Page images

find them in different pages of this pamphlet.

He says, p. 17,

"I propose to consider what are the legitimate results of that system which passes under the name of Anglicanism ;by which term I mean more particularly that system of religion which is adopted by the high-church school in the Establishment. The practical results which I mean to point out are those which affect the allegiance of Anglicans to the Established Church, and their continuance in it. The difficulties then involved in these results are such as will not be felt to be difficulties by the low-church school."

Certainly not: and we do not much thank Mr. D. for that admission. He

could not well avoid it. And we have little reason to thank him, when we consider its connexion with what immediately follows,- to which we must advert hereafter. He adds, p. 18,

"The difficulties however of which I have to speak, are those alone which beset the high-church party in maintaining their principles, and yet continuing in their allegiance to the Established Church. This must be specially borne in mind as the ground of the following argument. The first difficulty I will


mention is that which has reference to I. THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH." This brings Mr. D. at once to the Tractarian notion of the Church. He says, very truly, p. 19,


'This is a difficulty which does not oppress low churchmen, because they

resolve the doctrine into that invisible

bond, which, as they say, unites together all real Christians of whatever denomination. They do not believe the Church to be a visible body."

Certainly they do not believe THE Church to be a visible body. We might object to the use of the terms high-church and low-church,-which Mr. D. uses, adroitly enough, to serve his own purpose. But we know what he means; and we will dispose, both of these terms, and of the exception which might be taken against them, by simply relating an anecdote.

A lady, whose heart was right with God, but who had not much head for controversies, and the distinctions involved in controversial terms, once complained to a clergyman, that she


had been much perplexed and troubled with a discussion about HighChurch and Low-Church,-which she could not rightly understand. She asked him, therefore, "Can you tell me the difference?" "O yes,' replied he immediately,-"I shall not have the slightest difficulty in so doing. The High-Church set the Church above Christ; and the Low-Church set Christ above the Church."

This is the real distinction between the two parties; and, keeping this in remembrance, let us proceed with our quotation,

"But the Anglican utterly rejects this theory. It enters as an element into his

definition of the Church that it is VISIBLE."

And he adds, in the same page,—

"The Anglican ... considers the whole Church Catholic to consist of the Roman communion, the Greek communion, and the Anglican communion (including of course the American.)"


This, then, it seems, is the first and main principle of Anglicanism: that THE Church is VISIBLE, (and, therefore visible union with it is essential,) and that the Roman communion is a main branch of it. If this be granted— if this be assumed as a first principle -we think the question is settled. We do not see how the conclusion can be avoided, that the separation of the "Anglican" communion from the Roman was a deplorable schism;" and that it is the duty of all who admit this principle, to join the Church of Rome without delay. They have already given up the only principle on which separation from it can be justified. Writing, therefore, (as Mr. D. professedly does) to those who fully admit his premises, we think that he proves them, most triumphantly, to be in a position altogether untenable and indefensible and if they cannot logically refute his argument-moral honesty requires, that they should come practically to the same conclusion with him.


Mr. D. next adverts (under head II. p. 38,) to "the doctrine of SACRAMENTAL GRACE" which, we presume, must be considered as the second great principle. And, after observing that, "To deny baptismal regeneration, or

the real presence, is in the belief of “ Anglicans” are aggrieved by the the Anglican, a fatal heresy," he says,

recent decision in the Gorham case : p. 41,

but that they are much more ag, · Now I may assume, that the Angli- grieved by that exercise of Royal can believes, substantially, the following Authority which was manifested in doctrine.

the act of pronouncing a judgement “1. That the very Body and Blood of in such a case at all. And, if so, it our Lord are in no merely figurative is evidently impossible that they can, sense, but really and substantially pre

with good conscience, remain in the sent, not merely to the heart and soul of

Church of England. They have, in the believer, but, 'under the form of bread and wine’ upon the altar.

regard to her Supremacy

" in all " 2. That in this sacrament, the priest spiritual or ecclesiastical things or really offers in commemoration the true

causes” (see the thirty-sixth canon) and proper sacrifice of that very Body, renounced their allegiance to their which once for all was offered on the Queen, and they ought to withdraw Cross, and that in this sacrament is from a Church which requires them, transacted the perpetuation of that one not only to subscribe to, but openly to Sacrifice once offered, which is pro- maintain,“ to the uttermost of their pitiatory for the sins of the whole world. wit, knowledge, and learning, purely

“ This I suppose is also, in substance, and sincerely, without any colour or the belief of the Catholic, and however

dissimulation,” the doctrine of the others inay doubt of, or deny the truth of this doctrine, no one can question its

Royal Supremacy, (compare the thirimmense and overwhelming importance, ty-sixth canon with the first.)

But let us come to still more imif true.”

portant matters. After saying enough, Many would have thought that, by

under his first four heads, to shew, this time, Mr. Dodsworth must have

that the whole of the Anglican party known what is “the belief of the Ca

are in a false and dishonest position, tholic;" but perhaps those spiritual

Mr. Dodsworth comes at last to that masters, to whose despotism he has

point, with which, we think, in comthought fit to subject himself, may

mon honesty, he ought to have bedeem it expedient to keep him for a

gun,- that is to say, to the “ Thirtytime in the dark. He

be a more

nine Articles.” On this head he useful tool in their hands, before he really knows - while he only sup

says, p. 70,

" V.- PASSAGES IN THE THIRTY-NINE poses – what is the doctrine of that

ARTICLES. apostate Church which he has joined. “ For some time I have had misgivings But, be this as it may, the doctrine about some passages in the thirty-nine (which he assumes that the“Anglican” Articles. But my misgivings have been believes) is, it is evident, so essen- suspended rather than laid asleep by such tially the same with the Popish doc- considerations as these; that the Articles trine, that Mr. D.

were intended to be articles of compre. well appeal to

inay those who have gone so far, that it is

hension; that they have in fact been subvery inconsistent and inconsequential

scribed by Catholic-minded men; and

that on the whole they admit of a Catholic in them, not to go one step farther;

sense as much as of a Protestant sense. that is to say, by leaving a Protestant

“ I now feel, on further consideration, Church and joining that of Rome. the untenableness of these reasons, chiefly This conclusion is further enforced by

on grounds which recent events have led the remarks which Mr. D. makes

me to examine; First, that it is an imupon

piety to allow of comprehension on such “ III.-THE ACTUAL STATE OF THE

subjects as some of those on which the Existing EstABLISHED CHURCH," p.49,

Ar:icles treat. It is in fact to make “open and

questions' of distinct dogmas of the

Church. And next that some of the Ar“ IV.-... the interference of the

ticles do not admit of a Catholic sense. Civil POWER IN MATTERS OF A PURELY

And further that it is no real reason for SPIRITUAL NATURE," p. 53.

subscribing them, to say that there are From what is said under this latter

(thers which equally condemn a protestant head, it appears, not merely that subscription. This may be a good argu.


ment ad hominem but not ad conscien. But the truth is, that, as soon as we

come to the Thirty-nine Articles, we And he then proceeds to make parti- discover, but too plainly, the utter discular remarks on Articles vi., xl., honesty of the whole party. They XIII., XIX., XXI., XXII., XXV., XXVIII.,

dishonestly and wickedly keep the XXIX., XXXI., Xxxv., and xxxvir. (Mr. Articles out of sight as long as they D. evidently means xxxvII.; for he can: they thrust them into the backsays, it “treats on the subject of the ground: for they know and feel that royal supremacy, and spiritual juris- those Articles, - many of them exdiction; but both in the “Contents," pressly, and all of them taken as a and in the body of the pamphlet, it whole and as a system, --- are directly is wrongly numbered).

against them. And when they are This part of the pamphlet more forced at length to take some notice especially must be looked at in its of them, it is in the spirit of the infatwofold aspect: we cannot be content mous Tract, No. XC., - even when to deal with it, as we well might with they do not go to the full length of most of the preceding portion, merely that shameful and shameless producin reference to those to whom it is tion. Mr. Dodsworth is evidently primarily addressed: we should, in so disposed to admit and use the princidoing, be guilty of compromising the ples of that Tract as far as he can,cause of Divine Truth. Much of what though he is sometimes compelled to precedes is, as we have said, in its allow that it is unsatisfactory; for he bearing upon Tractarians, weighty and quotes it again and again, applauds its powerful: it demolishes their position: ingenuity (p. 86), and never once conand, as so doing, we might fairly com

demns its Jesuitism : nay, he says, in mend it to the serious consideration regard to one of the grossest instances of the reader, and approve it, as of its dishonesty (its remarks on the clearly setting forth the only legiti- condemnation of Transubstantiation, mate result of the premises which it

in Art. xxvii.);assumes. But we cannot, in any res

And I

suppose cans generally pect or measure, concede the meed of reconcile their subscription to this Artipraise to that part of the pamphlet cle by adopting substantially this interwhich relates to the Articles. With pretation of it.” (p. 81.) reference to what seems to be the main object of the writer, that which So that, on the testimony of Mr. D. might have been that which ought himself, the principle of a non-natuto have been the most forcible portion ral interpretation of the Articles is of his work, is in fact the feeblest : commonly adopted by Tractarians, as and the reason is, that, in regard to the only way of reconciling their conEvangelical Truth, and to the ques

sciences to subscription! What are tions at issue between the “ Anglican" we, then, to think of their consciences?* party and the faithful portion of the And what, then, is the conclusion to Church of England, it is the most

which all this brings us, but simply dishonest and Jesuitical. There is that with which we set out? The indeed, even in this part of the pam

whole of this pamphlet proves that phlet, enough to shew, that--much

the Tractarians (or * Anglicans”) are as he and they are disposed, and long not of the Church of England, though, as he and they have been accustomed

for their own convenience, or for the to wrest, and pervert, and explain purposes of their true and proper moaway “the plain and full meaning,

ther, the Church of Rome, they may the literal and grammatical sense" of for a time continue in it. Ér. D. the Articles, still there is abundance conclusively proves, that in common to which no “ Anglican" can pretend honesty and consistency-they ought honestly to subscribe :-"some of the to leave it, and to join the Church of Articles do not admit of a Catholic Rome: for to that apostate Church sense:"- no, not even when the non- their admitted and avowed principles natural method of interpretation has inevitably lead them. Their first þeen tried to the uttermost!!


• See Tit. i. 15.

rector, Mr. Goodall, and an intelligent Inquirer; and the tone and manner will remind some of our readers of the conversations between Mr. Lovegood and Thomas Newman; though Mr. Stannard is never led away by that unhappy love of the humorous, which enlivens, but detracts from the general wisdom of Rowland Hill's "Village Dialogues."

To take an example from the fourth chapter, where the subject is that answer in our Catechism, which says that "the body and blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper." Mr. Goodall observes, upon these ward, in times past, as a stumblingwords, that "they have been put forblock in many a weak brother's way; and are now again perverted by some, even ministers of our Church, to the same purpose;" and he proceeds to ask the Inquirer, what he understood our Lord to mean, in John vi., by eating His flesh, and drinking His blood? (p. 54.) To this question, the Inquirer answers:—

"I understand that by the words, flesh and blood, as there used, our blessed Lord intended to express whatever he did, or suffered in the body (prepared for Him as Mediator) for our redemption and salva. tion; and that by eating and drinking He meant a hearty receiving of Him, and reliance upon Him as the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey


"Mr. G.-For what reason, do you in such terms as these? suppose, did our Lord express himself

"I-In order most strongly to impress on the minds of His hearers the necessity of depending on Him alone for eternal life, shewing them, that as the natural life is supported by food of God's appointment, so the life of the soul is maintained by that Saviour whom He had given, the true bread from heaven; and that as we must eat and digest our food, in order that our bodies may be nourished and kept alive, so we must come unto Jesus Christ; must receive, believe in, and rely on him for the saving of the soul.'


principles are not those of the Church of England, but those of the Church of Rome.

Here we must pause for the present: but we hope to resume our consideration of this pamphlet, and to make some further remarks upon it in another aspect; that is to say, in its reference to Evangelical Truth, and those who maintain it;-on which it makes, by the way, many unfair assaults, which we cannot, and must not, pass by unnoticed, or unrebuked.


OF THE LORD'S SUPPER; intended to show the Nature and Object of that Ordinance; the Benefits proposed by it; and the Qualifications requisite, in those who desire to be partakers of those benefits. By CHRISTOPHER STANNARD, B.D., late Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. pp. 296. Longmans.

We cannot sit down to review this excellent treatise, without taking blame to ourselves for not having done our part to make the christian public earlier aware of its merits. Every one knows that treatises, tracts, sermons, and polemical discussions, on the holy communion of the Lord's Supper, are abundant enough. They are so numerous, that a decided preference of any one, to all others, may be no more than a proof that the judge has but a very limited acquaintance with the fruits of the labour of many wise and highly-gifted servants of the Lord, who have cultivated this portion of sacred literature. If it be so, the present reviewer must confess himself unacquainted with any other treatise on the Lord's Supper, in which the subjects considered correspond so fitly and so fully with the topics suggested by our liturgy and catechism. And the manner in which they are treated is simple, clear, grounded on Scripture, and elucidated by quotations from some of

our soundest divines.

The instruction is conveyed in dialogues between a good Nathanael, his

"Mr. G.-I think that your view of

this matter is correct; and that you are also perfectly right as to the obligation and indispensable necessity that is upon us to receive Jesus Christ as our Saviour.

As such, we must receive Him in all His offices. Every act and word of His is of importance to us,-His teaching, His exhortation, and His example; but, above all, His death: and this it is which we are especially directed to remember in the Lord's Supper. The importance of the death of Christ (the immediate cause of which was a separation of the blood from the body) is very strikingly shewn by His appointing the bread and wine to be taken separately, with an express command respecting each. These were the significant emblems which our Lord appointed to be employed for keeping up the remembrance of His decease, which He speaks of as already accomplished; it being His 'determinate counsel' soon to finish the work which the Father gave Him to do. And I would here observe, that the injunction, 'do this,' appears from St. Paul's words, Ye do shew the Lord's death till He come,' to have laid an obligation not only upon the Apostles, during their lives, to shew the Lord's death, by partaking of the emblems of His body and blood, then actually broken, and shed for them; but to be equally binding on all, both then and in the ages to come, who should believe on Him, through their word; and moreover, that the grand and chief design of the Lord's Supper is, so to bring to the devout remembrance of His disciples, the exceeding great love of their Master and only Saviour thus dying for them,' as to strengthen and confirm their faith in Him, in whom we have redemption through His blood,' and for whose sake alone, pardon of sin, increase of grace, and all the mercies and blessings of the new covenant are poured forth upon us. In the answer of the Catechism, we are told, that true believers, receiving in this holy ordinance the emblems of Christ's body and blood, according to their Lord's command, and thus openly expressing their thankful acceptance of the benefits thereby held forth to them, do actually experience the reality which by faith they seek: the like blessings to those which Paul desired for his Ephesian brethren, when he prayed the Father that he would grant them to be strengthened with might by His spirit in the inner man;' and that Christ might dwell in their hearts by faith. Agreeably to this view of the matter, our twenty-eighth article declares, that the body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner: and the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten


in the Supper is faith.' Therefore (as in the twenty-ninth article), the wicked, and such as be void of a lively faith, although they do carnally and visibly press, with their teeth, the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ.' It is with a direct view to this important truth that every part of our communion service is constructed. First, we are exhorted to observe, that the benefit afforded by the Lord's Supper is great, if, with a true penitent heart and lively faith, we receive that holy sacrament; for then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink His blood; then we dwell in Christ and Christ in us; we are one with Christ, and Christ with us.' Afterwards we are



taught to pray that our gracious Lord' would 'grant us so to eat the flesh of His dear Son, Jesus Christ, and to drink His blood' (so, i.., to do it with a true penitent heart and lively faith), that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in Him and He in us;' or, in other words, that our sinful deeds, done in the body, may be expiated by the sufferings and death of God's dear Son, Jesus Christ;' and that we 'being cleansed (by Him) from ail filthiness of the flesh and spirit,' may have a constant dependence upon Him for life, which is our dwelling in Him; and that He may bestow a constant influence of His quickening spirit, which is His dwelling in us. To think and to believe are as really acts of the mind, as to eat and to drink are acts of the body; and what is done by the mind is as truly done as what is done by the body. The body and blood of Christ, therefore (i.e., a Leart-cheering and invigorating sense of the benefits which Christ purchased for us, in the body of his flesh, through death). are as truly, as verily and indeed received' by faith, as bread and wine are by the mouth. In every part of our beautiful service, the grand stress is laid upon faith."-Ch. iv. pp. 54-65.


This exposition of our Church's doctrine is followed by an account of the doctrine of transubstantiation, as stated in the official documents of the

Papal church, and of the ground alleged for it from the Scriptures by the Romanists. The insufficiency of that ground is shewn by a comparison of Scripture with Scripture; and some of the monstrous results which avowedly follow from the doctrine of tran

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »