« ZurückWeiter »
"We find, Oh most joyful, most wonderful, most unexpected sight;
we find the whole cycle of Roman doctrine gradually possessing
numbers of English churchmen.'-- The Ideal, $c., p. 565.
the Articles, I renounced no one Roman doctrine.'-Ibid, p. 567.
WHAT IS SUBSCRIBED.
What is BELIEVED. Art. X. Of Free Will.-The condi Council of Trent : On Justification. tion of man after the fall of Adam is such, CANON V. Whosoever shall affirm that he cannot turn and prepare himself that the Free Will of man has been lost by his own natural strength and good and extinct by the fall of Adam : let him works to faith and calling upon God.' be accursed.'
Art. XI. Of the Justification of Man. Can; XI. On Justification. — Who- We are accounted righteous before ever shall affirm that men are justified God only for the merit of our Lord and solely by the imputation of the righteous. Saviour Jesus Christ, by faith, and notness of Christ : let him be accursed.' for our own works and deservings.'
Wherefore that we are justified by Can. IX. On Justification. - Whofaith only is a most wholesome doctrine, soever shall affirm that the ungodly is and very full of comfort.'*
justified by faith only : let him be ac
cursed.' Art. XII. Declares : _ That good CHAP. VII. On Justification : Deworks are the fruits of faith, and follow clares, that inherent righteousness is the after justification, and do spring out ne sole formal cause of justification.' cessarily of a true and lively faith.'
Can. XI. States, that inherent 'grace and charity' form part of the cause of justification. And Can. XXXII. speaks of a man as being justified by his good works, which are wrought by him through the grace of God and the merits of Jesus
Christ.' ART. XIII. Of Works before Justifica CAN. VII. · Whoever shall affirm that tion.—' Works done before the grace of all works done before justification, in Christ and the inspiration of his Spirit, whatever way performed, are actually are not pleasant to God: we doubt not sins, and deserve God's hatred : let him but they have the nature of sin.'
be accursed, ART. XXII. The Romish doctrine Session XXV. The Council declared: concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Wor That there is a Purgatory, and that the shipping, and Adoration, as well of souls detained there are assisted by the Images as of Reliques, and also Invoca- suffrages of the faithful, but especially by tion of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly in the acceptable sacrifice of the Mass.' All vented, and grounded upon no warranty who have the care and charge of teachof scripture, but rather repugnant to the ing' are 'to instruct the faithful conword of God.'
cerning the Invocation and Intercession of the Saints, the honour due to Relics, and the lawful use of Images.' And the Council pronounces the sentence of condemnation on those who affirm that veneration and honour are not due to the relics of the saints; and that the memorials of the saints are in vain frequented
to obtain their help and assistance.' ART. XXV. There are two Sacra Session VII. CANON 1. Whoever ments ordained of Christ our Lord in shall affirm that the sacraments of the the gospel, that is to say, Baptism and new law were not all instituted by Jesus the Supper of our Lord. Those five Christ our Lord, or that they are more
* Accordingly, Mr. Ward calls the doctrine of justification by faith only, 'a hateful heresy,' p. 44, note ; 'a hateful and fearful type of antichrist of prodigious demerits,' p. 305.
commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, &c., are not to be counted for Sacraments of the gospel. The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about, but that we should duly use them.’
ART. XXXIII. “Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of our Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions. The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance received, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.’
ART. XXXI. Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross.—“The offering of Christ once made, is that perfect 'redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin but that alone. Wherefore the sacrifice of masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain and guilt, were blasphemous fables and dangerous conceits.”
or fewer than seven, viz., &c.; or that
Now with such an exposition before us, does it require intel
lectual acuteness, or literary training to determine whether an honest subscription to the one is compatible with a conscientious belief of the other? We confidently ask, whether it is possible for any man of common sense and ordinary integrity to compare the two theological systems, as thus embodied in their accredited forms, and not to perceive that they are most decidedly and irreconcileably antagonistic. Apart from all enquiry as to the amount of truth or error which each contains, every unsophisticated mind, whether protestant or catholic, christian or heathen, must at once see that each condemns the other, that if one be true the other must be false; that in fact the Articles are a strong, plain, unequivocal protest against the decrees and canons, and that no man can possibly hold them both, any more than he can serve God and mammon; or believe that to be truth, VOL, XVII. N N.
which he knows to be falsehood. To evade the meaning,' to
explain it away,' and to place an unnatural sense upon the words, is to seek shelter from difficulty in a 'refuge of lies,' and to secure certain advantages by the sacrifice of truth and honesty. To what purpose is it that Dr. Moberly assures us that he knows Mr. Ward to be a man of the most thorough and upright integrity, that he is distinguished by the most noble elevation of moral conscientiousness,' while we have the fact before us, that by practising evasion he signs articles which he does not believe, and that he proclaims it, and glories in it. Is not this a mode of proceeding which, in the concerns of ordinary life, would be branded with infamy, and would destroy a man's commercial credit for ever? Mr. Keble solemnly warns the members of convocation against daring to affirm the bad faith' of his Romanizing friend, if any think it 'but possible that the passage cited from his book, 'may be attributed to obliquity of judgment,' or 'incautious reasoning. But if by some mental obliquity, men can persuade themselves that it is right to practice deceit, are they therefore exonerated from the charge of bad faith? Was Saul of Tarsus the less a persecutor, because, when he breathed out threatenings and slaughter' against the followers of Christ, be 'verily thought he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth? When men do wrong against their convictions, there is some hope that they may pause in their career, or be checked in their course; but when by some unhappy process both reason and conscience are made parties to delinquency, there are none of whose return to virtue so little hope is to be entertained, and against whom it is so necessary to be on our guard.
Let it not, however, be supposed that we are doing injustice to Mr. Ward, or that we take too depreciating a view of his character. We are perfectly willing to believe that, up to a certain point, he is an upright and honourable man. But the more we admire his general excellencies, the more deeply are we grieved for this lamentable exception. This is the point on his mental retina where there is no power of distinct vision, this is the monomania of his morality; and how pernicious must be that school of theology which produces such an aberration of reason, such a paralysis of the moral sense in the case of subscription, is obvious to every one who is not under the Romanizing delusion. Who can calculate the amount of mischief to the interests of morality already occasioned in and out of the university by the dissemination of the principles of Tract No.90; and what would be the condition of society, if these were allowed to imbue the minds of one generation of students after another, and so to spread their poison through all ranks of the community, that the same principles of interpretation should be applied to wills, deeds, and written contracts in general ? Still it is a comfort to know, that, unless in those cases in which a long process of fallacious ingenuity has been employed on minds already inclined towards popery, the common sense and common honesty of the nation will reject with abhorrence such detestable duplicity.
We have noticed, before referring to the proceedings of convocation, the principal arguments employed in this case, with the exception of Mr. Ward's own defence, to which we shall presently advert, as these publications before the trial constituted in fact the only discussion of the question. The House of Convocation admits of no new proposition, no amendment, no altering of a resolution proposed; every one must, therefore, come prepared to decide on the case from a previous consideration of its merits.
As the time of convocation drew near, the abandonment of the third proposition by the Hebdomadal Board was announced. A strong opinion, it was ascertained, prevailed against its adoption among men of almost all parties; the liberal were averse to more stringent measures, and therefore objected to a new test. Mr. Ward's friends denounced it as an act of usurpation and tyranny; while many judged that no declaration could bind men who could apply such principles of interpretation, as the tractarians had adopted. Indeed Mr. Oakeley subsequently declared, that he should find no difficulty in signing the proposed test. The proposition was withdrawn by the board. A requisition numerously signed, was subsequently presented to the authorities, requesting that measures might be taken, 'for submitting to the convocation about to assemble on the 13th of February next, a resolution conveying the formal censure of the university upon the principles inculcated in the 90th number of the “Tracts for the Times, and a solemn repudiation of the modes of interpreting the Thirty-nine Articles therein suggested. In consequence, it was announced, by a resolution of the Hebdomadal Board, signed February 4, 1835, that, as in Tract 90,'entitled, “Remarks on certain Passages in the Thirty-nine Articles,' modes of interpretation were suggested, and have since been advocated in other publications purporting to be written by members of the university, by which, subscription to the said Articles might be reconciled with the adoption of Roman Catholic errors,' the following decree would be proposed to the House of Convocation, "That modes of interpretation, such as are suggested in the said Tract, evading rather than explaining the sense of the Thirty-nine Articles, and reconciling subscription to them with the adoption of errors, which
they were designed to counteract, defeat the object, and are inconsistent with the due observance of the above-mentioned statutes,’ (mentioned in the preamble). On the publication of this resolution, the battle of words was renewed again with fresh vigour; one publication followed another in rapid succession, and preparations were made on both sides for a desperate struggle. Men of high station, it is said, endeavoured in vain to prevail with the authorities to withdraw this last proposition; and when they failed, recourse was had to the proctors, both of tractarian principles, and one of whom so far gone in their mysteries that his college testimonials had been refused. Rumours were afloat respecting the intention of the proctors to take on themselves the heavy responsibility of placing their veto on the proceedings of convocation in relation to this last proposition; but it was scarcely believed that two men, of comparatively inferior standing in the university, would have the temerity of availing themselves of the power of their short lived office, to prevent the judgment of the university from being taken on a most important question. But it was soon known that, on Monday evening, scarcely three days preceding the convocation, the proctors had actually informed the Vice Chancellor that such was their intention. At length the memorable 13th of February arrived, special trains by the Great Western, to and from Oxford, had been announced, and all was anticipation. Intense was the cold, and fast fell the snow; but the number of non-resident members who kept pouring in, and who were seen, despite of the inclemency of the weather, moving about in various directions, with earnestness depicted on their countenances, indicated that something of deep and unusual interest was about to happen. And seldom, if ever, had business of a university kind taken so deep a hold on the minds of the citizens. All seemed to feel, that events were pending, intimately connected with their civil and religious liberties, and anxious was the expectation as to the result. At twelve o’clock a congregation was held, in order that those Masters of Arts who had not yet taken their regencies, might be qualified according to statute for voting in the convocation. In the mean time, the great body of members had begun to assemble in the theatre, and to take their appropriate places. Measures had been adopted to prevent strangers and undergraduates from entering the quadrangle contiguous to the theatre. About one o'clock, the Vice Chancellor, the Heads of Houses, the Doctors, and the Proctors, in solemn procession approach, and enter the theatre. On the north side of this elegant and ample structure, is a raised platform or gallery, sloping forwards about eight or ten feet from the ground, in the centre the Vice Chancellor takes his place as president, on either