covertly-labour "to undo the work of the English Reformation," and to assimilate the Reformed Church of England to the un-reformed and corrupt Church of Rome.

The first section consists of a short treatise, by the late Dr. Hook,' originally written as a lecture for the Leeds Church Institution, in which the English Reformation is shown to have been based and conducted on primitive principles, in contradistinction to the works of the less favourably circumstanced foreign Reformers, who, under the influence of the powerful minds of Luther and Calvin, were more intent to establish an entirely new, than to restore to its purity the old, system of religion. The contrast between the Catholic doctrines of the Church, re-affirmed by the Reformation in England on the one hand, and the deviations from primitive Truth on the other, whether towards Romanism or ultra-Protestantism-is clearly defined and enforced with much ability by the Dean. In the second section, the Bishop, drawing a parallel between the Reformation

1 Long out of print, and now re-published with a few omissions.

of the older Church by King Josiah, and the Anglican Reformation, urges resort to the Word of God-the fountain and standard of revealed Truth-as the only means, at once safe and effectual, for purifying the Church from the errors engrafted upon her system during the Middle ages, by the tendency to corruption inherent in the human mind.

After vindicating the soundness of the principles on which, and the legitimacy of the measures by which, under the guidance of God's good providence-overruling for good "the irregular appetites and haughty temper of a profligate king"-the Reformation was accomplished, the Bishop enforces the duty, and points out the reason of maintaining that precious inheritance so regained: guarding it alike from the superstitions and errors of the past, and from the unbelief which has resulted from a reaction against those

errors.

As an appropriate conclusion to this Part, it is followed by a reprint of the letter addressed to Pius IX., in reply to the summons to attend the Vatican Council, by Bishop Cleveland Coxe, as his "colleague in that Episcopate to which the Holy Ghost has committed the government of the Catholic Church,"-warning him that if a truly Ecumenical Council should be convened, its first duty would be to institute a process against him, in view of the false doctrines taught from his episcopal chair.

By an appeal for the Restoration of the Holy Eucharist to its rightful position in the Service of the Church," by the late Dr. Biber, PART III. concentrates the discussion upon the Eucharistic question, as the cardinal point of the argument by which AngloCatholic principles are to be defended against the attempted revival of medieval traditions and practices opposed to the primitive Truth.

In the form of a Review of Canon Trevor's treatise on the subject, PART IV. sets forth the Catholic doctrine of Holy Communion; maintaining the Memorial Sacrifice to be inseparable from the participation of the sacrament by the faithful. After vindicating the Scriptural and Catholic teaching of our Church concerning this Sacrament, the Roman dogma of the sacrifice of the Mass, and the Lutheran theory of Consubstantiation, are severally considered. The doctrine of the Real Spiritual Presence to the faithful communicant, as held in the English Church, is then specially treated; followed by an examination of the fallacy of

the new "Objective" theory. The concluding portion of the review bears testimony to the Catholicity and beauty of the Anglican Liturgy. Supplementary to this review is subjoined a reprint of the Pastoral Letter above referred to, of the Scottish Bishops, in Provincial Synod assembled, condemning the teaching of the late Bishop of Brechin as erroneous, on the doctrine of the Holy Communion. The aversion to the doctrine of Sacramental grace, prevalent in many quarters since the time of the Reformation, is traced by the Bishops to the natural reaction from errors and excesses with which the primitive teaching had been overlaid; and they express their fear lest such aversion should be increased and aggravated by the recent attempts to restore those errors.

In Part V., the essential principles of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper are set forth and explained with special reference to the Liturgy and Ritual of the English Church. The Part is extended to ten sections, (in two divisions,) in order to give a full consideration to the subject, being one of primary importance in the due fulfilment of this work. It comprehends a large portion of Dr. Goulburn's. valuable treatise on "The Office of the Holy Communion," in which the purpose of the several parts of the Service are very clearly explained, and includes extracts from his "Farewell Counsels."

After "having thus fully maintained and set forth the true Catholic Faith concerning the Mystery of the Holy Communion, as held and taught by our Church," (to repeat the announcement in the Introductory Statement,) "it became a necessary duty to point out and protest against the attempted revival of Medieval and Romish theories, to the perversion of Primitive Truth, which are once more thrust forward with the bold assumption of being 'Catholic Verities,' to the destruction of the peace of our Church.” The two following enlarged Parts are appropriated to this purpose, the materials for which in Part VI., are furnished by the last Charge of the late Archbishop of Canterbury, (reprinted by permission of his son,) and by a short treatise by the Rev. William Milton on the doctrine of the Holy Communion, written with special reference to some statements in the last Charge of the late Dr. Hamilton; which caused much alarm and anxiety, as tending to give encouragement to these revived errors. The real question at issue relates chiefly to "Eucharistic Sacrifice,"

and the subject is ably treated by Mr. Milton in answer to the Bishop. In the 4th section, the Manifesto to the late Archbishop from leading members of the Ritualistic party, advocating the same unsound doctrines, is carefully examined and answered. The two last sections, by the same author, contain a narrative of the last Paschal Supper of our Lord, with concluding reflections on His true SPIRITUAL SACRIFICE.

Carrying on the discussion in the same direction, the Seventh Part proceeds to a critical examination (from the pen of the late Dr. Biber,) of several of the most prominent writings lately put forth in support of the doctrine of a quasi-material Presence in the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood; viz., Mr. Keble's treatise on "Eucharistic Adoration;" Mr. Carter's "Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist," and his "Spiritual Instructions;" Mr. Blunt's "Sacraments and Sacramental Ordinances of the Church;" and Dr. Pusey's sermon, "This is MY BODY." The materialistic theory of the Holy Communion which underlies them all, is subjected to the test of the Word of God,—its fallacy demonstrated, and its pernicious tendency laid bare.

In Part VIII., "the true Eucharistic Adoration of the Catholic Church-ever addressed to Christ enthroned in Heaven," is set forth in a very able historical treatise by the late Archdeacon Freeman, (reprinted with slight abridgement), being the second part of Vol. II. of his "Principles of Divine Service," and forms a complete refutation of the materialistic views contained in Mr. Keble's treatise above named.

The principles maintained in this Part are further illustrated by a copious Appendix, containing extracts selected both from cotemporary authors, and from the standard works of two of our great Divines, Bishop Jeremy Taylor, and Bishop Beveridge.

Thus far the Editor had endeavoured, by the aid of the materials placed at his disposal, to set forth, in their purity and integrity, the great principles of the English Reformation; that is to say, the Scriptural and uncorrupted doctrines of the primitive Church, happily recovered by our branch of the Church at her Reformation. Among these, the doctrine of the Holy Communion forms the central point, the means of spiritual life, and true bond of union of the Christian Church; and to its rightful establishment and clearance from the accretions of error, the greater part of this work of

"Vindication " has accordingly been devoted.

But that done, there remained a further duty beside, to which he felt he could not be wanting. Among the attempts that are made to disseminate doctrines opposed to the teaching of our Church, there are none so much to be reprehended as the introduction of obsolete and unauthorized practices, under the mask of superior piety and devotion, which are closely connected with those doctrines, and so made the means of indirectly preparing the way for their reception, and insidiously teaching them. An obvious instance of this is the encouragement of the laity to be present at the administration of the Holy Communion as a proper act of devotion, when not intending to partake of the Sacrament. It has now become the general rule at those churches where excessive ritual is adopted, for the non-communicant congregation to remain at the mid-day Communion service, or at a funeral service in which the "high celebration" is introduced, to witness, but not partake, of the Holy Communion. This is a mere counterpart of the ordinary custom in the Church of Rome (as with ourselves before the Reformation), to go to "hear Mass," supposing thereby to aid the priest in " offering a sacrifice for the quick and the dead;" so emphatically condemned by our Church as a blasphemous fable and dangerous deceit." With Romunists it is notoriously made a substitute for receiving the Sacrament; and for English Churchmen to return back to such an indefensible practice, is a wilful disregard of the essential purpose of Christ's ordinance, and incompatible with a real apprehension of the mystery of godliness, in the faithful reception of the Lord's Supper.

66

To refute these errors seemed, under the circumstances, an imperative duty. And it is with a view to that object that the latter parts of the volume contain a republication, with important additions, of Mr. Scudamore's treatise on the Communion of the Laity, and of Dr. Biber's essay, entitled, "The Communion of the Faithful, essential to the Celebration of the Holy Eucharist." both of these, the practice of " Non-communicant attendance" is shown to be utterly inconsistent with the rule and constant practice of the Primitive Church, as also with the Order of the Holy Communion, according to the rule and (until a very recent period) the invariable custom of the Church

In

of England. The persistent efforts of the Ritualist party to establish the practice of non-communicating attendance at the celebration of the Holy Communion, made it desirable to examine the soundness of the principle upon which it affects to rest. Part IX., accordingly, is devoted to an historical investigation of the question, whether or not such a custom was sanctioned by, or is consistent with, the rule of the Primitive Church; and Part X., whether it has ever been that of the Reformed Church of England. The overwhelming testimony produced is a conclusive answer in the negative to this question; and the lessons of history are a warning to us, as Mr. Scudamore shows, of what the inevitable result would be, should this practice again prevail in our Church.

The 1st and 2nd sections of the Eleventh Part contain a review of the "Reply of the Council of the English Church Union" to Mr. Scudamore on this subject; giving a digest of the controversy that was occasioned by their petition and memorial to Convocation against the final passing of the new rubric, requiring a pause to be made in the service to allow non-communicants to retire. The inaccurate mastery of facts displayed by these self-elected champions of the faith, is fearlessly exposed by the sounder scholarship and deeper acquaintance with ecclesiastical history of their opponent. As an appendix to this part, will be found some valuable liturgical notes, and two important

**After the chief part of the above Preface was prepared for the press as an accompaniment to the separate Numbers in which the first edition was issued, the Charge of the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol to his Diocese in October last has been published, pointing out in very earnest words to his Clergy the serious and imminent dangers besetting our Church. As the completion of this preface has been deferred until the second edition in one volume was ready for publication, (with which it is now included), the Editor gladly takes the opportunity of adding some valuable extracts from two of the Bishop's Addresses, feeling that the words of solemn warning addressed on such an occasion by the Bishop to his Diocese, are a strong confirmation of the apprehensions expressed above, respecting the gravity of the crisis through which our Church is passing, and carry with them a weight and authority that is not to be gainsayed.

addresses by the Bishop of Lincoln, to his diocese, on 66 Non-communicant Attendance," and "Fasting Communion," forming part of his last charge, and republished with his permission.

In Part XII., and the Supplement following it, the Series is brought to a close, as the culminating point of this and every other discussion respecting the Holy Communion is reached in the all-important question of "Eucharistic Sacrifice." What this is, as taught in Holy Scripture and believed by the faithful in primitive ages, is set forth in a treatise by the Rev. J. Le Mesurier. It is followed by two treatises, which will be received with all the greater reverence now that their learned and devout Author, Dr. Biber, rests from his labours, and awaits in peace the coming of the Lord, Whom he served so long and faithfully. In the former of the two, the sacrificial character of the worship of the Church on earth, by virtue of its union with the ever-pleading of the One Sacrifice, once offered, by the Great High Priest within the veil, is ably maintained by copious references to Holy Scripture; in the latter, the Holy Communion, as a means by which Christians are made one in Christ, and therefore one with each other, is proved to be the true Eirenicon of the Church militant here on earth, while waiting for the coming of the kingdom of her Redeemer, the PRINCE OF PEACE.

SOME PRESENT DANGERS OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

The dangers that now menace the Established National Church are especially grave. They may be all summed up in those three forms of evil which I have already specified, and with which we have unhappily now become all too familiar-lawlessness, caballing and the spirit of party, and that undue exaltation of an office and its privileges which is commonly known by the name of sacerdotalism. With each one of these forms of danger we have been brought frequently in contact during the last ten years. Much has been said on these subjects; many a warning has been given; many an indication of the train of evils that always accompany these three dangerous principles has often been specified. Still, they are prevailing with us, and-what is of especial moment-under present forms and developments that seem to give us additional causes for anxiety. These forms and developments, these new aspects of old dangers, it may be useful for us to subject to a very care