REESE LIBRARY
ov riii-:
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
Class No.
NEW, REVISED, AND CHEAPER EDITION.
Crown 8vo. price 35. Qd. net.
THE REFORMATM SETTLEMENT
Examined in the Light of History and Law.
By the Rev. MALCOLM MACCOLL, D.D.
Canon Kesidentiary of Kipon.
LONGMANS, GREEN, & CO.
London, New York, and Bombay.
OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.
* Canon MacColl attains a remarkable success in proving
that the principles which High Churchmen have inherited
from the Caroline divines fall in with the modern and, in
the best sense, liberal theology and with the science of
to-day.' — GuAEDiAN.
* We hasten to add our tribute of cordial respect to the
general conception of Canon MacColFs book, and to the
courage, vigour, and thoroughness with which he has
carried it out. . . . Having demonstrated the historic
width and the present-day reasonableness of Anglican
liberty in the realm of Sacramental teaching, Canon
MacColl is not less concerned to exhibit the injustice of
the attempt to suppress the Ritual by which "High,"
views are symbolised and set forth. And, in particular,
he deals at length, and very effectively indeed, with the
judgments of the Judicial Committee on points connected
OPINIONS OF THE PBESS
with the Ornaments Rubric. ... He places beyond
reasonable doubt the fact that the plain meaning of the
rubric by which the ornaments of the Church and of its
ministers were deliberately regulated at the last revision
of the Prayer-book, which, of course, has Parliamentary as
well as Synodical authority, was set aside by the Judicial
Committee, and a wholly non-natural meaning read into
it and made of penal obligation. . . . Another point of
great importance on which, • as it seems to us. Canon
MacColl achieves special success is his demonstration of
the unhistoric character of the claim, put forward by Sir
William Harcourt in his most aggressive manner, that
the Crown and Parliament have a right to determine the
doctrine, discipline and ceremonial of the Church of
England. . . . We may not agree with all Canon MacColl's
conclusions, but we must congratulate him on having
produced a book which is calculated to promote sound
thinking on the relations between Church and State, and
to dissuade the candid reader from participation in efforts
towards a reduction of the ancient and clearly established
liberties of the Anglican clergy.' — Spectatoe.
' A contribution of solid value towards the enlighten-
ment of the public mind at a moment fraught with
grave issues to the welfare of religion in this country.'
Observer.
*A formidable armoury of weapons for use in the
present controversy.' — Echo.
' A book written for the present crisis, but very
superior to the ordinary party manifesto.'
Manchester Guardian.
OPINIONS OF THE PBE88
' For dignity, vigour, and incisiveness it is worthy of
the author of the " Letters of Junius." '
Chuech Times.
* His arguments and evidence are now generally re-
cognised to be so good in any case he takes in hand that
they cannot be disregarded. Royal Supremacy, Confes-
sion, Ecclesiastical Courts, and all the topics of this
controversy he handles with masterly skill.'
LivEBPooL Post.
'No one who has followed with any interest the
course of the recent ecclesiastical controversy can afford
to miss so lucid, moderate, and well presented a state-
ment of the case. ... In a succession of closely reasoned
chapters, which bristle with evidences of profound study
and research, Canon MacColl takes up, one by one, the
questions which have most stirred the parties to the
recent dispute, and examines them in the light of history
and law, making his constant appeal to the acts and
writings of the English reformers, and to the records of
the Reformation period. All parties to the controversy,
whatever their prepossessions, will agree in acknowledging
the literary strength displayed in a work which, for all
its erudition, is never dull or abstruse, and in appreciating
the unexceptional tone and temper brought by the author
to the consideration of theological moot points which,
unfortunately, are too often discussed in a very different
spirit.' — WoBLD.
* Dr. MacColl is an experienced and most dexterous
controversialist. ... It can hardly be questioned that
Dr. MacColl has made out his case.' — Ceitic.
OPINIONS OF THE PEE88
' Canon MacColl is a practised and energetic contro-
versialist, and it is impossible to read his new volume
without admiration for his skill of fence and his sturdy-
adroitness of attack. ... It is a clever and penetrating
criticism of many modern fallacies, political, historical,
religious, and it is a criticism which boldly carries the
war into the enemy's country. . . . Dr. MacColl's
criticism, too, of the "Ecclesiastical Courts and the
Ornaments Eubric " question will be found almost
conclusive.' — Liteeature.
* The author has studied his subject with great care,
and we believe with impartiality. . . . What we think is
clearly proved is that the High Church party has a far
stronger case from the historical point of view than the
extreme Protestant agitators would admit. ... In short,
from the political and historical point of view, we should
say that Canon MacColl comes off a comparatively easy
victor. . . . There is much else in this able and interesting
volume which is full of interest.' — Daily Chronicle.
* Canon MacColl's book is undoubtedly able, and, so far
as it helps to clear the issue, it is of service to all parties.'
Westminster Gazette.
' Mr. MacColl's book covers all the questions at issue.'
Academy.
* The book bears marks of haste, but it is bright and
easy reading, in spite of all the technicalities.'
Morning Leader.
' Canon MacColl deserves the best thanks of the
public for his interesting and instructive book.'
Sunday Times.
OPINIONS OF THE PBESS
' Canon MacCoU's book on this subject is full of
information, and is well worth reading.'
The Christian Million.
* As a first-class fighting defence of the High Anglican
position, we recommend the book, more especially as there
is not, from the first page to the last, one word of bitterness,
and nothing but appreciation of the labours and merits of
Nonconformists.' — Methodist Times.
* These quotations may suffice to set Churchmen and
others on reading this book, to the cogency of which a
quite unusual testimony is forthcoming Without
entering upon details, it is safe to say that Dr. MacCoU
has rendered it necessary for objectors to Catholic doctrine
and practice within the Established Church to look else-
where than to legal interpretations of the Book of
Common Prayer for relief. The ultra vagaries of extreme
High Churchmen will perhaps be put down, but the
system of which they are the excrescences will remain
until Protestant Englishmen repudiate it as a national
system by effecting Disestablishment.' — Liteeary World.
' Protestants will find Canon MacCoU's book of value
because of the admissions he makes.'
The Christian World.
After some unfavourable criticism : — * At least two of
the twelve chapters were well worth writing, and we can
quite imagine that they produced an effect on the minds
of impressionable Members of Parliament ; we mean those
on " Auricular Confession" and the " Ornaments Rubric."
The latter is a well- sustained and fairly complete review of
a subject upon which the last word has certainly not been
OPINIONS OF THE PRESS
said, and of which the more investigation the better. On
the crux of Confession the Canon's views are so far
temperate that he seems to us to answer himself. All
that loyal Churchmen are entitled to demand is that the
regulations of the Prayer Book shall not be so abused as
" to generate a morbid scrupulosity and blunt the sense of
personal responsibility." ' — Times.
' The book is clever and interesting, but most unsatis-
factory. . . . Canon MacColl gives himself away on almost
every page. . . . But if Canon MacColl is occasionally
egotistic, there is a tone of true religious earnestness in
many parts of the volume, and his chapters on " The
Propinquity of the Spiritual World " and on " The Inter-
mediate State" are singularly suggestive, though their
high religious tone seems somewhat out of harmony with
the controversial purpose and the air of special pleading
that pervades all the rest of the book.' — Daily News.
* Canon MacColl is an acute and distinguished combatant
in many fields. He sustains his high reputation in the
substantial volume which he has contributed to the for-
midable mass of polemical literature which has grown
out of the " Crisis in the Church." We desire to say at
once and plainly the value we attach to this book. It is
timely, learned, extremely interesting, and — consider-
ing the circumstances of its composition — remarkably
moderate. It has, we are informed, already exercised a
salutary influence in political circles : we think it is
competent to do much good, to clear away many
delusions, and facilitate a juster and wiser discussion
of Church questions. We state this at the outset in
OPINIONS OF THE PEESS
order to leave ourselves free, without risk of miscon-
ception, to call attention to points in which we find
ourselves compelled to join issue with the author. [The
Reviewer supports Professor Maitland's thesis as to ihe
Canon Law, and " Canon MacColl's lengthy discussion
of the Ornaments Eubric does not altogether satisfy"
him.] . . . The concluding chapters on " Anglican and
Roman Orders," and ''The Prisoner of the Vatican:
a Chapter of Secret History," have but an indirect
connection with the thesis of the book, but in them-
selves are both valuable and interesting. Canon MacColl
does well to recall the character of the antagonism
between the Churches of England and Rome ; for among
the consequences of domestic controversy not the least
probable or the least pernicious is the unreasoning disgust
with their own communion which it breeds in the minds
of devout Anglicans. Such disgust is the best condition
in the world for the projects of the Romanisers.'
Saturday Review.
' In this ably written volume we have a vindication of
the position of the High Church party. ... In short. Dr.
MacColl's book, while no doubt controversial, is in effect a
plea for toleration on broad grounds in the present so-called
''Crisis in the English Church," especially, perhaps, in
view of the claims of the Vatican ; and as such it deserves
study by the leaders on both sides.' — Liverpool Mercury.
' To us the most interesting portion of the work is
that very large, and perhaps predominating element, which
has little or nothing to do with the subject of his work,
such as " The Propinquity of the Spiritual World.'
Weekly Register.
OPINIONS OF THE PBESS
* Weighty and learned.' — Scotsman.
' It is not too much to say that the anti-ritual judg-
ments of the Privy Council have never before been subjected
to so damaging a piece of criticism.'
Phcenix (by Professor Shuttle worth).
' This is the most solid contribution which has been
made, or which is likely to be made, to the literature of
the present crisis in England. Its learned author is
abundantly qualified, probably beyond any man of our
times, for the treatment of his subject. His exposition of
it is so lucid and masterly that we do not see how the
force of his argument can be evaded by any fair-minded
man. Indeed, it may be asserted that it has made itself
felt more directly and practically than any book of this
decade. Although it has hardly been published six
months, four editions have been sold, and it is reported
that since reading it, some forty members of Parliament
have felt forced to change their votes. It is seldom that
such results are produced by a book. We are well within
the bounds of moderation when we say that no American
Churchman can form a sound and sensible opinion upon
the great questions which are convulsing our mother
Church until he has carefully studied this book.'
The Living Chubch (New York).
* With exceptional knowledge, secured by long and
accurate study of history, the writer has exhibited with
masterly force and lucidity the leading principles of the
Keformation Settlement in the light of history and law.' —
The Official Year-Book of the Chubch of England,
page 530.
I
BT THE SAME AUTHOR.
Sixth Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
CHRISTIANITY IN RELATION TO SCIENCE
AND MORALS.
Second Edition, Revised. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.
LIFE HERE AND HEREAFTER : Sermons preached
in Ripon Cathedral and elsewhere.
LONGMANS, GREEN, A CO.
LONDOH, NEW YORK, AND BOMBAY.
THE
EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
THE
REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
EXAMINED IN THE LIGHT OF
HISTORY AND LAW
BY THE
REV. MALCOLM MacCOLL, D.D,
CANON RESIDENTIARY OP RIPON
EIGHTH EDITION REVISED AND ENLARGED
9^ OF THE ^
UNIVERSITY
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
NEW YORK AND BOMBAY
1900
All rights reserved
\^A^
PEEFACE
TO
THE EIGHTH EDITION
The interest taken by the public in the subjects
discussed in this volume is proved by the fact that
the book ran through seven editions within a year of
its publication. It has been out of print for some
time because I was anxious to review in a new
edition the decisions given by the two Archbishops
on the use of Incense in public worship and the Keser-
vation of the Blessed Sacrament for the communion
of the sick. I have in a new chapter subjected those
decisions to an exhaustive examination, and have
proved them, as I believe, to be untenable on
historical and legal grounds. On that point, how-
ever, the reader must' form his own conclusion. But
I wish here to offer some criticism on certain aspects
of the controversy which have not received the atten-
tion they deserve.
1. And first as to the complaint that the clergy
refuse to yield obedience to their bishops. We are
119852
VI THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
told, with somewhat monotonous iteration, that the
disobedience of some of the clergy to their bishops
v/ould not be endured for a moment in the army.
Short shrift, we are warned, would be given to the
officer who refused to yield instant obedience to the
order of his superior. The answer is that there is
no analogy whatever betw^een the two cases. The
relation of subordinate officers to their superiors in
the army is a despotic relation. 'Theirs not to
reason why,' and if they do they are liable to
immediate arrest. The relation of presbyters to
their bishops is a constitutional relation. 'Tig
their duty * to reason why ' before they obey. -Nor
has the bishop any right to issue arbitrary orders.
Even in the middle ages bishops never claimed those
autocratic powers which are now claimed on behalf
of our bishops. It has been the policy of Ultranion-
tanism to lead to Papal absolutism by a. gradually
ascending scale of inferior despotisros : the laity
dependent on the priest, \ the priest on the bishop, the
bishop on the Pope. That is the conditionto which
the craft of the Jesuits has reduced the Church of
Eome ; audit answers their purpose admirably,; since
they have thus captured the Papacy, as I have shown
in chapter xii., and have consequently become lords
t)f the Church. An Ultramontane bishop in France
declared some years ago that his elergy, were a
Regiment submissive, without demur, to his word of
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION Vll
command. 'My clergy,' he said, 'are a regiment;
I say march, and it marches.' ^ Is that an ideal
that it is desirable to aim at? And at a time, too,
when not a few of the priests and laity of the Eoman
Church are proclaiming its evil results in their com-
munion ?
The bishops of the Church of England, like the
bishops of Catholic antiquity, are constitutional
rulers. The secret conclave of bishops at Lambeth
.every year before the meeting of Convocation is not
only modern, but unconstitutional and dangerous
in addition. The foolish and mischievous Public
Worship Eegulation Act was the offspring of one of
those secret meetings. The deliberations of Con-
vocation become a farce if all the members of the
Upper House meet in the Jerusalem Chamber merely
to give formal and public sanction to resolutions
already debated and passed in secret in Lambeth
Palace. According to the true principles of eccle-
siastical polity the bishop should govern his diocese
by the advice of a council of presbyters.. He did
so in the primitive Church, and he does now in
Scotland and America. It does not so much matter
what the exact composition of the bishop's council
may be. In Scotland it is a diocesan synod. We
^ ' Mo7i clerge est comme im regiment : il doit marcher, et marcJie.^
iSpeech by Cardinal Bonnechose in the French Senate in the Session
of 1865.
viii THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
have in England, according to the high authority of
Thorndike, another kind of diocesan council : —
The chapters of cathedral churches are by their birth-
right counsellors to the bishops, and assistants in his
whole office ; the archdeacon his minister and principal
commissary ; those, by the rule set on foot by the apostles,
and observed always by the Church, of planting cathedral
churches in cities, and making the churches planted in
cities cathedral churches, for the government of all Chris-
tendom within the territories of those cities ; this, being
by his order ministerial to them, as well as to the bishop,
when both have part in the same office.^
2. Let us apply this to the action of our episcopate
after the Lambeth decision on the use of incense.
Nearly all the bishops advised their clergy to yield
obedience to the decision ; and some of them com-
manded obedience to it in peremptory and minatory
terms. Now what are the facts? The decision
had no legal validity whatever ; and even if it had,
even if it had issued from a legal tribunal having
coercive jurisdiction, it concerned those priests alone
who pleaded before the Archbishops. Moreover,
not only did the decision lack all legal validity, but
it did not take the form of a godly admonition issued
to the few priests immediately concerned. It was
simply an historical conclusion arrived at by the two
Primates from a necessarily hasty and imperfect
examination of a certain department of ecclesiastical
• Works, x.-i5G-7.
PEBFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION ix
history. They admitted that the use of incense was
not only innocent, but was beautiful and Scriptural
in addition ; and they encouraged the hope that it
might one day be restored in our Church. But at
present they pronounced incense illegal, and forbade
its use. That raised an entirely new issue, and made
obedience, in my humble judgment, impossible for
such of the clergy as had studied the subject and
had convinced themselves that the use of incense in
the Church of England was legal. If I were a
parish priest using incense, and my bishop said to
me : ' In view of the present distress I ask you to
give up the use of incense,' my disposition would be
to take his advice. But if he said : ' I have no
objection to incense ; I believe it to be Scriptural and
edifying; but I consider it illegal, and therefore I
order you to give it up,' I should respectfully refuse,
for I could not obey without acting what would be
to me a lie — namely, a public declaration that I
believe the use of incense illegal, whereas I believe
it to be perfectly legal. I should consider that my
bishop's order was of a non-Episcopal character. It
did not come from him as a bishop but as a student
of history, and the question in my mind would be
whether he knew more about the subject than I did.
If my hypothetical diocesan were the Bishop of
Oxford or the Bishop of London, I should feel at
once the need of reconsidering my own opinion.
For not only are those eminent prelates profomidly
X THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
versed in ecclesiastical history, but they possess in
an eminent degree the historical instinct. They can
see the bearing of an argument almost before it is
uttered. But our Primates, able as they ar^, well read
as they are, and most upright and conscientious, are
not historians or historical critics. The questions
they asked during the ' Hearing ' at Lambeth proved
conclusively that they were on unfamiliar ground,
both historical and legal. Their decisions therefore,
both on Incense and Keservation, are entitled to the
deference, neither more nor less, which is due to
the accuracy or the reverse of their historical con-
clusions. The question of obedience, canonical or
otherwise, does not come in at all. It is purely a
matter of criticism, and you don't obey a critic.
You are either convinced by him, or you refute him.
That is a point which the public has entirely over-
looked in this matter. The Lambeth decisions are
the decisions of critics, not of judges, and still less
of fathers-in-God ; and are entitled to the respect
which their accuracy merits, and no more. People
would appreciate this distinction at once if the
Lambeth decisions were on questions of Greek
scholarship or of astronomy. The opinion of
Professor Jebb in the one case or Dr. Ball in
the other would outweigh any number of Lambeth
decisions to the contrary. The Archbishops do
not say : ' You must obey because we ask you
to do so as your spiritual superiors ' ; but, * You
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION Xl
must obey because we tell you that the facts
of history and law are against these usages.'
Those who cannot accept that conclusion are bound
in honesty to disobey, just as much as they
would be bound to disobey if the Archbishops had
asked them to disbelieve against their consciences
in the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. It
is no part of a bishop's office to be an umpire in
such matters. People see this readily enough when
their prejudices are not engaged. Dr. Dollinger
was admired by all classes of English Churchmen
for disobeying a General Council of his Church, with
the Pope at its head. Why did he disobey it ?
Because he was asked to accept the Pope's infalli-
bility, not as a new doctrine, but as a doctrine always
held in the Church. He had surveyed the whole
field of history, and offered to prove against all
comers that the doctrine which he was asked to
accept as an historical truth was an historical false-
hood. ' I am an old man,' he said to me one day,
'and have not long to Hve ; but I am determined not
to go down into the grave with a lie in my right
hand.' The demand to accept such a dogma on
such ground he felt as an outrage on his intellectual
integrity.
Among the many lessons which I learnt from
him none made a deeper impression on me
than the duty of unswerving loyalty to historic
truth, be the consequences what they may. It was
xii THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
my great privilege to study under his guidance for
some weeks every year during fifteen years. He
v^as so good as to give me a table in his own
working-room in his fine library at Munich, and was
not only ever ready to give me his advice, but always
encouraged me to draw upon his inexhaustible stores
of knowledge. But the alpha and omega of his
teaching invariably was : ' Make sure of your facts.
Be grateful to anyone who points out your errors, and
never sanction what you believe to be untrue. Truth
always pays best in the end.' He illustrated his
teaching one day by the following anecdote : He
visited England for the first and only time soon
after Cardinal Manning had seceded to the Church
of Rome, and chancing to meet him at an evening
party, the future Cardinal asked to be introduced to
the famous Munich Professor. ' Dr. Dollinger,' said
Manning, ' I have asked to be introduced to you that
I might thank you for having made me a Catholic'
* I bowed,' said Dollinger, * not understanding what
he meant. Manning explained. *' Yes," he went on,
" it was you who made me a Catholic. For I was
brought up in the belief that history could not be
trusted in the hands of Catholic writers, and my own
reading, I am bound to say, confirmed that impres-
sion. A book of yours fell into my hands. I read
it and found that you always gave the facts truly,
whether they made for or against the Church. The
PREFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xiii
scales fell from my eyes. I saw that one might
be a Catholic and yet be true to the facts of his-
tory, and I became a Catholic." And this man,'
added Dollinger, with one of his humorous smiles,
* who thanked me for having made him a Catholic
through my loyalty to historic truth, now de-
nounces me as a heretic because I will not accept
as an article of faith what I know to be an historic
falsehood.'
3. Those of the clergy, therefore, who value
historical truth and have convinced themselves that
the Lambeth decisions are contrary to the facts of
history, are placed in the painful dilemma of being
obliged to disobey their bishops or do violence to
their consciences. And all because the Archbishops,
instead of issuing a godly admonition, have pro-
pounded some historical propositions which no one
can say are beyond dispute, and which I believe I
have proved to be contrary to the facts. Obedience
is a great virtue ; but it has its limits, and one of
those limits is loyalty to truth. ' To obey is better
than sacrifice ' we have often been told of late. Yes,
but to obey what and whom ? Saul was not asked
to give his assent to a disputable proposition. He
was sent on a definite errand, about which there
could be no two opinions. And he disobeyed.
Why? Not because he had any doubt as to the
meaning of his commission, but because he chose to
xi V THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
obey another voice than Samuel's^ He was nervously
anxious to be on the popular side :-^:
And Saiil said unto Samuel, I have sinned; for Lbave
transgressed the commandment of the Lord and thyAvords :
because I feared the people and obeyed their voice.
Saul did obey, but he obeyed the wrong voice,
the voice of public opinion, because he was afraid.
Certainly, 'to obey is better than sacrifice,' but it
all depends upon the voice to which obedience is
rendered. The voice of the people is not always the
voice of God, the proverb notwithstanding. For
myself, when in any controversy I chance to find
myself on the popular side, I think it high time
to examine the purity of my motives and" the
righteousness of my cause. ;: . ;
I have never had a quarrel, or even.ardifferenjse,
with any bishop in my life. -My experience of tha
episcopate is of the niost pleasant character.: From
the Archbishop of Canterbury, when he was Bishop
of Jjondon, I received nothing but kin diiess. No
one admires more than I do his great ability, his:
manly nature, and his sterling integrity. And if hei
should do me the honour of reading the following
pages, and should feel annoyed by anything 1 hav^-
written, perhaps I.may remind him that one of my
earlieBt essays in controversy was in his own defence
when he was nominated to. the see of Exeter. He
was then on the unpopular side. Dr. Pusey and his
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION XV
followers joined hands with the ' Eecord ' and its
followers in a monster petition against the nomina-
tion of Dr. Temple. The petition was signed, I
think, by more than thirteen thousand clergy. I
was a young curate at the time, living in a clergy-
house, and was asked to sign the petition as all my
colleagues had done. I not only refused, but I
entered into a polemic in the ' Guardian ' on behalf
of Dr. Temple. Doubtless he has forgotten all
about it, but I received a letter of thanks from him
at the time.
From the Archbishop of York, too, I have
received undeserved kindnesses. And I have felt, as
others have, the charm of his personality and the
attraction of his high and holy character. It is just
because I feel that a mistake made by two men
of such lofty characters and of such well-earned
influence is sure to be more prolific of evil than
the mistakes of smaller men, that I have felt it
necessary to go so fully into the question.
4. With that explanation I will venture to make
some few more observations on the duty of obe-
dience to bishops. Twice within the last fifty
years the two Archbishops of the day have issued
Pastorals, signed by nearly all their suffragans,
against innovations in public worship ; and the
alleged root of the mischief, which they all deplored
was the disobedience of the clergy. What were the
innovations then ? and wherein consisted the dis-
xvi THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
obedience. Let us take the first period. A states-
man in difficulties thought that he could ride back
into office on the crest of a great Protestant wave.
In the Durham Letter accordingly he appealed to
the mob, who responded with the St. Barnabas
riots. The bishops were frightened and issued their
Pastoral, laying the whole blame on the disobedient
clergy. The innovations then were surpliced choirs,
choral services, weekly Eucharists, preaching in
the surplice, credence tables, and floral decorations
of churches at festal seasons. These things the
bishops of the day wished to put down. One of the
twenty-four who signed the Pastoral of March 29,
1851, refused to license any curate in his diocese
unless the applicant made a ' statement in writing
that he would not preach in the surplice.' And
when an incumbent, assenting to this as a general
rule, pleaded that on Communion Sundays the
surplice might be permitted, * to avoid inconve-
nience,' the bishop refused peremptorily to grant
this indulgence, because * his doing so involved a
sanctioning the practice in general, which practice I
deem,' he said, ' not in accordance with the spirit
and intention of the law of the Church.' ^
In the same year the Primate, before licensing
a young clergyman to a curacy, asked to see some
of his sermons as a specimen of the doctrine which
' The correspondence is in the Gtcardian of 1851. I have lost
the number, but the page is 298.
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xvii
he was accustomed to preach. His Grace picked
out the following sentence as an * extreme and
unguarded opinion ' : —
At the font it was that * we put on Christ,' and were
regenerated, or made new creatures in Him : then the old
world of sin and wrath passed away : then ' all things
became new ' in our new birth to grace and reconciliation
to God.' '
Another bishop, in a charge to his clergy, ' warned
them against the use of the word Catholic as a
party word, and expressed his regret that it should
have been retained in one place in the Liturgy (the
creed not being, in his opinion, part of the Liturgy).' ^
Bishop Phillpotts tells another story of ' a meri-
torious and exemplary deacon ' who had been ' ex-
cluded by his bishop from the priesthood ' for refus-
ing to deny the doctrine of the Real Presence in
the Eucharist, * although still allowed to be worthy
of holding a license in his diocese.' ^
Nearly a quarter of a century afterwards the two
Archbishops and all their suffragans except two
issued a Pastoral in which they lamented the aliena-
tion of the laity by the innovations introduced by
some of the clergy ; and the Public Worship Regula-
tion Act was passed in a panic, with the result which
' See A Pastoral Letter to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exeter
on the Present State of tJie Church. By Henry, Lord Bishop of
Exeter, p. 44.
' Ibid. p. 45. » Ibid. p. 48.
a2
xviii THE BEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
we all know. And now, at the close of another quarter
of a century — these ecclesiastical crises recur, by
some mysterious law, in cycles of twenty-five years
— we are told that we are in another ecclesiastical
crisis, and again the cry is that all the mischief is
caused by the innovations and disobedience of the
clergy. I am far from saying that the clergy are
free from blame. I believe that some of them have
been greatly to blame for extravagance of language
and ceremonial. But the misfortune is that in every
so-called * crisis ' it is not at the extravagances that
the bishops have struck, but at what the Preface of
the Prayer Book calls ' some established doctrine or
laudable practice of the Church of England, or indeed
of the whole Catholic Church of Christ.' I quote
from the Episcopal Pastoral of 1875 :
The refusal to obey legitimate authority is another evil
in the Church at the present time. Not only has it
frequently occurred that clergymen fail to render to epi-
scopal authority that submission which is involved in the
idea of episcopacy, but obedience has been avowedly
refused to the judicial interpretations of the law of this
Church and Eealm.
Such has been the attitude of the Anglican
Episcopate towards every religious movement from
Wesley's time to our own. And can any one now
doubt that the attitude has been as detrimental
as it has been futile ? On all those occasions a
sympathetic yet discriminating interest would have
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xix
given the. bishops control of the movement, guiding
what was beneficial in it and checking what was
foolish or mischievous. Indiscriminate denunciation
failed to check the movement and left it without
authoritative guidance. The bishops forgot, as men
are prone to forget, that reforming movements are
always marked by zeal outrunning discretion, and
sometimes exhibiting itself in follies and eccentri-
cities, which will disappear with larger knowledge
and more mature experience, leaving what was solid
and good in the movement as a precious heritage,
which would have been lost by summary suppression
of the movement. The succeeding generation then
enjoys the fruit, and forgets the strife that brought
it forth. ' A prophet is not without honour save in
his own country,' and the children of one generation
deck the tombs of the prophets whom their fathers
slew. This is true especially of reforming movements,
be they social, political, or religious. Keformers are
apt to be regarded by the mass of their contem-
poraries as lawless persons, revolutionists, troublers
of Israel. And this is quite natural for two reasons.
In the first place, the prosperous and comfortable
classes of society are precisely those who least feel
the need of reform. In the second place, reformers
must necessarily aim at making an impression, and
this they can only do by dealing in general and
sweeping statements ; statements which are true
in the abstract, but which require qualification in
XX THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
practice. If the reformer were to stop to explain
and qualify every general proposition with all the
necessary reservations which belong to it, the result
would be that he would make no progress at all.
His general principles would be lost in the multitude
of his explanations ; his hearers would be unable to
see the end for the process. From the nature of
the case, therefore, all great reforms are certain to
be more or less characterised by something of ex-
travagance. They are a recoil, and can hardly avoid
rebounding towards the opposite extreme before they
settle in the * golden mean.' Benovation implies a
wrong state of things out of which it grew — a decay,
or a weakness, or an obliquity, or an excrescence.
Whatever is amiss and requires mending necessarily
impairs the tone of the amendment itself : the
restoration still retains a connexion with the old
state, just because it is a restoration. As supplying
a defect or providing a counterpoise, it is still
correlative to the former state and must correspond
to it in some degree, even in its faultiness ; the
action and reaction, though contrary, requiring to
be equal ; too much answering to too little, the
over-prominent to the overlooked. The crooked
stick, to quote Aristotle's familiar illustration, can
only be straightened by bending it towards the
opposite extreme.
No reform that goes to the root of the evil
that it seeks to cure can escape this disadvantage.
PREFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxi
Christianity did not iscape it. Its Founder was
delivered over to prison and to death as a 'male-
factor' and *perverter of the nation,' and His
Apostles shared the fate of their Master. ' These
men/ said the Jev^s of Thessalonica of Paul and Silas,
' that have turned the world upside down are come
hither also.' What is the Sermon on the Mount, in
large part, but the assertion in an extreme and naked
form of the neglected side of great truths ? But
perhaps the aptest illustration of the point I am
insisting on is the treatment of the mutual relation
of faith and works by the Apostles Paul and James
respectively. ' Man is justified by faith and not by
works,' says the former. ' Man is justified by works
and not by faith,' says the latter. And both appeal
to the example of Abraham, by way of illustration.
Of course, we see that the opposition between the
two statements is only verbal, each being merely the
unqualified assertion oE a neglected truth. Ours is
not that epicurean deity that in delicious repose
occupies its
templa serena :
Despicere unde queas alios, passimque videre
Errare, atque viam palantes quaerere vitae.^
In a world of error the progress of truth is commonly
not in a straight line, but zigzag ; by action and
reaction ; now inclining to this extreme, and then
to that ; sometimes giving one of its sides a promi-
' Lucretius, De rerilm Nafnra, lib. ii. 7.
Xxii THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
nence, and anon another, according as the exigencies
of the strife and the needs of men require.
And thus it happens that what one generation
regards as revolutionary innovations become the
truths of the next and the truisms of that which
follow^s. The Evangehcals of the present day are
more ' EituaHstic ' in their conduct of pubHc worship
than the Tractarians were fifty years ago. The
leaders of the Tractarians, so far from disregarding
episcopal authority, were almost obsequious in their
deference to the bishops. ' A bishop's slightest word,
ex cathedra, is heavy,' says one of the ' Tracts for
the Times.' ' His judgment on a book cannot be
light.' And the practice of the writers corresponded
with their professions. For the publication of the
' Tracts ' was stopped at once on a hint from the
Bishop of Oxford to Newman. And how was this
docility rewarded by the bishops of that day ?
Newman, Keble, Pusey, Isaac Williams, Hugh James
Kose, and a galaxy of other great names were
abused in language which no bishop would now
think of flinging at the most obnoxious of extreme
Eitualists. I quote Newman :
They were called in turn 'superstitious,' 'zealots,'
'mystical,' ' malignants,' 'Oxford heretics,' 'Jesuits in
disguise,' ' tamperers with Popish idolatry,' ' agents of
Satan,' ' a synagogue of Satan,' ' snakes in the grass,'
' walking about our beloved Church, polluting the sacred
edifice, and leaving their slime about her altars ; '
PKEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxiii
' whose head,' exclaimed another bishop, ' may God
crush ! ' ^
The bishops of our day would be among the first
to deplore such language as applied to such men.
But does it not teach a valuable lesson? The
leaders of the Oxford movement showed great
respect to episcopal authority in all matters of
external observances ; but they could not control
the mass of their followers. The whole style of
ecclesiastical architecture and public worship was
revolutionised in spite of the opposition of the
bishops. And how many bishops are there now on
the bench who would wish it otherwise — who would
wish, that is, that implicit obedience had been
rendered to the bishops of fifty years ago ? It is
hardly too much to say that disobedience to the
bishops then saved the Church as an Establishment.
To-day the Church is much more popular and
influential among both the classes and the masses
than she was then : a result largely due, not only to
the hard work of the clergy, but chiefly to that
brightening of Church Services which a short-sighted
prudence would have banned. Bishop Phillpotts, of
Exeter, alone among the bishops of his day, had the
sagacity to understand the situation, and the courage
to express and act on his convictions, as the following
extracts from his ' Pastoral Letter,' already quoted,
' Difficulties Felt by Anglicans, p. 94.
xxiv THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
show. Criticising the Pastoral of the Archbishops
and their suffragans, which he refused to sign, he
asks : -
Is it, then, accordant with the true dignity — or
even very manifestly consistent with the first duty — of
bishops, to close their eyes and seal their mouths against
the daring violation of an article of the creed, and to look
at nothing but little ritual irregularities? These are
matters which, so far as they may transgress the law of
the Church, ought, in my opinion, to be dealt with by
every bishop in his own diocese ; for they cannot be dealt
with justly or effectively without looking to the specialities
of every particular case.
How much wiser this discriminating policy than
the rigid enforcement of a Procrustean uniformity
even in cases where the law is unquestionable. But
to be lax about the creed while strict about cere-
monial observances — this the bishop could not
stand : —
I deemed it little short of mockery to put forth an
united address to our clergy, praying them to submit
to us, as doubts, these small matters, many of which do
not seem to them to be doubtful at all.
5. On January 18 last a lay deputation, headed
by the Duke of Newcastle, presented a numerously
signed remonstrance to the Archbishop of Canterbury
against his Grace's decision on incense and the
enforcement of that decision by many of the bishops
in their respective dioceses. Among the speeches
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION XXV
made on that occasion was one by Lord Edward
Churchill, who protested respectfully against the
partial administration of the law by the bishops. He
pleaded ' for even-handed justice,' and complained
that while the bishops condoned irregularities and
unquestioned breaches of the law in various direc-
tions, * those who indulge in an unpopular ritual —
although they are, almost without exception, hard-
working, successful, and excellent priests — are every-
where harassed and threatened.' In his very courteous
answer to the deputation the Primate took up this
point in a manner which, I own, surprised me.
There was, he said, an important difference of prin-
ciple between the two cases. The Kitualists claimed
to supplement the directions of the Prayer Book
by usages sanctioned by the early Church. And
that he considered ' a very serious thing.'
It cannot be said that omissions of such a kind as
have been described are of the same importance, because
they do not rest upon the same principle. A man refuses
to recite the Athanasian Creed. He breaks the law, but
he does not claim when he breaks the law that he is
doing what the Church Catholic commands him to do ; he
does not claim that he has some superior authority at his
back, and the thing therefore stands on a totally different
footing.
Surely that is a questionable doctrine. One man
breaks a law knowingly and deliberately. Another
man says : ' I am not breaking any law. The Church
xxvi THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
of England has herself referred me to the early-
Church as the model and standard of doctrine and
worship. The Prayer Book is not an exhaustive
directory of public worship, and I do not think
that I am violating its letter or spirit in adopting
a usage sanctioned by the early Church.' That
man may be in error as to the fact ; and I ad-
mit, for my part, that a parish priest has no right
to pick and choose among the usages of the early
Church and introduce whatever he pleases without
consulting his bishop. Still the man who con-
scientiously believes, however erroneously, that he
is obeying the law is surely less culpable than the
man who deliberately breaks what he acknowledges
to be law. The latter exhibits a distinctly lawless
temper : the other does not.
Archbishop Temple's great predecessor in the see
of Exeter took a very different view of this matter.
The Pastoral of the archbishops and bishops on
which he was commenting contained : —
A clear and unhesitating protest against the principle
that as the Church of England is the ancient Catholic
Church settled in this land before the Reformation, and
was then reformed only by the casting away of certain
strictly defined corruptions, therefore, whatever form or
usage existed in the Church before its reformation may
now be freely introduced and observed, unless there can
be alleged against it the distinct letter of some formal
prohibition.
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxvii
The Bishop of Exeter decHned to join in this
protest. On the contrary,
To this principle (making allowance for the terms in
which it is expressed, not by those who profess, but by^
by those who condemn it) I am disposed to ascribe much
of weight and justice. Where any office in the prescribed
ritual, though not in express terms, yet in its plain spirit,
or according to the analogy of the service-book in general,
rejects an ancient usage or practice, which it may be
attempted to engraft upon it anew^ then I should think the
attempt unreasonable or culpable. But where no prohibi-
tion, expressed or implied, and no reason drawn from the
particular office, or from the general tone and nature of
our Liturgy, is opposed to the introduction of a Catholic
usage practised before Edward the Sixth's reign, I am not
prepared to say that such a thing is always improper —
much less merits the reprobation of the whole episcopal
body.
And he proceeds to argue that the Church of
England 'distinctly recognises the principle against
which my Eight Keverend Brethren out of Con-
vocation have felt it their duty to protest.' After
giving some reasons for his opinion, he adds: —
In truth, on what other principle can we justify our
own niost proper and edifying service at the consecration
of every new church ? Where is the modern canon
which enjoins or authorises it?
All this is in direct opposition not only to the
Primate's cZ^cMm in his answer to Lord Edward
Churchill, but to the whole doctrine of the inter-
XXVlll THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
pretation of our formularies which the Archbishops
have expounded in their Opinions on incense and
reservation. Even so moderate a Churchman as
the late Charles Kingsley, in a letter written to me
and published in his Life, attributed much of the
unbelief of the day to ' the invincible ignorance of
modern Puritanism.' He ' believed that the English
mind (and probably the Scotch) was ripe ' for a larger
faith. He concluded : —
If we keep cautiously within the limits permitted by
truly Catholic antiquity, we shall set in motion a mighty
engine for the Church's help in her need. I, as a student
of public opinion, have no doubt whatsoever of this.
But I must return to Bishop Phillpotts and his
vindication of the right of the clergy to appeal to
Catholic antiquity as the model of their worship,
subject to two conditions : first, that they introduced
no usage which was clearly opposed to the Prayer
Book ; secondly, that they should carry their con-
gregations with them : —
But although I thus declined to subscribe the Episcopal
Address, and while I fully admit the right of the clergy
to practise all that is not forbidden by the law of the
Church, while, too, I would applaud the exercise of
that right to the utmost, whensoever their own people
agree with them in its exercise, I yet am bound to warn
them of the rashness of exercising it against the liking and
without the concurrence of their people. . . . Yet there is
one consideration which must not be omitted. It may
])e truly urged that, the common prayer of the faithful
PBEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxix
being not primarily nor chiefly designed to edify man, but
to worship God, and God having been pleased to reveal to
us something respecting the w^orship of Him in heaven —
that it is formal, ceremonial, aye and musical, choral,
antiphonal — divine worship upon earth ought to be a
representation, after our poor measure, of what we read of
the worship of the heavenly hosts. It is easy, therefore,
to conceive a state of feelings in a parish which ought not
to regulate the service of the Church ; which ought not to
be allowed to prescribe what is sometimes called the plain-
ness and simplicity of Protestant worship. . . . Neither
am I disposed to recommend any consideration of popular
feeling beyond the particular congregation intrusted to the
minister's charge. If that congregation prefers a more
ornate or elaborate service than many or all the parishes
around it, I should consider it an invasion of Christian and
even of civil liberty to control the services of any Church
at the bidding of those who do not belong to it.
And the poor especially ought to be considered : —
When the congregation consists mainly of the poorest
orders there we commonly observe a great love of a
majestic and even elaborate service. The ornaments of
their church ; the storied glass ; the painted and, it may
be, gilded walls ; the table of the Lord, elevated above the
rest, and decked with sober yet costly furniture ; the pealing
organ ; the chanted Psalms ; the surpliced choristers ; the
solemnity of the whole ritual— gladdens while it elevates
their minds ; they recognise in it their own high privilege as
Christians, and rejoice to find themselves equal participants
with their richest neighbours in the homage thus paid to
the common Lord and Father of all. In truth, when we
consider the little which the poor man has to delight his
heart and touch his imagination in his own squalid home,
XXX THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
we ought to rejoice that he can find enjoyment in the
House of Prayer, his Father's House. For this reason, few
occurrences have affected me more than the lamentations of
the poor worshippers in one of the districts of the Metro-
poHs, when they saw, or thought they saw, at the dictation
of a riotous and lawless mob, the approaching surrender of
the ritual which they loved, and which was their weekly
— to many among them the daily — solace of that poverty
to which the providence of God had corjsigned them.
Incidents such as this cannot be separated from the general
character of the proceedings of the past winter. The
rioters at S. Barnabas's were stimulated to their violence
by the words and deeds of men of a far higher order than
their own.^
6. No one is less of a Eomaniser than I am, as
anyone vs^ho reads this volume w^ill admit. Deplorable
as I regard the divisions of Christendom ; earnestly
as I desire the fulfilment of our Lord's dying prayer ;
sincerely as I appreciate the w^ork done by the
Roman Church and admire the saints which she has
reared ; I am sorrowfully forced to believe that the
reunion of Christendom will not come through her.
It is not reunion she seeks, but unconditional
submission. I must go even further, and avow my
honest conviction that as long as the Vatican decrees
remain unrepealed reunion with the Church of
Rome, if possible, would be sinful. Those decrees
have destroyed the original constitution of the Church
and erected an irresponsible despotism on its ruins.
^ A Pastoral Letter. By Henry, Lord Bishop of Exeter,
pp. 84-88.
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxxi
And this revolution it has sought to justify by a
portentous falsification of history. Till all this has
been repealed — explained it cannot be — the reunion
of Christendom through Eome is out of the question.
It was not out of the question before the Vatican
Council, although the gradually increasing influence
of the Jesuits made it less and less probable. In
the end of last century and the beginning of this
ecclesiastics of eminence in both Communions
beheved in the possibility of such a union. In the
dawn of this century Barrington, the Prince Bishop
of Durham, used the following language in an
address to his clergy : —
There appear to me to be in the present circumstances
of Europe better grounds of hope for a successful issue to
a dispassionate investigation of the differences which
separate the two Churches of England and of Eome than
at any former period. With this view, and these
hopes, I continue to exert my humble efforts in this
great cause of charity and truth. ... If, I say, by per-
severing in a spirit of truth and charity, we could bring
the Eoman Catholics to see these most important subjects
in the same light that the Catholics of the Church of
England do, a very auspicious opening would be made
of Catholic Union, ^ which formerly engaged the talents
and anxious wishes of the best and ablest members of both
Communions.
And what public duty of greater magnitude can pre-
sent itself to us than the restoration of peace and union to
the Church by the reconciliation of two such large portions
' The capitals are not mine.
' b
xxxii THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of it as the Churches of England and Eome? What
undertaking of more importance and higher interest can
employ the piety and learning of the ministers of Christ than
the endeavour to accomplish this truly Christian work? . . .
If I should live to see the foundation for such union well
laid and happily begun ; if Providence should but indulge
me with even a dying prospect of that enlargement of the
Messiah's kingdom which we have reason to hope is not
very remote, with what consolation and joy would it illu-
minate the last hours of a long life. With what heartfelt
pleasure should I use the rapturous language of good old
Simeon : * Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in
peace.' May that Saviour who has left us, in the record
of His Gospel, His own anxious prayer for the union of
His disciples, promote and prosper the blessed work of
Catholic Union.
I quote this from the Introduction to a somewhat
remarkable book published in the beginning of this
century by a pious Roman Catholic priest, the Rev.
Peter Gandolphy : ' An Exposition of Liturgy, or a
Book of Common Prayers and Administration of
Sacraments, with other Rites and Ceremonies of
the Church, for the Use of all Christians in the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.'
It is modelled on our Prayer Book almost exactly
as far as the office of the Mass, which is all in
English, and much simplified and curtailed. There
are offices for Baptism, Matrimony, Churching
of Women, and Communion of the Sick. There
are also Articles of Religion, exceeding our Thirty-
nine by four. But what is most remarkable is that
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxxiii
the book, together with another by the same author,
received the formal approbation of the Holy See in
a document prefixed to the volume, and ending as
follows : —
Sed cum Adversarii ejusdem Auctoris ita machinatio-
nibus (opera eorumdem agentis in urbe) plures circum-
venerint, ac terrefecerint, ut aut sileant, aut veritatem
dicere vereantur, dum de hac re requiruntur ; has
Litteras jussu Erai. P. Magistri S. Palatii exaratas mea
manu subscripsi, solitoque mei muneris sigillo com-
munivi ; indubitatam fidem omnibus faciens, quod duplex
opus Eev. Dni. Petri Gandolphi amplam ab Apostolica
Sede Approbationem ^ jure, meritoque obtinuerit.
Datum Eomae ex Collegio Poenitentiariorum ad
S. Petrum Die 13 Novembris, anno 1816.
Then follow the seal and the formal signatures.
Another spirit has invaded and possessed the
Church of Eome since then, and those who pray for
the reunion of Christendom must look elsewhere for
encouragement and hope. And there is much to
encourage. Presbyterian Scotland seems to have
shaken off its prejudice against episcopacy, and
to be drawing nearer the Church of England in the
matter of public worship ; and both in Scotland
and in England the denominations which hold the
creed of Christendom have been moving towards
each other with a view to union. The Churches
of the East and of Eussia, on the other hand, have
been for some years past manifesting an increasing
' The capitals are in the original.
b2
xxxiv THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
friendliness towards the Church of England ; and
interchanges of courtesy and amity and good offices
have taken place between the see of Canterbury and
the primatial sees of Constantinople and Eussia.
The Bishop of London had his proper place assigned
to him at the coronation of the Tsar, and his mission
was reciprocated by that of the Archbishop of
Finland at the Diamond Jubilee of our Queen. The
subsequent visit of the Archbishop of York to Eussia
produced a most favourable impression in that
country — an impression greatly strengthened by the
masterly and dignified ' Answer ' of the two Arch-
bishops to the Pope's Bull against Anglican Orders.
The Lambeth Opinions on Incense and Eeserva-
tion have, I fear, gone far to destroy these happy
auguries. The condemned usages are not obnoxious
to the Protestant feeling of this country. The one
is too Scriptural to be condemned on the ground
of Popery, and the other commends itself, when
properly explained, to the practical common sense
of the average man. If the Archbishops had
claimed for the episcopate the right of regulating
both usages they would, I believe, have given
general satisfaction. As it is, they have done
nothing to conciliate the Intransigeants of the
Church Association, they have distressed and per-
turbed a large body of loyal Church people, and
they have played the game of Eome by declaring war
upon usages which have always prevailed throughout
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxxv
Eastern Christendom. The Eoman authorities in this
country, who were getting alarmed at the reci-
procal courtesies between the Anglican and Oriental
Churches, have not been slow to use against us the
effective w^eapon with which the Archbishops have
supplied them. Our argumentative position against
Kome rests on the same basis as that of the
Churches of the East. When Pio Nono invited
the Oriental bishops to the Vatican Council they
replied that Kome must first repudiate the additions
which she had made to the creed, and they appealed
to the verdict of history, preferring ' the historical
method ' to Papal decrees as the criterion of truth.
Such has been the position taken up by all our
great divines since the Reformation. The Lambeth
Opinions have abandoned that ground by assum-
ing that the I Church of England made a new start
at the Reformation, having bound herself by an
inflexible Act of Parliament to do nothing ' other or
otherwise,' no matter what the circumstances or
emergency, than is prescribed in black and white
in the Book of Common Prayer.
That assumption completely undermines our posi-
tion in the controversy with Eome, and that is one of
my main objections to the Lambeth Opinions. It is
to my mind a matter of the most vital importance
to the Church that those Opinions should not be
enforced. No more serious blow, if any so serious,
has been struck at the historical position of the
*b3
xxxvi THE REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Church of England since the Beformation ; and on
her historical position everything depends. Fortu-
nately, however, they are opinions only, having
neither legal nor synodical authority. They bind
the Church in no v^ay, but they do much harm
meanwhile. Already they have done much to help
forward the cause of disestablishment.
7. In a conversation which I had with Mr. Glad-
stone some years ago on that subject he said : ' To
disestablish the Church of England would be a
gigantic operation, and I don't envy the man who
undertakes it. If it should ever come, it is more
likely to be by revolt from within than by assault
from without.' The revolt has begun, and I am
persuaded that if there is any attempt to suppress,
by legislation or otherwise, the party which has
been aggrieved by the Lambeth Opinions — a party
much larger than that of the extreme Ritualists —
the question of disestablishment will at once be
brought within the range of practical politics. This
is much more a lay than a clerical question, and a
large section of the most loyal and devoted lay
members of the Church of England, at the next
General Election, will support a Liberationist can-
didate, in preference to a candidate, be he who
he may, who pledges himself to any kind of legis-
lation which would have the effect of narrowing
the boundaries of the Church of England. Poli-
ticians are always making mistakes in this matter.
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxxvii
They mistake the loud noise of organised chques
for the voice of the nation. ' Because half-a-dozen
grasshoppers under a fern make the field ring
with their importunate chink, while thousands
of great cattle, reposed beneath the shadow of
the British oak, chew the cud and are silent,
pray do not imagine that those who make the
noise are the only inhabitants of the field, or that
of course they are many in number.' ^ Lord John
Eussell's Durham Letter was an electioneering fiasco.
Lord Beaconsfield's patronage of the Public Worship
Regulation Bill, which he described as a Bill to
* put down Ritualism,' contributed in no small
degree to the Conservative debacle of 1880.
The explanation is simple. The extreme Puritan
' party, represented by the Church Association and the
Liverpool Laymen's League, are not a formidable
electioneering force. The candidate who accepts
their pledge will have arrayed against him the whole
of the Ritualists, and probably the majority of the
High Church party in addition. There is, moreover,
always a considerable body of the electorate who do
not ordinarily take an active part in politics. But
they hate persecution ; they hate bigotry ; they
consider self-denying lives and hard work among the
poor of more consequence than the occasional fumes
of incense or the Communion of the sick by a part of
the Sacrament reserved from the public administra-
> Burke, Works, iv. 220.
xxxvni THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
tion. These will vote again, as they did in 1880,
against the candidate who gives a pledge in favour
of a persecuting policy. Lastly, there is the working
man. That distinguished publicist, the late Mr.
W. R. Greg, declared, a quarter of a century ago,
that the clergy who had most influence with the
working classes were the Eitualists. That is much
more the case now. The working man may be
indifferent to religion himself, but he is quick to
recognise and appreciate the self-denying labours of
clergy who live among the poor. Mr. Kensit and
his ' preachers ' have not ventured to invade any
church in a working-class parish. The working
man, moreover, is exceedingly jealous of the intrusion
of religion into secular politics. He has ideals and
aspirations of his own, and the last thing he wishes
is the waste (as he thinks it) of the time of Parlia-
ment on questions which do not touch his social life.
Mr. Gladstone was known to be a High Churchman.
He opposed the Public Worship Regulation Bill,
ruining thereby, as Lord Beaconsfield believed, his
political future. The truth is, I believe, that his
conduct on that and other occasions did not lose his
party a single seat.
8. We hear much of ' the crisis in the Church.'
There is no crisis if only those in authority will deal
patiently and tactfully with controversies which are
but ripples on the surface of the Church's life, and
are, after all, far preferable to the unwholesome
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xxxix
stagnation which has in the past done so much
harm. At the bottom of this controversy there are two
antagonistic theories of reHgious worship. Accord-
ing to one theory, God in the Psalmist's language
should be worshipped 'in the beauty of holiness.'
He demands the homage of the whole man, body,
soul, and spirit. He delights in splendour of service
when it is the offering of a pure love and a genuine
devotion. The other theory would banish art
altogether from the sanctuary. Its ideal of worship
is really a consecration of the principle of ugliness to
the service of Almighty God. Let anyone who doubts
this read the literature of Puritanism in this country
and in New England when it got the upper hand.
In the Journal of William Dowsing, Parliamentary
Visitor appointed under a warrant for * demolish-
ing the Superstitious Pictures and Ornaments of
churches ' within the county of Suffolk alone, we have
a description of the havoc made by those fanatical
iconoclasts. Painted windows, crosses, crucifixes,
holy water vessels, Ora pro nobis inscriptions, altars,
organs, brasses in floors and walls, frescoes, paintings,
candlesticks, crosses even on towers and pinnacles
of churches — all were ruthlessly destroyed, and all
chancels were lowered to the level of the nave.
Similar havoc went on in other counties. The fury
with which the Sign of Redemption was regarded
was ludicrous. All doors with bars that accidentally
formed the sign of the cross had to be taken down.
xl THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and tailors were forbidden to sit cross-legged.
Mothers were sent to prison for kissing their babies
on Sunday. The theatres were all closed, and
Shakespeare and the Book of Common Praj^er were
both put on the Index of forbidden books which it
was a legal offence to possess. * Classes ' were
appointed with inquisitorial powers to pry into pri-
vate life and inflict arbitrary punishments. Milton
groaned under the tyranny, and gave vent to his
feelings in a line which has been constantly mis-
applied. He hoped, but in vain, that Parliament
would come to the rescue : — -
But we do hope to find out all your tricks,
Your plots and packing, worse than those of Trent,
That so the Parliament
May, with their wholesome and preventive shears,
Clip your phylacteries, though bank your ears.
And succour our just fears,
"When they shall read this clearly in your charge.
New j^'i'dshyter is but old priest writ large. ^
It is hardly too much to say that the Puritan
regime went far to destroy the aesthetic sense of the
English nation. Not only was public worship made
dull and dreary, but ugliness reigned over our domestic
architecture and social life. Sir Walter Scott was
the first to break the spell of that worship of the
ugly, and the reaction which he started has embraced
' Sonnet, On the Netv Forces of Conscience under the Long Parlia-
vie7it. The italics are in the original.
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xli
all denominations and all departments of life. The
Ritualistic movement is one of its offsprings, and it
will in due time, like all enthusiastic movements,
shed its follies and extravagances and be assimilated
with advantage into the organism of the Church.
Ten years hence incense and the primitive reserva-
tion of the Sacrament for the Communion of the sick
will be deemed as harmless as the use of the surplice
in preaching is now. All that is needed is patience
and common sense. The bishops have far more in-
fluence than they imagine. It is their business to
lead in matters of this sort, and the people always
appreciate leaders who will lead. I have had some
experience in addressing working men, and my ex-
perience tells me that the working man is a lover of
justice and fair play. Let him be told, as he
is told so seldom, that certain things, which are
denounced, are in the Prayer Book, and whatever he
may think of them — which commonly is very little
— his sense of fair play will revolt against the perse-
cution of those who practise them. Several of the
bishops, conspicuously the Bishop of London, who
have dealt with their clergy as fathers-in-God, and
have not been afraid to deal with each case on its
merits instead of trying to enforce a most question-
able exposition of the law, have had very little
difficulty.
In criticising Professor Collins's argument that
xlii THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
' fuoco ' was commonly used for incense in Italian, I
forgot one thing of which the Professor's informant
may have been thinking. When the paschal candle
was lit on Holy Saturday five grains of blessed incense
were fixed in it in memory of the wounds of Christ
and the precious spices with which He was anointed
in the tomb. But there can be no doubt that
the Venetian Ambassador's * fuoco ' referred to the
' Beam-light,' the new fire struck from the flint on
Easter Eve.
In my answer to Professor Maitland I have
dealt with the only adverse criticism which deserves
any notice.
A pamphlet has been sent to me by a gentleman
of the name of Tomlinson, accusing me of a variety
of offences. The tone of the pamphlet might well
excuse me for declining to notice the criticism of
such a writer. But, in truth, there is nothing
in the pamphlet to answer. A few unimportant
inaccuracies in . details had been noticed by myself
and by friends. But the fact is that Mr. Tomlin-
son is an impossible controversialist. He does not
understand either his own case or his opponent's.
He is a gentleman with a craze, to which he
has given the name of * the Fraud Kubric' He
thinks that the Ornaments Kubric is a ' fraud '
foisted into the Prayer Book without any authority.
Even if that were true — and it happens to be the
reverse of the truth — of the Elizabethan Kubric,
PEEFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION xliii
Mr. Tomlinson's theory would be a sheer irrelevancy,
for our present Ornaments Kubric is unquestionably
authorised by the Uniformity Act of 1662. But
Acts of Parliament are futile against a monomania,
and Mr. Tomlinson sticks to his 'Fraud Eubric'
His craze has not even the equivocal merit- of
originality. It was started in the year 1883 by an
excellent layman of some learning — Mr. Wheatley
Balme. I reviewed his book in a weekly journal,
and, I believe, convinced him of his error. Some
time afterwards Mr. Tomlinson took up the dis-
carded theory, trotted it out as a wonderful
discovery of his own, and has been riding his
hobby against all comers ever since. His first
tilt was against Archbishop Benson in the Lincoln
case, although I believe the Archbishop never
knew it. According to him the Act of Uniformity
of 1559, the Act of Uniformity of 1662, Archbishop
Benson's Lincoln Judgment, and all the decisions of
the Judicial Committee on questions of Ritual are
monuments of ignorance and abettors of a fraud
practised by Queen Elizabeth. I am thus a sinner
in good company. Putting aside a few superficial
inaccuracies almost inevitable in a book written in
much haste, I have not been convicted of any serious
error, and I have every reason to be satisfied with
the verdict of the critics, not only in this country,
but in the United States and in our Colonies as
well.
xliv THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
I have omitted in this edition the long Introduc-
tory Letter to Sir William Harcourt, and I take this
opportunity of thanking him for the courtesy and
friendliness which he has shown to me in this contro-
versy. I have also, by the urgent desire of many,
reduced the price of the volume from 7s. 6d. to 35. 6d.,
while adding some 250 pages of fresh matter.
MALCOLM MacCOLL.
Jtdy 1900.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGK
Preface . v-xliv
I. The Presence of Christ in the Eucharist . 1
II. The Eucharistic Sacrifice 39
III. The Eeformation : its Causes and Eesults . 80
IV. The Testimony of Anglican Divines . . . 114
V. Propinquity of the Spiritual World . . 177
VI. Sacerdotalism 193
VII. Auricular Confession 217
VIII. The Eeformation and Confession . . . 265
IX. The Intermediate State 296
X. Ecclesiastical Courts and the Ornaments
EuBRic 331
XI. Anglican and Eoman Orders .... 460
XII. The Prisoner of the Vatican : a Chapter of
Secret History 520
XIII. The Lambeth Decisions 553
XIV. An Answer to Professor Maitland . . . 709
Index 763
THE
REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
CHAPTER
THE PEESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE EUCHARIST
The Primate has in his recent Charge given us,
with admirable clearness, an exposition of the
various aspects of the doctrine of the Eucharist
which, in his opinion, have been held at different
times in Eastern and Western Christendom.
I. There is, first, the Zwinglian view, according
to which ' the Sacrament, in fact, differs from prayer
in degree, but not in kind.' His Grace admits that
this view * softens, purifies, elevates, kindles ; ' but
it is only as a memory of a past sacred event,
kindling devotion as a Trafalgar or Waterloo
banquet may kindle patriotism. This view, excel-
lent as far as it goes, he rejects as inadequate.
II. There is, next, the doctrine of a * mysterious
gift, uniting us to Christ in a special manner and
degree, giving new power, new cleansing, new life,
B
2 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and even new insight into spiritual things, leavening
the v^hole being with a heavenly infection. This
gift is something far beyond the natural working of
our own minds.' And ' this mysterious gift,' which
theologians call the res sacrame7iti, results from the
consecration of the bread and wine in the way
ordained by the Church. It is, therefore, indepen-
dent of the communicant.
Between the Zwinghan doctrine and this ' there
can be no question at all that the Church holds the
latter,' in common with * the early Christians ' uni-
versally, and with ' the Greek and other Churches
in the East ' to-day, as well as with * the Eomans
and the Lutherans.'
III. But now comes a subdivision of opinion.
The Boman Church defines the manner of the
Presence by the word Transubstantiation, which
the Church of England rejects as going beyond our
Lord's revelation, and ' overthiowing the nature of
a sacrament ' in addition. Others, like Hooker,
* maintain that the Eeal Presence should not be
looked for in the consecrated elements, but in the
receivers.' ' The Church certainly teaches Hooker's
doctrine,' which is indeed inseparable from belief in
a Beal Presence. Yet Hooker's doctrine does not
exhaust the Church's teaching, which implies ' the
further doctrine that there is a Beal Presence in
some way attached to the elements at the time of
consecration and before the reception.'
If there be no Eeal Presence until the reception, it
may be asked what is the effect of consecration, and may
PRESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE EUCHARIST 3
not the consecration be omitted ? The answer is obvious.
On the theory that the Real Presence is bestowed in the
reception and not before, then the effect of the prayer of
consecration is to attach to the elements, not a presence,
but a promise. The bread has been blessed according to
our Lord's command, and the Lord's promise is that when
the communicant partakes of the bread, so blessed, he
shall be a partaker of the Lord's Body.
But this does not, even on the admission of the
Judicial Committee in the Bennett case, ' exclude
the other opinion, namely, that in some mysterious
way there is a Presence attached to the elements
from the moment of their consecration.' ' It is
difficult,' the Primate thinks, * if not impossible,
really to distinguish between this doctrine and the
Lutheran doctrine commonly called Consubstantia-
tion, and it is important that it should be clearly
understood that it is not unlawful to hold it and to
teach it within the Church of England.'
That is, I believe, an accurate epitome of what
the Archbishop of Canterbury has laid down as the
doctrine of the Real Presence sanctioned by the
Church of England. It has evoked a good deal of
criticism, more particularly in regard to the doctrine
of Hooker and that of Consubstantiation. On these
two points T shall have something to say presently.
But there i*^ rj) much misconception on the general
subject that ^.L may be useful to explain, as far as
possible, what the doctrine of the Eeal Presence
connotes in the min:ls of those who hold it, without
any attempt or desire to define the mode of the
B 2
4 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Presence. My own belief, based on considerable
experience, is that the controversy is largely a
verbal one, some denying what others do not affirm.
The truth is that human language is totally in-
adequate to express the verities of the spiritual
world. It is always more or less symbolical, and
never comes up to the reality. It is the clothing,
not the skin, of thought, and never, even at its best,
fits its contents accurately. This is true of ordinary
ideas. But all that relates to the being and mode
of working of the infinite Creator must necessarily
be beyond the compass of mundane speech. St. Paul
tells us that when he was * snatched up into Para-
dise ' in some mysterious way above his comprehen-
sion he 'heard unutterable utterances, which it is
impossible for man to put into speech ' {dpprjra
pTjfjbara, a ovk e^ov dvOpooira) XdXrjo-at). Who can
doubt that the Nicene Creed itself, with all the
skilled precision bestowed on its terminology by the
united experts of Christendom in the most supple
and plastic of languages, gives but a most imperfect
expression to the truths which it enshrines ? And
thus it sometimes happens that what seem to be
contradictory statements are in fact only different
aspects of the same truth. Hooker's language
about the Eucharist is, I believe, a case in point.
His meaning is by no means exhausted by the oft-
quoted sentence : —
The real presence of Christ's most blessed Body and
Blood is not therefore to be sought for in the Sacrament,
but in the worthy receiver of the Sacrament.
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 5
An isolated quotation may bear a very different
meaning when restored to its context. Let me
therefore quote what precedes and follows this
famous passage in Hooker :—
The bread and cup are His Body and Blood because
they are causes instrumental upon the receipt whereof
the participation of His Body and Blood ensueth. For
that which produceth any certain effect is not vainly nor
improperly said to be that very effect whereunto it
tendeth. Every cause is in the effect which groweth
from it. Our souls and bodies, quickened to eternal life,
arc effects the cause whereof is the Person of Christ.
His Body and Blood are the true wellspring out of which
it floweth. So that His Body and Blood are in that very
subject whereunto they minister life, not only by effect or
operation, even as the influence of the heavens is in
plants, beasts, men, and in every thing which they
quicken, but also by a far more Divine and mystical kind
of union, which maketh us one with Him even as He and
the Father are one.
Then follows the passage in dispute, which
Hooker proceeds to explain and amplify. And what
he is plainly anxious to show is that the Sacraments
have in themselves no inherent virtue ; that they
were ordained for a purpose, and that they have no
efficacy beyond or apart from that purpose ; that the
Eucharist was ordained in , order to incorporate us
into Christ, and that we have no right to look for
Christ's presence in the Sacrament except in connec-
tion with that purpose.
The fruit of the Eucharist is the participation of the
Body and Blood of Christ. There is no sentence of Holy
E THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Scripture which saith that we cannot by this Sacrament
be made partakers of His Body and Blood except they be
first contained in the Sacrament, or the Sacrament con-
verted into them. * This is My Body ' and * This is My
Blood,' being words of promise, sith we all agree that by the
Sacrament Christ doth really and truly in us perform His
promise, why do we vainly trouble ourselves with so
fierce contentions whether by Consubstantiation or else
by Transubstantiation the Sacrament itself be first
possessed with Christ, or no ? A thing which no way
can either further or hinder us howsoever it stand,
because our participation of Christ in this Sacrament
dependeth on the co-operation of His omnipotent power,
which maketh it His Body and Blood to us, whether
with change or without alteration of the element, such as
they imagine, we need not greatly to care nor inquire.
Take therefore that wherein all agree, and then
consider by itself what cause why the rest in question
should not rather be left as superfluous than urged
as necessary. It is on all sides plainly confessed, first,
that this Sacrament is a true and real participation of
Christ, who thereby imparteth Himself, even His whole
entire Person as a mystical Head, unto every soul that
receiveth Him ; and that every such receiver doth thereby
incorporate or unite himself unto Christ as a mystical
member of Him, yea, of them also whom He ac-
knowledgeth to be His own ; secondly, that to whom the
Person of Christ is thus communicated, to them He giveth
by the same Sacrament His Holy Spirit to sanctify them
as it sanctifieth IJim which is their Head ; thirdly, that
what merit, force, or virtue soever there is in His
sacrificed Body and Blood, we freely, fully, and wholly
have it by this Sacrament; fourthly, that the effect
thereof in us is a real transmutation of our souls and
bodies from sin to righteousness, from death and corrup-
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 7
tion to immortality and life ; fifthly, that because the
Sacrament, being of itself but a corruptible and earthly
creation, must needs be thought an unlikely instrument
to work so admirable effects in man, we are therefore to
rest ourselves altogether upon the strength of His
glorious power, who is able and will bring to pass that
the bread and cup which He giveth us shall be truly the
thing He promiseth.
It seemeth, therefore, much amiss that against them
whom they term Sacramentarians so many invective
discourses are made, all running upon two points : that
the Eucharist is not a bare sign or figure only ; and that
the efficacy of His Body and Blood is npt all we receive
in this Sacrament. For no man, having read these books
and writings which are thus traduced, can be ignorant
that both these assertions they plainly confess to be
most true. They do not so interpret the words of Christ
as if the name of His Body did import but the figure of
His Body, and to be was only to signify His Blood.
They grant that these holy mysteries, received in due
manner, do instrumentally both make us partakers of the
grace of that Body and Blood which were given for the
life of the world, and, besides, also imports into us in true
and real though mystical manner, the very Person of our
Lord Himself, whole, perfect, and entire, as hath been
showed.^
This quotation gives a complexion, different from
the common interpretation, to the passage so often
quoted from Hooker. He rejects peremptorily the
Zwinglian view of 'a bare sign or figure only,' and
the Calvinistic view of a presence merely of ' efficacy.*
He also rejects as presumptuous and untenable such
' Bh. V. Ixvii. 5-8.
8 THE EEFORMAl'ION SETTLEMENT?
definitions as Transubstantiation and Consubstantia-
tion, which, however, he is in his charity wiUing to
leave in the category of philosophical opinions, pro-
vided they are not made articles of faith or obtruded
into the sphere of dogmatic theology. But while
rejecting any definition of the manner of Christ's pre-
sence in the Eucharist, he insists emphatically on the
objective reality of the presence ; the presence, that
is, of ' the very Person of our Lord Himself, whole,
perfect, and entire,' and ' imparted unto every soul
that receiveth Him ' instrumentally through the
Sacrament. But he is jealous of any attempt to
localise the heavenly gift or subject it to temporal
conditions. Avoid, he says in effect, curious ques-
tions as to time and place. Let it suffice for you
to know that if you receive the Sacrament duly
prepared, you receive not a bare sign or figure, and
not an efficacious influence only, but Christ Him-
self in the fulness of His theanthropic Presence.
This doctrine Hooker unfolds elsewhere as fol-
lows : —
It is too cold an interpretation whereby some men
expound our being in Christ to import nothing else but
only that the self-same nature, which maketh us to be
men, is in Him, and maketh Him man as we are. For
what man in the world is there which hath not so far
forth communion with Jesus Christ ? It is not this that
can sustain the weight of such sentences as speak of the
mystery of our coherence with Jesus Christ (John xiv.
19 ; Ephes. v. 23). The Church is in Christ as Eve was
in Adam. Yea, by grace we are every one of us in Christ
and in His Church, as by nature we are in those our
I>BESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHABIST 9
first parents. God made Eve of the rib of Adam. And His
Church He frameth out of the very flesh, the very v^rounded
and bleeding side of the Son of Man. His Body crucified
and His blood shed for the life of the world are the true
elements of that heavenly being, which maketh us such
as Himself is of whom we come. For which cause the
words of Adam may be fitly words of Christ concerning
His Church : * flesh of my flesh, and bone of my bones,' a
true native extract of mine own body. So that in Him, even
according to His Manhood, we, according to our heavenly
being, are as branches in that root out of which they grow.
To all things He is life, and to men light, as the Son
of God : to the Church both life and light eternal by
being made the Son of Man for us, and by being in us a
Saviour, whether we respect Him as God or as Man.
Adam is in us as an original cause of our nature, and of
that corruption of nature which causeth death ; Christ as
the cause of original restoration to life. The person of
Adam is not in us, but his nature and the corruption of
his nature derived into all men by propagation. Christ,
having Adam's nature as we have, but incorrupt, deriveth
not nature but incorruption, and that immediately from
His Person, into all that belong unto Him. As therefore
we are really partakers of the body of sin and death
received from Adam, so except we be truly partakers of
Christ, and as really possessed of His Spirit, all we speak
of eternal life is but a dream.
These things St. Cyril duly considering, reproveth
their speeches which taught that only the Deity of Christ
is the vine whereupon we by faith do depend as branches,
and that neither His Flesh nor our bodies are comprised in
this resemblance. For doth any man doubt but that even
from the Flesh of Christ our very bodies do receive that
life which shall make them glorious at the latter day, and
for which they are already accounted parts of His blessed
10 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Body ? Oui corruptible bodies could never live the life
they shall live, were it not that here they are joined with
His Body which is incorruptible, and that His is in ours as
a cause of immortality; a cause by removing through the
death and merit of His own Flesh that which hindered the
life of ours. Christ is therefore both as God and as Man
that true Vine whereof we both spiritually and corporeally
are branches.
Hooker does not hesitate to say that, in virtue ot
this sacramental union with Christ, * God hath deified
our nature.' ^
These grand passages show what a lofty view
Hooker took of the sacramental system, a view as far
removed from that of those who would regard the
Sacraments as bare figures and symbols as of those
who would fall into the gross error of the people of
Capernaum and ask, 'How can this Man give us
His flesh to eat ? '
We have in Keble's ' Christian Year ' an exact
parallel to the passage so often quoted to prove that
Hooker believed in a mere subjective presence of
Christ in the Eucharist. In his poem on * Gun-
powder Treason ' Keble writes : —
O come to our Communion Feast :
There present in the heart.
Not in the hands, th' eternal Priest
Will His true Self impart.
Take these words by themselves, and they are
a more explicit denial of an objective presence of
» Bk. V. liv. 5 ; Ivi. 7, 9.
PEESENCE OF CHEISl IN THE EUCHAEIST 11
Christ in the Eucharist than Hooker's words ; yet we
know that no one taught mojre emphatically than
Kebledid the doctrine of an objective presence. His
treatise * On Eucharistical Adoration ' is based on
that belief. For instance, the dispute about Eucharis-
tical adoration, he says, ' raises evidently the whole
question of that which is denominated " the real
objective presence " of Jesus Christ in the holy
Eucharist.' And then he proceeds to argue in favour
of that doctrine. In the course of his argument he
naturally discusses the doctrine of Hooker, of whose
works his own edition is the standard one, and con-
eludes : * Therefore let no person apprehend that in
teaching and magnifying the Eucharistic sacrifice he
is really contradicting this great authority ; any more
than, to name a kindred point, he need think him-
self departing in principle from Hooker's mind by
maintaining the Eeal objective Presence after conse-
cration.' ' I shall presently endeavour to explain the
sense in .which the Church, as I understand the
matter, wishes her children to believe in the doctrines
of the Real Presence and Eucharistic Sacrifice — a
sense very different from the misconceptions of
popular Protestantism. The point which I am now
pressing is that the ordinary interpretation of the
classical passage on the Real Presence in Hooker is
not consistent with his teaching as a whole, which
plainly insists on a Presence independent of the faith
of the recipient. What he was solicitous about was
that people should not think that the Eucharistic
* On Eiicharistical Adoration^ pp. 57, 71.
1^ THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Presence was inherent in the consecrated elements as
a quality proper to them. He insists therefore that,
although the Sacrament is by Divine appointment
the cause instrumental for putting us in communica-
tion with our Incarnate Lord, yet the Presence must
be sought in the recipient and not in the conduit
through which the gift passes. Reception of the gift
is conditional on reception of the Sacrament where
that is possible, just as the cure of Naaman's leprosy
was contingent on his dipping seven times in Jordan ;
but in each case the efhcient cause must be sought
in the will of God. He can attach what condition
He pleases to the bestowal of His gifts, and we have
no right to expect them if we wilfully neglect the
conditions; but the gifts themselves exist quite
independently of our views about them or our
attitude towards them. The Eucharistic Presence
is quite independent of the faith of the recipient.
Faith creates nothing. Its province is not to create
but to receive a gift external to it and offered to it.
Faith is sometimes compared to an eye. But the
eye does not create the light. It receives it and
transmits it to the brain and intellect. But a man
may injure his eyes, so that they cease to be accurate
conductors to the soul. The vision is thus blurred
and distorted. Or he may destroy his eyes altogether,
and then the whole realm of light, with all its en-
trancing visions, is shut out from the soul. But the
hght is there all the same. It embraces the blind
man in its radiance, but can find no avenue into his
soul, since he has destroyed his organs of vision.
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 13
The light is there, but no longer for him. Yet it
impinges on his blind eyes. It touches the optic
nerves. But there is no response, for the organ of
apprehension is gone. And this is true of all our
senses ; the function of each is to receive an impres-
sion, an impact from an external object charged v^ith
its appropriate virtue. And philosophers may discuss,
and have discussed, whether the gift is in the external
object or in the recipient of the impact ; v^hether the
sweetness is in the sugar or in the palate ; whether
the beauty is in the sunset or in the percipient
mind. The sunset prints the same image on the eye
of the brute as on the human eye ; but there is no
corresponding res sacramentiy if I may so express
myself. For indeed Nature is a sacrament, as the
old Fathers loved to think ; * an outward and visible
sign of an inward and spiritual ' Presence energising
through all her operations and phenomena.
But however philosophers may dispute, we all
agree that our bodily senses are our organs of com-
munication with external facts, and that our sensa-
tions are no mere subjective impressions, but im-
pressions resulting from contact with objective
realities. The senses do not create the impres-
sions. They only receive and convey them.
So with faith. It no more causes the Presence
in the Eucharist than the eye causes the sunset.
The Presence is objective — that is, outside of it and
independent of it. If faith be lacking, the Presence
has no more access to the soul than the glory of the
setting sun has through sightless eyeballs. Want of
14 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
faith in the people of Capernaum incapacitated them
for the reception of their Saviomr's gifts. ' He could
do no mighty work there because of their unbelief.'
Yet He was there, close to them, touching them.
Thus we see that, alike in the Kingdom of Nature
and of Grace, the Presence that nourishes the soul
must be objective before it can become subjective.
And there is also in each case a process of transmu-
tation on reception of the gift. As Hooker says of
the Sacrament of the altar, so we may say of the
Sacrament of nature, that the gift * is not to be sought
for in the Sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of
the Sacrament.' If he is not worthy, the gift can
find no entrance in either case ; but let it find an
entrance, and immediately it begins to energise and
to transform the recipient of it. Our Church repu-
diates the transubstantiation of the sacramental ele-
ments ; but she asserts the transubstantiation of the
recipient of the Sacrament. Thus, says Hooker, * God
hath deified our nature.' Just as we assimilate
material food and transubstantiate it into the sub-
stance of our bodies, so the Presence of Christ, sacra-
mentally received, is designed to transubstantiate us
spiritually into the redeemed and deified Humanity
of Christ , making us, as the Apostle says, ' partakers
of the Divine nature.' *
The doctrine of those who make the faith of the
communicants the cause of Christ's Presence is
exposed to a fatal objection. For it follows — as may
surely happen — that if all the communicants lack
' 2Pet. i. 4.
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 15
faith there is no sacrament at all : there is only an
empty ceremony without any result, ' an outward and
visible sign ' without any corresponding reality.
This, not less than Transubstantiation, ' overthroweth
the nature of a sacrament.' The former abrogates
the heavenly part ; the latter, the earthly. The
primitive and Catholic view maintains both.
And now let us see what the primitive and
Catholic doctrine is, disengaged from materialism, on
the one hand, and what, for lack of a better word, I
will venture to call psilochristism, on the other.
Our Lord, says the ' Te Deum,' * hath opened the
Kingdom of Heaven to all believers.' How? We
have the answer in the Epistle to tKe Hebrews :
* Having therefore, brethren, a sure confidence for
entrance into the Holies in the blood of Jesus, which
entrance He hath made for us anew — a living way
fresh opened sacrificially through the veil, that is His
flesh.' * What are we to understand by this preg-
nant passage ? It is impossible to give the compact
and suggestive meaning of the original except in peri-
phrasis. Our Lord's Incarnation is the medium of
communication between the natural life and the
spiritual. It is, in the first place, the copula that
unites the creation with the Creator. * He took not
on Him the nature of angels, but of the seed of
Abraham He layeth hold.' Had He assumed angelic
nature, the chasm that divides the Creator from His
creation would have remained unbridged. By taking
human nature, the Eternal Son bridged the gulf.
' Heb. X. 20.
16 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
For human nature consists of body (o-w/ia), soul
i'^vxv), and spirit (irvsv^a) ; and these embrace the
whole creation : inorganic matter, vegetable, animal
and spiritual life. Thus only can we fully under-
stand the profound language of St. Paul. The atone-
ment which he preached was a truth infinitely deeper
and higher and wider than a mere forensic satisfaction
for sin. It embraced the universe by uniting it with
the Almighty and all-loving Creator. * For it pleased
the Father that in Him should all the fulness {irav
TO TrXtjpco/jLa) dwell ; and through Him to reconcile
all things (to, iravra) to Himself through the blood
of His Cross ; through Him, whether things upon
the earth or things in the heavens.' ^ And the same
Apostle, in another place, represents * the whole
creation ' as ' groaning and travailing in pain with
us until now,' and awaiting with us * the redemption
of the body ' ^ which aUies us to the material
universe.
The Incarnation thus embraces the whole uni-
verse of being. Next, it is, in a more restricted
sense, a fresh source of purified life to the fallen
race of Adam. ' For as in Adam all die, even so in
Christ shall all be made alive.' ^ How do all men
die in Adam? By deriving from him a nature
biased towards evil by the now recognised law of
heredity ; a nature not so much evil in itself, as
disorganised, out of joint, going after wrong objects,
nourished on deleterious food, and thus become
^ Col. i. 19, 20. 2 Rom. viii. 22, 23.
» 1 Cor. XV. 22.
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 17
anaemic, needing a fresh supply of healthy blood
to forni gradually a new nature to take "the place of
the old. This is the * new and living way ' which
Christ opened for mankind through the veil of His
flesh — that is, of His deified humanity. Zcocra is
here the antithesis of that which is lifeless, and
therefore powerless. The way into the sanctuary
of the Old Dispensation was a lifeless pavement
trodden by the high priest alone with the blood of
slain beasts for which there was no resurrection —
sacrifices, therefore, ' which could never take away
sin,' and were efficacious only as shadows cast
before of the one prevailing ' Sacrifice for ever ' of
the ' Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.*
The way opened by Jesus Christ is new and unique ;
and it is living, for it is His own. Humanity, over
which death 'hath no more dominion.' The veil,
' that is His flesh,' is rent asunder, opening the holy
of holies ' to all believers,' never again to be closed
till His mediatorial work, which embraces all
creation, is finished, and death is swallowed up in
victory, and all this visible scene of fleeting phe-
nomena gives place to the 'new heavens and the
earth wherein dwelleth righteousness.'
Let us try to enter into the full meaning of this
glorious revelation, this ' new and living way ' into
the spiritual realm. Sea rod KarairsTdo-^aTos tovt
scTTLv aapK09 avTov. While our Incarnate Lord
was on earth fulfilling the conditions of fallen
humanity during the period of His Kenosis — that
is, while He held His uncreated glory and Divine
c-
18 THE BEFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
attributes in abeyance — His mortal flesh hung Hke
the Temple curtain between Himself and His people.
But death rent the veil, and at the same moment
* the veil of the Temple was rent in twain from the
top to the bottom.' He laid aside the Adamite
conditions of His manhood, and passed with it,
transfigured and glorified, under the reign of the
laws which are proper to spiritual being. And thus
He reconciled {airoKarriXka^sv) us in the body of
His flesh through death (Col. i. 22), so that the
flesh should no longer be a wall of partition either
between His Humanity and the spiritual world, or
between God and man ; but, on the contrary, a
bond of union bridging the ' great gulf fixed ' till
then between the human and the Divine, the finite
and the Infinite. Thus it is that He has made a
new way for us (avsKalvicrsv) through the veil of His
flesh, opened out a new mode ®f access to God, so
that the Divine Nature is now approachable by the
human.
What a flood of light this view of the Incarnation
casts upon sundry passages of Holy Writ ; such, for
instance, as our Lord's words to Mary Magdalene :
' Touch Me not, for I am not yet ascended to My
Father/ It was no longer the * flesh ' which she
had known and handled under its temporal con-
ditions, but that flesh spirituaHsed and glorified, and
to be approached henceforth ' in a new and living
way,' and by other organs than the bodily senses.
And now let us see how this doctrine bears on
our sacramental union with Christ as expounded by
PRESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHARIST 19
St. Paul, and also by our Lord Himself, especially
in the great sacramental discourse recorded in the
sixth chapter of St. John's Gospel. ' For as in
Adam all die,' says the Apostle, * even so {ovtw Kal)
shall all be made alive.' All men die in Adam
through the law of heredity ; by deriving from the
progenitor of the race — not indeed an utterly
depraved nature, as some have supposed, but — a
tainted nature ; a nature v^ith a germ of evil in it ;
a nature with the equilibrium of its parts destroyed,
so that the animal bias is apt to master the spiritual.
And this evil inheritance with which we are all:
born is due to our organic connection with the
head of our fallen race. Thus ' in Adam we all die.'
How are we * made alive in Christ ' ? The
Apostle tells us that it is by an identical process —
i.e. by organic connection. ' Even so ' — just in the
same way — ' in Christ shall all be made alive.' He
contemplates humanity as subsisting under two
heads, the ' First Adam ' and the ' Second Adam,'
' the Old Man ' and ' the New Man.' From the one
we derive a vitiated life, an impoverished nature.
Into the other we are ' grafted ' by sacramental
union in order to have a new and untainted life
injected into our wounded nature. In baptism, our
Church Catechism tells us, we are ' made members
of Christ.' And the Catechism does but follow the
stronger language of St. Paul, who compares the
connection between Christ and Christians with that
between Adam and his wife, who was made * bone of
his bone and flesh of his flesbc' Christians, he says,
c 2
20 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
' are limbs of His body, out of His flesh and His
bones.' And elsewhere : * The first man Adam was
made a living soul ; the Last Man was made a life-
giving (^cooTTOLovv) spirit. Howbeit that was not
first which is spiritual, but that which is natural ;
and. afterward that which is spiritual. The first
man is of the earth, earthy : the second man is the
Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they
also that are earthy ; and as is the heavenly, such
are they also that are heavenly. And as we have
borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the
image of the heavenly.'
These words can bear but one meaning, namely,
that the connection with ' the Last Adam ' is just
as real as the connection with the first. Our Lord
Himself conveys the same idea under the image of
the life-giving Vine and its branches ; and still more
emphatically in that wonderful discourse in the sixth
chapter of St. John's Gospel. There He calls Him-
self 'the Bread of life,' 'the living Bread which
came down from heaven.' And then more plainly :
' The Bread that I will give is My Flesh, which I will
give for the life of the world.' And when His
hearers questioned the possibility of such a gift. He
repeated the startling assertion with a solemn as-
severation : * Verily, verily, I say unto you. Except
ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His
Blood, ye have no hfe in you. Whoso eateth My
Flesh and drinketh My Blood hath eternal Hfe;
and I will raise him up at the last day. For My
Flesh is meat indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed*
PRESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE EUCHARIST 21
. . . Many therefore of His disciples, when they
heard this, said, This is an hard saying ; who can
hear it ? . . . From that time many of His disciples
went back, and walked no more with Him.' And
He let them go rather than water down His ' hard
saying.' He was even willing that His ' little flock '
of twelve should follow the rest rather than let them
believe that He meant less than He said. There is
pathos, but also unflinching determination in His
question : ' Will ye also go away ? ' It were well
if they who still stumble at the doctrine would
ponder Simon Peter's answer : ' Lord, to whom
shall we go ? Thou hast the words of eternal life.'
Our Lord's words are 'an hard saying' still.
Shall we call them figurative ? All language is in a
sense figurative. It is never the exact embodiment
of the idea which it seeks to express. But it is, let
us remember, always less than the truth. In that
sense our Lord's language here is figurative. He
does not mean flesh and blood in the sense in which
we ordinarily use these words ; but He means
something much deeper, grander, more real. He
means His essential Humanity. Throughout the
sacrificial system of Israel the blood represents the
life, the totality of individual being. Hence the
prohibition to eat it. ' For the life of the flesh is in
the blood : and I have given it to you upon the altar
to make an atonement for your souls ; for it is the
blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.' ^
It was thus in the language of their own law that
' Lev. xvii. 11.
22 THE REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
our Lord expounded His Eucharistic doctrine to the
people of Capernaum ; and they ought to have
understood Him and followed His reasoning. But
their minds remained on the low level of gross
materialistic conceptions, and they asked incredu-
lously, ' How can this man give us His flesh to eat ? '
He tried to explain : * The spirit is the life-producer ;
the flesh profiteth nothing. The subject of My dis-
course is spirit and life.' ^ That is to say, when He
spoke of giving His Flesh and Blood as the food of
His people, He did not mean by flesh and blood any-
thing that the bodily senses could apprehend or a
chemist could analyse into its elements. In that
sense our Lord's Flesh and Blood are certainly not
present in the Eucharist, or indeed anywhere. It is
true that He called on His disciples to testify to His
* flesh and bones ' after His Kesurrection. But it is
also true that the normal condition of His risen body
was that of spirit. What we call flesh and bones is
a consolidation of gases which are subject to disinte-
gration and dissolution, and this is warded off for a
time by the assimilation of congenial nutriment to
repair the unceasing waste of tissue. But our Lord's
risen body subsists without food and is independent
' The form of the original is somewhat lost in the English
version, especially the second clause of the verse (63) : To ftiifxaTa &
f 70) AaAw viuv irvevfxd eVrt /cat (oo-f} eariv. This is inadequately rendered
by ' The words that I speak unto you they are spirit and they are
life.' The word ^rj/xa in Hebraistic Greek, both in the Septuagint and
in the New Testament, came to signify the subject of the words, and
not the mere words themselves. It was of the realities enshrined in
His words that our Lord declared that they are spirit and life ; not
dead matter like ' flesh and blood ' in ordinary speech.
PRESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHARIST 23
of the laws of physics. He passed through the
rock-closed tomb, for the angels rolled back along its
groove the heavy stone door to let the pious vromen
in, not to let the risen Saviour out. Similarly He
passed afterguards through the closed door, and
appeared and disappeared at will, sometimes recog-
nisable, sometimes not, according to the spiritual
receptivity of those He visited. The truth is that
His humiliation. His self-emptying, was always on
His part a voluntary act. He chose to be subject to
the conditions of fallen human nature ; to learn to
walk and read, stumbHng as He learnt ; to ' grow
in wisdom and stature,' His mind developing ^»ri
passu with His body ; to need sleep and food like
weary and decaying mortals ; to sit fatigued by the
well of Jacob and crave for a refreshing draught of
cool water ; to feel keenly the desertion of friends
and the pain of wounds ; to have a tender human
pity for the widow who was following the bier of an
only son ; to shed tears at the grave of Lazarus as
He heard the sobs of the dead man's sisters ; to die
upon the cross by a royal act of will, not through the
violence of men ; for it was ' with a loud voice,' not
with the gasp of dying men, that ' He yielded up the
ghost.'
But all this was a voluntary subjection, not a
necessity laid upon Him by an unavoidable destiny.
And to show this He occasionally freed Himself even
before His death from the domination of physical
conditions and laws. He dispensed with food for
forty days aoxd forty nights, contrary to the ordinary
24 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
experience of men. He walked upon the waves against
the law of gravity. He made Himself invisible to
the multitude at Capernaum contrary to the laws of
optics. He was transfigured on the Mount beyond
the skill of mortals. Before His Eesurrection there-
fore the normal condition of His body was what St.
Paul calls psychical and our English Version calls
* natural ; ' that is to say, He chose to submit to the
ordinary conditions of fallen humanity, but retained
the power of retiring on occasion within the domain
of spiritual laws, and was jpro tanto released from
the reign of natural laws.
Conversely, after the Eesurrection the normal
condition of His body was that of spirit. His
habitat, if I may use the expression, was the
spiritual world, from which He emerged at will,
moving freely and unimpeded among natural laws ;
availing Himself of them when He chose, and dis-
pensing with them at His pleasure. He appeared in
human form, though the form varied, and almost
invariably required the opening of a spiritual organ
in the percipient to recognise it. To convince the
incredulous Thomas, He materialised His spiritual
body and exhibited it with the stigmata of the
Passion. And He spoke with an audible voice and
ate with them on the shore of the lake. On the
other hand, He passed through solid substances as if
they did not exist. And although this fact has so
often furnished the sceptic and the scoffer with
objections and gibes against Christianity, physical
PEESEKCE OF CHRIST IN THE EUCHARIST 25
science itself has now come to the aid of an affronted
creed, and discomfited its assailants. We now know
that even a physical substance like electricity can
pass through solid substances as if they did not
exist ; through masses of tissue, and wood, and even
rock. What is possible to a material substance can,
a fortiori, present no difficulty to a spiritual sub-
stance, which is so much subtler than the most
ethereal of earthly entities.
Though I accept the intention conveyed by the
Black Kubric — to use the common solecism— at the
end of the Communion Office, I cannot accept its
philosophy when it affirms that ' the natural Body
and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven, and
not here ; it being against the truth of Christ's
natural Body to be at one time in more places than
one.' Christ, as we have seen, has no ' natural
body ' at all in the sense of the rubric. For * flesh
and blood,' as the Apostle assures us, ' cannot
inherit the kingdom of God ; neither doth corruption
inherit incorrupcion.' ^ Our Lord's risen body is
* spiritual,' not * natural,' as the same Apostle also
assures us, and has therefore no relation to place.
* Christ sits at the right hand of God,' says a most able
and learned Danish Protestant divine, ' but the right
hand of the Father is everywhere.' He is careful,
however, to guard himself against the Lutheran
perversion of the doctrine of the Communicatio
Idiomatum, which endows Christ's Humanity with
• 1 Cor. XV. 50.
26 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the ubiquity of His Divine Person.' Hooker takes
much the same view : —
To conclude, we hold it in regard of the fore-alleged
proofs a most infallible truth that Christ as Man is not
everywhere present. There are which think it as infalli-
bly true that Christ is everywhere present as Man, which
peradventure in some sense may be well enough granted.
His human substance in itself is naturally absent from
the earth. His soul and body not on earth but in heaven
only. Yet because this substance is inseparably joined
to that personal Word which by His very essence is
present with all things, the nature which cannot have in
itself universal presence hath it after a sort '^ by being
nowhere severed from that which everywhere is present.
For inasmuch as that infinite Word is not divisible into
parts, it could not in part but must needs be wholly
incarnate, and consequently wheresoever the Word is it
hath with it manhood, else should the Word be in part
or somehow God only and not Man, which is impossible.
For the Person of Christ is whole, perfect God and per-
fect Man wheresoever, although the parts of His Man-
hood being finite, and His Deity infinite, we cannot say
that tJie lohole of Christ is simply everywhere, as we may
say that His Deity is, and that His Person is by force of
Deity. For Somewhat of the Person of Christ is not
everywhere in that sort, namely, His Manhood, the o)iIy
conjunction whereof with Deity is extended as far as
Deity, the actual position restrained and tied to a certain
place ; yet presence hy ivay of conjtmction is in some
sort presence.
Again, as the Manhood of Christ may after a sort be
everywhere said to be present, because that Person is
* Martensen's Christian Dogmatics, p. 325.
' The italics are Hooker's in all this quotation^
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHARIST 27
everywhere present from whose Divine substance man-
hood nowhere is severed ; so the same universaUty of
presence may likewise seem in another respect apphcable
thereunto, namely, co-ope7'ation with Deity, and that in
all things}
There is scarcely a greater name in the history
of philosophy than Leibnitz, a man of universal
genius, sound judgment, and master of all the learn-
ing of his time in addition. A sincere Protestant
himself, he was a sincere believer in the doctrine of
the Real Presence in the Sacrament, and he meets
as follows one of the current objections to it : —
As I have been the first to discover that the essence
of a body does not consist in extension but in motion,
and hence that the substance or nature of a body, even ac-
cording to Aristotle's definition, is the principle of motion
(eVreXexcta) and that this principle or substance of the
body has no extension, I have made it plain how God
can be clearly and distinctly understood to cause the sub-
stance of the same body to exist in many different places.'^
Even of material substance we must admit that
we know nothing but as it is manifested in certain
qualities. We cannot think of any quality except as
inhering in some underlying substance as its basis.
But substance itself eludes our last analysis.^ Alike
in philosophy and in theology if we try to run beyond
' Eccl. Pol. V. Iv. 7, 8.
"^ Briefivechsel zicischen Leibnitz, Amauld, u. Ernst v. Hesse-
Bheinfels, p. 145.
3 ' Quid sit rei alicujus substantia minime cognoscimus. Videmus
tantum corporum figuras et colores ; audimus tantum sonos ; tan-
gimus tantum superficies externas ; olfacimus odores solos ; et gus-
tamus sapores : intinms substantias nullo sensu, nulla action^
28 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
our tether we end in upsetting ourselves. Our
inquiry leads us at last to a mystery which sense
and intellect fail to penetrate. The doctrine of the
Eucharistic Presence is a matter of revelation and
of faith, and the mode of it is past our comprehen-
sion. So true is Sir William Hamilton's dictum
that ' no difficulty emerges in theology which had
not previously emerged in philosophy.' For the
philosopher equally with the theologian the safe
rule is, ' Crede ut intelligas,' not ' Intellige ut credas.' ^
' Mysteries are revealed unto the meek,' says the
wise son of Sirach. And a greater than he has
taught us that the key which opens the secret of His
mysteries is a teachable will. * If any one hath the
will to do His will, he shall know of the doctrine
whether it be of God.' ^
Let us then, in this spirit, see whether we cannot
understand at least the drift of our Lord's discourse
at Capernaum. He declares Himself to be the food
of His people. He promises to give them His Flesh
and Blood for their sustenance, and solemnly affirms
that unless men eat His Flesh and drink His Blood
they have no life in them. But He adds that they are
not to understand His words in a gross natural sense
appreciable by the bodily senses. It is not man's
perishable body that He promises to feed, and by
feeding make partaker of His own Eternal Life, but
reflexa, cognoscimus.' (Principia, Schol. TJlt.) Cf. Sir William
Hamilton's Discussions on Philosophy, pp. 604-5,
' See Is. vii. 9, in the LXX version : Kal iav fi^ Tnanixnire olZf fx^
ffvyrjre.
* St. John vii. 17.
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 29
man's true self, his spiritual substance, which re-
mains constant amidst the unceasing mutations of
its earthly integument. *It is the spirit that
quickeneth,' not flesh and blood that the senses can
scrutinise. Impoverished humanity must be placed
in communication with a fresh spring of life to arrest
the decay of the old perishing nature and transform
it into the nature of the Incarnate Son.
* It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh pro-
fiteth nothing.' In these words our Lord lays down
a truth applicable to all life. Even in material
things it is not the gross mass of palpable particles
that ' profiteth,' but the spirit, the hidden essence,
which is too subtle for the apprehension of the
senses, too ethereal for the skill of science. ' It is
the spirit that quickeneth ' throughout the realm of
nature. Matter in all its forms is an evolution from
a spiritual cause which has its source in the Divine
Will. * In Him we live, and move, and have our
being,' and apart from Him there is and can be no
life. In this sense the whole universe of created
being may be said with exact truth to feed upon its
God. Its life is derivative, not independent. ' The
eyes of all wait upon Thee, Lord, and Thou givest
them their meat in due season.' No life can exist for
a moment, from that of an archangel to that of a
blade of grass, apart from the Almighty Creator and
Universal Sustainer. In the spiritual world, as far
as we are given to know, all created life is sustained
immediately by the will of God. On earth it is sus-
tained sacramentally — that is by means of secondary
30 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
causes. This rule prevails universally in our world.
It is the law of all life in the vegetable and animal
kingdoms, and it is the law of human life both on
its material and spiritual side. It was the law of
Paradise. However we interpret the narrative of
man's innocence and fall, it is plain that it describes
a sacramental system : ordinary food proper for
man's body, and spiritual food for his spiritual
nature, imparted through material channels, till
man's sin interposed a barrier.
All nature may thus be regarded as a sacramental
system, * an outward and visible sign of an inward
and spiritual grace ' energising within it ; and the
Sacraments of the Church are but an example in one
department of the Divine Providence, as manifested
on earth, of the rule which He has ordained through-
out the realm of nature. By the ' hard saying '
which shocked the people of Capernaum, and many
others since their day, we are to understand Christ's
Incarnate life. He would have us believe that this
is the source and nutriment of our spiritual, that is
our true, our real life.
But how can our Lord's Humanity be thus dis-
seminated germinally among the milHons of His
members ? To which I answer : How can the flesh
and blood — that is, the essential humanity — of
Adam be disseminated among the millions of his
descendants ? We know that it is so : the fact is
undisputed. And shall we declare that to be im-
possible to the Second Adam, whose Person is
Divine, which is an admitted fact in the case of the
PEESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 31
first Adam ? Shall the first Adam be capable of
propagating his perverted nature among all the
human beings who have sprung from his loins?
And shall the Second Adam, 'the Lord from
heaven,' be unable to impart His life-giving
Humanity through the channels of His ov^n ap-
pointment ? There is a real presence of Adam, in
no figure of speech but in stern truth, in all his
children. We are indeed partakers of his flesh
and blood ; and yet, again, not in the gross sense
understood by the people of Capernaum, but in a
far more real sense.
But there is a fundamental difference between
Adam's presence through the long line of his
offspring, and Christ's Sacramental Presence.
Adam is present in his nature, through the mys-
terious process of natural generation, in all his
descendants. But he is not present personally, for
his person, being human, is limited and circum-
scribed. Christ's human nature is communicated
sacramentally, and He is thus, like Adam, present
humanly in the process of communicating it ; but
He is also present personally, for His Person, being
Divine, is inseparable from His Humanity, and is in
fact omnipresent.
The fact is, the impugners of the Sacramental
system of the Church take too contracted a view of
God's relation to the material universe. They find
it hard to believe that spiritual energy can be
imparted through material channels, such as water,
and bread and wine. But surely this is in strict
32 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
analogy with His operations in nature and among
men. Does any of His gifts reach us except through
some material agency ? What were the prophets
of old? What is the Bible? What is prayer?
Are not all these and the like material organs of
communication between God and man? Let us
purge our minds of carnal notions and rise above
the grovelling literalism of the people of Capernaum,
who imagined that the Flesh and Blood with which
Jesus offered to feed them meant portions of pon-
derable matter. ' They are spirit and they are
life,' and all the more real on that account.
It may be well, before passing away from this
subject, to take note of the Primate's reference to
Consubstantiation in his recent Charge. ' It is diffi-
cult, if not impossible,' he says, 'really to distinguish
between this doctrine [of the Real Presence] and the
Lutheran doctrine commonly called Consubstantia-
tion, and it is important that it should be clearly
understood that it is not unlawful to hold and teach
it within the Church of England.'
I suppose that his Grace understands by Con-
substantiation the co-existence of the substance
of the bread and wine with the substance of the
Lord's Body. It is not quite clear what the
Lutheran doctrine really is. The explanations of it
are not always consistent. Luther himself explains
it as follows in his letter to Henry VIII. : —
The Body of Christ is (the bread still existing) in the
Sacrament, as fire is in iron, the substance of the iron
existing ; and God in man, the human nature existing ;
PEESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE EUCHARIST 33
the substances in each case being so united that each
retains its own operation and proper nature, and yet they
constitute one thing.
Yet on other occasions Luther, while strongly
insisting on the reality of the Sacramental Presence,
deprecates any attempt to define the mode. The
Lutheran Confessions, moreover, carefully avoid
definition while affirming the fact. The Augsburg
Confession says : ' De Coena Domini docent quod
cum pane et vino vere exhibeantur corpus et
sanguis Christi vescentibus in Coena Domini.' The
Saxon Confession says : ' Docentur etiam homines
sacramenta esse actiones divinitus institutas, et extra
usum institutum res ipsas non habere rationem
sacramenti, sed in usu instituto in hac communione
vere et substantialiter adesse Christum, et vere ex-
hibere sumentibus corpus et sanguinem Christi.'
The Wiirtemberg Confession says : ' Cum de pane
dicitur Hoc est corpus meumj non est necesse ut
substantia panis mutetur in substantiam corporis
Christi ; sed ad veritatem sacramenti sufficit quod
corpus Christi vere sit cum pane praesens, atque adeo
necessitas ipsa veritatis sacramenti exigere videtur,
ut cum vera praesentia corporis Christi verus panis
maneat '
We may therefore say that Lutheranism is not
committed to the doctrine of. Consubstantiation, and
the English Church certainly is not. The great
divines of the seventeenth century reject equally ' a
trans and a con ' as definitions of the mode of the
Presence : and the divines of the Tractarian move-
34 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
merit are equally emphatic on the point. And with
good reason. For the word ' Consubstantiation ' lends
itself to more than heterodox meaning. Luther
himself, misled by the word, sometimes used lan-
guage which implied impanation, and also Euty-
chianism. The word may mean not only the co-
existence of heterogeneous substances, but also their
possession of a common nature, as when the Nicene
Creed says tha-t Christ is consubstantial with the
Father. Our divines therefore have done wisely to
avoid a word which has never been naturalised even
in Lutheran theology, and which has never obtained
a footing in our Church.
In fine, try as we may, we are not likely to im-
prove on Queen Elizabeth's profession of faith in
the Eeal Presence : —
He was the Word that spake it ;
He took the bread and brake it ;
And what that Word did make it,
I do believe and take it.*
So much as to the doctrine of the Real Presence
in the Eucharist. Disengaged from popular mis-
conceptions and crude materialistic notions, surely
it must be admitted to be in complete harmony with
the teaching of our Lord and with St. Paul's
' These lines have sometimes been attributed to Donne ; but the
balance of evidence is in favour of their Elizabethan authorship
when the queen was in confinement as Princess Elizabeth. They
are not in the first edition of Donne, and were published for the
first time as his in 1654, thirteen years after his death. Some other
poems, confessedly not his, were published in the edition of 1654.
PRESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE EUCHARIST 35
doctrine of our relation to the two Adams, and of
the Eucharist being our bond of union with
Christ.' We shall presently see how the Church of
England regards it. But let me first endeavour to
explain the sense in which I understand the
Eucharist to be a sacrifice. For undoubtedly that
term has been applied to it in the earliest Liturgies,
and by those ' Catholic Fathers and ancient
Bishops' to whose doctrine the English nation, in
its ecclesiastical and lay capacity, appealed at the
time of the Keformation as a model for the teaching
and practice of its clergy. The primary appeal was
to Scripture, but to Scripture as interpreted by the
undivided Church of the first centuries of Chris-
tianity. The Canon of 1571 concerning Preachers
enjoins the clergy * never to preach anything to be
religiously held and believed by the people except
what is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old or
New Testament, or which the Catholic Fathers and
ancient Bishops have collected from that doctrine.' ^
An Act of Parliament, passed thirteen years
previously,^ declares emphatically that * nothing is
to be adjudged heresy but that which heretofore has
been adjudged by the authority of the Canonical
Scriptures, or the first four General Councils, or
• 1 Cor. X. 16.
2 ' In primis videbunt Concionatores, nequid unquam doceaiit
pro concione quod a populo religiose teneri et credi velint, nisi
quod consentaneum sit doctrinse Veteris aut Novi Testamenti,
quodque ex ilia ips& doctrina Catholici Patres et veteres Episcopi
colligerint.'
' 1 Eliz. cap. i. a.d. 1558, § xxxvi.
d2
36 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
some other General Council, wherein the same hath
been declared heresy by the express word of Scrip-
ture ; or such as shall be termed heresy by the High
Court of Parliament with the assent of the clergy in
Convocation.'
Bishop Pearson is a standard Anglican authority,
whose classical work on the Creed is one of the
books which candidates for Holy Orders are re-
quired to master. He was, moreover, one of the
divines who presided over the last revision of the
Book of Common Prayer, and was also one of the
divines who took part in the Savoy Conference.
Baxter says ' he was their [Church of England's]
true logician and disputant. . . . He disputed
accurately, soberly, and calmly, being but once
in a passion, breeding in us [the Puritans] a
great respect for him.' He also calls him * the
strength and honour of that [Church of England]
cause.' In a sermon in praise of the Reformation
preached before the University of Cambridge in
1669 during his tenure of the Lady Margaret
Professorship of Divinity, Pearson says : —
Sacros igitur imprimis Scripturse codices [Eeformatio]
tanquam basin religionis instaurandae posuit, et omnibus
propalavit. Sed ne mala feriata hominum ingenia tarn
tremenda mysteria violarent, sapientissime praecepit ' ne
quis populo quicquam tanquam ad salutem necessarium
prsedicaret, quod antiquissimi Patres ex eisdem ante non
coUegerunt.' Tria praeterea Symbola, certissima antiquae
fidei criteria, admisit ; admonuit etiam, ' Vere generalia
Concilia esse sine controversia admittenda, et quicquid
I
PRESENCE OF CHEIST IN THE EUCHAEIST 37
iis contrarium doceretur ac pervivaciter defenderetur,
pro haeresi puniendum esse.' Sacros ordines, ab ipsis
Apostolis institutes, promo^dt ; disciplinam vetustissimam,
aut adhuc obtinentem retinuit, aut ante collapsam
restitutum iri exoptavit.^
Here then we have this eminently representative
divine of the Church of England taking his stand
on the authoritative declarations of the Church and
State of England at the period of the Eeformation,
and laying down the following cardinal principles
of the Eeformation : first, the appeal, on all disputed
points, to Scripture as interpreted by the Church of
the (Ecumenical Councils ; secondly, the conservation
of the organic constitution of the Church as it came
down from Apostolic times ; thirdly, the retention
of what still remained of the ancient order of Divine
worship, and the restoration of what had collapsed
in the turmoil of party passions and prejudices.
We have probably in this passage a side light on
the Ornaments Eubric by one of its framers. The
ornaments there prescribed w^e to be retained for
use where circumstances allowed their restoration.
Grotius also refers in terms of high praise to the
Canon of 1571.2 The thirtieth Canon of 1603
enters more fully into the rationale of the Canon of
1571. After defending against the Puritans the use
of the sign of the Cross in baptism, the Canon pro-
ceeds to lay down as follows the general principle
' Minor Theological Works, i. 436.
* Non possum non laudere praeclarum AnglisB canonem»
* Imprimis,' &c. De Imperio Sum. Pot. circa Sacra, vi. 8.
38 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
underlying the appeal of the English Church to
antiquity : —
Thirdly, it must be confessed that in process of time
the sign of the Cross was greatly abused in the Church
of Eome, especially after that corruption of Popery had
once possessed it. But the abuse of a thing doth not
take away the lawful use of it. Nay, so far was it from
the purpose of the Church of England to forsake and
reject the Churches of Italy, France, Spain, Germany, or
any such-like Churches, in all things which they held and
practised, that, as the Apology of the Church of England
confesseth, it doth with reverence retain those ceremo-
nies, which do neither endamage the Church of God, nor
offend the minds of sober men ; and only departed from
them in those particular points wherein they were fallen
both from themselves in their ancient integrity, and from
the Apostolical Churches which were their first founders.
Lastly, the use of the sign of the Cross in Baptism,
being thus purged of all Popish superstition and error,
and reduced in the Church of England to the primary
institution of it, upon those true rules of doctrine con-
cerning things indifferent, which are consonant to the
Word of God and the judgment of the ancient Fathers,
we hold it the part of every private man, both minister
and other, reverently to retain the use of it prescribed
by public authority.
With this rule of interpretation to guide us, let
us now consider what is meant by the Eucharistic
Sacrifice.
3'J
CHAPTEK II
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACRIFICE
I SAY it With all respect, but those who condemn
the doctrine of the Eucharistic Sacrifice appear to
me not only to misunderstand what they censure,
but to take an inadequate and jejune view of the
Sacrifice of Christ. They seem to fasten down its
significance to what logicians call its inseparable
accident, and to regard it as beginning and ending
on Calvary. What a poor notion such a view gives
of the doctrine of the Atonement and of our Lord's
condescension and love ! To us, with our limited
vision and sense of guilt, death appears a great
calamity. It puts an end to all our plans, tears us
from a thousand endearing associations, and dis-
misses us to an unknown world and an uncertain
destiny. To Him death was but a temporal in-
cident in a lifelong sacrifice. He ' drank of the
brook in the way ' and passed to His mediatorial
throne to offer Himself as a perpetual sacrifice.^
The essence of sacrifice is in the surrender of the
will. That done, the sacrifice is complete as far as
' Heb. X. 12. Both the argument and the sense require that
us rh SirtveKh in this verse should be connected with 7tpoaw4yKas.
40 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the sufferer is concerned, though circumstances re-
quire its consummation in the death of the victim.
Abraham's self-sacrifice was complete, and Isaac's
also, when the Father of the faithful raised his arm
to slay his child ; and the Church has always con-
ceded the crown of martyrdom to those whose
martyrdom was only in will. God has been sacri-
ficing Himself from eternity. He is self-sufficing
through the eternal harmony of a threefold Perso-
nality in an indivisible substance. He needs nothing
from without, and when He broke the silence of
eternity with the sights and sounds of created life it
was because His nature, like His name, is love, and
it is of the essence of love to share its happiness.
To Him this perpetual self-sacrifice involves no pain,
because His love is ' perfect,' having no disturbing
elements, and none of that ' fear ' which St. John tells
us 'hath torment.' But when the Eternal Son laid
aside His uncreated glory, ' emptied Himself ' for a
time of His regal dignity by voluntary abasement,
circumscribing for a purpose His infinitude by the
limitations of humanity, the pain that is latent in
the love of all finite natures became manifest in the
' strong crying and tears ' of His human nature.
He found the outpourings of His self-sacrifice re-
pelled on all sides. * He could do no mighty work
there because of their unbelief,' and His human soul
felt the pangs of baffled love.
The best of men
That ere wore earth about Him was a sufferer ;
A soft, meek, patient, humble, tranquil spirit ;
The first true gentleman that ever breathed.
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICE 41
We may, therefore, say that in self-sacrifice Hes
the happiness of God : first, in the relations of the
Persons of the Blessed Trinity to each other ; then
in the sphere of created life. The doctrine of the
Trinity is a mystery which transcends, without con-
tradicting, human reason. But one precious truth
it does disclose ; namely, the existence of social
qualities in the Godhead. It was not at the birth
of a Virgin's child in Bethlehem that God became a
Father. Fatherhood is an eternal attribute of His
nature, as Sonship is an eternal attribute of the
Second Person of the Trinity. Hence the emphasis
with which our Lord always calls Himself ' the Son
of man,' implying thereby in Him the prerogative
of another Sonship which differentiated Him from
all other men. This unique expression arrested the
attention of Benan. * It is probable,' he says, ' that
from the first He regarded His relationship with
God as that of a son towards his father. This was
His great act of originality ; in this He had nothing
in common with His race.' This important truth
is expressed with much force and clearness by the
late Mr. R. H. Hutton in his profound essay on the
* Incarnation and Principles of Evidence.' His
treatment of the subject may be gathered from the
following quotation : —
If Christ is the Eternal Son of God, God is indeed
and in essence a Father ; the social nature, the spring of
love, is of the very essence of the Eternal being ; the
communication of His life, the reciprocation of His affec-
tion, dates from beyond time — belongs, in other words,
42 THE EEFOEMATTON SETTLEMENT
to the very being of God. Now some persons think that
such a certainty, even when attained, has very httle to do
with human hfe. * What does it matter,' they say, ' what
the absolute nature of God is, if we know what He is to
us ; how can it concern us to know what He was before
our race existed, if we know what He is to all His
creatures now ? ' These questions seem plausible, but I
believe they point to a very deep error. I can answer
for myself that the Unitarian conviction that God is — as
God and in His eternal essence — a single and, so to say,
solitary personality, influenced my imagination and the
whole colour of my faith most profoundly. Such a con-
viction, thoroughly realised, renders it impossible to
identify any of the social attributes with His real essence
— renders it difficult not to regard power as the true root
of all other Divine life. If we are to believe that the
Father was from all time, we must believe that He was
as a Father — that is, that love was actual in Him as well
as potential ; that the communication of life and thought
and fulness of joy was of the inmost nature of God, and
never began to be if God never began to be.
For my own part, I am sure that our belief, whatever
it may be, about the * absolute ' nature of God, influences
far more than any one supposes our practical thoughts
about the actual relation of God to us. Unitarians
eagerly deny, I once eagerly denied, that God is to them
a solitary Omnipotence. Nor is He. But I am sure
that the conception of a single eternal will as originating,
and infinitely antecedent to, all acts of love or spiritual
communion with any other, affects vitally the temper of
faith. The throne of heaven is to them a lonely one.
The solitude of the eternities weighs upon their imagina-
tions. Social are necessarily postponed to individual
attributes ; for they date from a later origin — from
creation — w^hile power and thought are eternal. Neces-
THE EUCHARISTIC SACRIFICE 43
sarily, therefore, God, though spoken of and worshipped
as a Father to us, is conceived primarily as imagining
and creating ; secondarily only, as loving and inspiring.
But any being whose thoughts and resolves are con-
ceived as in any sense deeper and more personal than
his affections, is necessarily regarded rather as benignant
and compassionate than as affording the type of that
deepest kind of love which is co-ordinate with life ; in
short, rather as a beneficence whose love springs out of
power and reason, than as one whose power and reason
are grounded in love. I am sure that this notion of God
as the Absolute Cause does tincture deeply even the
highest form of Unitarian faith, and I cannot see how it
could be otherwise. If our prayers are addressed to One
whose eternity we habitually image as unshared, we
necessarily for the time image the Father the Omniscient
and Omnipotent Genius of the universe. If, on the other
hand, we pray to One who has revealed His own eternity
through the Eternal Son ; if in the spirit of the liturgies,
CathoHc and Protestant, we alternate our prayers to the
eternal originating love, and to that filial love in which
it has been eternally mirrored, turning from the * Father
of heaven ' to the ' Son, Redeemer of the world,' and
back again to Him in whom that Son for ever rests —
then we keep a God essentially Social before our hearts
and minds, and fill our imagination with no solitary
grandeur.^
And as the happiness of God springs from His
self-sacrifice, from His outpouring of Himself, as far
as that is possible, in the sphere of created life, this
also is true of man. * Whosoever will save his life
will lose it ; and whosoever will lose his life for My
' Essays, Theological and Literary, ii. 246-248.
44 THE BEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
sake shall find it.* We must, therefore, be somehow
partakers of Christ's sufferings. "We must be brought
into some kind of connection with His all-sufficing and
enduring Sacrifice. This idea underlies St. Paul's
teaching on the Sacrifice of Christ, e.g. Col. i. 24 :
' Now I rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up
{dvravaTrXrjpQ)) on my part what is lacking (ra
v(TTspi]fjLaTa) of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh
for His Body's sake, which is the Church.'
How are we to understand this language ? Cer-
tainly not in the sense that Christ's Sacrifice was
incomplete in itself. He died for all, and once for
all, and there can be no addition to that Sacrifice,
nor can there be anything lacking to its complete-
ness. And yet lack of some sort there must be, for
the Apostle says so very distinctly ; and lack, more-
over, which it is the duty and privilege of Christians
to 'fill up on their part.' It is a pregnant word,
occurring nowhere else in the New Testament, and
not at all in the Septuagint. The avrt has for its
primary meaning the idea of supply from an opposite
quarter to make up a deficiency. There is a clear
antithesis of two sufferers, the one filling from his side
something that had been left for him as his share of
the affliction. But that implies co-operation, and thus
identity in the work of redemption between Christ and
His followers, between the Head and His members.
We may therefore paraphrase the passage as follows.
When Adam fell, he involved his race in his
ruin. As yet he had no child, and mankind there-
fore, viewed as a race, fell with him. But the race
THE EUCHAEISTIG SACEIFICE 45
became individually partakers of the catastrophe by
process of natural generation. Christ's Sacrifice on
Calvary reversed the calamity of Eden, and thus
saved the race qud race. But the race becomes
individually partaker of the Eedemption by process
of spiritual regeneration. The lacking part of the
remedy, which they are to ' fill up on their side,' is
individual participation in the new life and all-
sufficing Sacrifice which He has offered, and this
through the means which He has Himself appointed
for that purpose. The Fall has two aspects. It
was an injured and guilty * nature which Adam
passed on to his offspring and descendants. It is a
restored and sinless Nature that died on Calvary,
and by His death made satisfaction for an attainted
race.
Thus Christ came, not as * the Desire of all
nations ' merely, nor merely as the infallible Teacher
and perfect Example of men, but, above all, as the
Healer and Saviour of our race. He came, not to
develop our old nature, but to make it anew ; to
reconstruct it from the foundation ; to place a new
organic force at its centre, which should gradually
transform the members into the likeness of the
Head. Humanity had been perverted from its- true
end ; but it was still Divine, else the Son of God
could not have clothed Himself in it even by a
Virgin birth. The very misery of man, as Pascal
has observed, proves his grandeur, and denotes his
* Guilty in the sense in which the descendants of an attainted
man inherit the consequences of their ancestor's crime.
46 THE RBFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
lineage as not of earth. There is an unearthly
melody in his song, and something more than
mortal mingles in his wail. Natures inferior to
his may be miserable ; but they are not conscious
of their misery. The knowledge of his misery adds
poignancy to man's sorrow, but also bears witness
to the high estate from which he fell. He is like a
royal exile, bearing about him in his retributive
wanderings the lineaments of his Divine origin.
The soul that rises with us, our life's star,
Hath had elsewhere its setting,
And Cometh from afar :
Not in entire forgetfulness,
And not in utter nakedness,
But trailing clouds of glory do we come
From God, Who is our home.
It was one of the fundamental errors of the
leaders of the Eeformation on the Continent that
they peremptorily denied that man ' trailed ' any
' clouds of glory ' from his heavenly home. They
taught that the Fall vitiated human nature at the
very core, making it altogether corrupt, so that God
could find nothing in it but what was abominable
and hateful. In his * Institutes ' Calvin has a
chapter entitled Ex corruptd naturd }iomi7iis nihil
nisi damnahile prodire, and the following quotation
will give a fair idea of his doctrine : —
Let us grasp this unquestionable truth, which no
opposition can ever shake, that the mind of man is so
completely alienated from the righteousness of God that
it conceives, desires, and undertakes everything that is
THE BUCHAEISTIG SACEIFICB 47
impious, perverse, base, flagitious ; that his heart is so
thoroughly infected by the poison of sin that it cannot
produce anything but what is corrupt ; and that if at any
time men do anything apparently good, yet the mind
always remains involved in hypocrisy and deceitful
obliquity, and the heart remains enslaved by its inward
perverseness. ... In vain do we look in our nature for
anything that is good.'
Again : —
Man cannot be excited or biased to anything but evil.
If this is so, there is no impiety in affirming that he is
under the necessity of sinning.^
Further on he does not hesitate to assert that ' man,
by a just impulse, does what is wrong.'
Melanchthon and Zwingli teach the same doc-
trine. The former maintains that the virtues of
good heathens, the constancy of Socrates, the ch^,s-
tity of Xenocrates, the temperance of Zeno, were
not virtues at all, but must be considered as vices ;
and that in fact ' all their works and all their
endeavours are sinful.' ^ Like Calvin, he accepts
the full consequences of his premisses, and does not
scruple to make God the direct author of sin, giving
as an example the adultery of David and his assas-
sination of Uriah. For obvious reasons I must
leave the passage in its coarse Latin vesture : —
Quod Deus facit libere facit, alienus ab omni affectu
noxio, igitur et absque peccato, ut adulterium David, quod
' Inst. lib. ii. c. 3, § 19, § 5.
^ ' Non debent pro veris virtutibus sed pro vitiis haberi.' — Loci
Theologici, p. 22.
48 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
ad auctorem Deum pertinet, non magis Deo sit peccatum
quam cum taurus totum armentum inscendit et implet.
Zwingli teaches the same doctrine, and uses the
same illustration. God, he says, is * the author,
mover, and impeller ' of the sins of men.*
Luther went quite as far. He said that ' it is
the nature of man to sin ; sin constitutes the essence
of man ; the nature of man since the Fall is become
quite changed ; original sin is the very offspring of
father and mother.'
Man is thus reduced to what Hallam calls ' a
sordid, grovelling, degraded Caliban.' ^ But men
are often better than their creeds, and I imagine
that most of those who would now call themselves
Calvinists and Lutherans would recoil from the
crude and cruel doctrine of their spiritual ancestors.
Nevertheless it colours the theology of many who
would repudiate its naked statements. Even so
gentle and truly Christian a spirit as the late Pro-
fessor Henry Drummond accepted the fundamental
tenet of the Calvinistic creed, and his acceptance
of it vitiates the argument of his (in many ways)
charming and suggestive volume on * Natural Law
' ' Unum igitur atque idem facinus, puta adulterium aut homici-
dium, quantum Dei auctoris, motoris, impulsoris, opus est, crimen
non est, quantum autem hominis est crimen ac scelus est.' — De
Provid. c. vi.
' Sic autem agit [Deus] per ilia instrumenta, ut non tantum sinat
ilia agere, nee tantum moderetur eventum, sed etiam incitet, impellat,
moveat, regat, atque adeo quod omnium est maximum, et creat, ut
per ilia agat quod eonstituit.' — Aphor. xxii.
2 Hist, of Lit. iii. p. 284.
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICE 49
in the Spiritual World.' In that book he repre-
sents man as dead by nature. Spiritually he
belongs, he says, to the inorganic kingdom, and
cannot pass over to the organic except through the
miraculous process of conversion.
The natural corollary of this doctrine of the Fall
was the figment of an 'imputed righteousness '—a
cloak, not a cure, for the sins of humanity. * God,'
says Luther, * sent His Son into the v^orld, and laid
upon Him all the sins of all men, saying, " Be Thou
Peter, that denier ; Paul, that persecutor, blasphemer,
and cruel oppressor ; David, that adulterer ; be Thou
that sinner that ate the apple in Paradise ; that
thief which hung upon the Cross ; in short, be Thou
the Person who has committed the sins of all men.
See therefore that Thou pay and satisfy them." . , .
Therefore when sins are seen and felt they are no
longer sins.' To say that faith without works was
dead and unprofitable he pronounced ' a devilish and
blasphemous doctrine,' and naturally therefore cha-
racterised the Epistle of St. James as ' an Epistle
of straw.'
This view of the Fall and the Atonement is
responsible for a great deal of the scepticism and
agnosticism of the day. Men who take the trouble to
reason seriously on these matters, identifying, as they
naturally do, Christianity with a representation of it
which outrages their moral sense, reject what they
believe to be Christianity, but is really a pernicious
perversion of it. I have dealt with this subject at
E
50 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
length in a work from which I will venture to make
a long quotation here.
* Now what do we mean by the doctrine of the
Atonement ? Various views have been put forward
on this subject, but I do not think it necessary
to discuss more than two of them. One view
represents the doctrine of the Atonement somewhat
as follows : That when man fell he brought com-
plete ruin on his race ; that human nature was
entirely and absolutely vitiated by the Fall ; that it
was not merely disorganised — its bond of unity being
broken by the severance of the human will from the
Divine — but that it became wholly and absolutely
evil, not a single element of good being left in it.
And not only so, but, in addition, all men became
criminals through Adam's guilt, and the successive
generations who are thus born into the world are
justly liable to an immortality of torture ; all except
a comparatively small number who have been pre-
destinated to eternal happiness, and for whom alone
Jesus Christ made atonement. This doctrine, more-
over, represents God the Father as a Being whose
majesty was so offended by Adam's sin that nothing
would appease Him but the death of His own inno-
cent Son. A ransom had to be paid of a value
beyond anything that man could offer, and the
Eternal Son accordingly offered Himself to His
offended Father as a substitute for guilty man ; and
for His sake, thus dying in man's stead, God was
satisfied, and an atonement was made for the elect.
' Surely this is a doctrine very derogatory to the
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICB 51
nature of Almighty God. It represents human
nature as wholly and completely evil in consequence
of Adam's fall. But that is not the doctrine of the
Bible, which represents the Divine Image in fallen
man as marred, but not entirely effaced. St. Paul
says that " we have all sinned, and come short of the
glory of God ; " come short, you see, not entirely
lost. Had man's nature become wholly sinful, God
the Son could not have become incarnate ; He could
not have taken a nature wholly sinful into union with
His Divine Person.
* Next, the doctrine on w^hich I am commenting
implies a difference of moral character in the Trinity.
God the Father is represented as so offended with
the human race that He could only be reconciled by
the voluntary sacrifice of His Son : as if the Father
and Son had contrary feelings towards mankind ; the
Father, a severe Sovereign Who would not forgive
without a ransom ; the Son, a compassionate Saviour
"Who offered His life to redeem humanity. The
Father would thus be less loving than the Son,
which of course is heresy. God the Father is,
moreover, represented as indifferent to the guilt or
innocence of the victim, provided only that the pay-
ment be equivalent to the debt. The innocent
suffered for the guilty, and His righteousness is im-
puted to sinful man, who is thus accounted, not
made, righteous. The righteousness which man
obtains through Christ does not enter into the tissue
of his own being, does not become part of him, does
not circulate through his spiritual veins as the sap
K 2
52 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of a healthy tree circulates through the fibres of the
sickly sprout which is grafted upon it. It is an
external garment which " skins and films the ulcer-
ous sore," leaving the putrid matter still festering
within. But what man needs is to have the sore
healed, to have the poison rooted out, to have his
nature renewed, to be placed in communication with
a fresh and pure fountain of life. He requires to be
made, not simply to be accounted, righteous. It is
with no mere imputed sin and guilt that he comes
into the world, but with a real heritage of woe — a
will biased to evil, and a conscience which bears
witness to ancestral guilt. It is, therefore, by no
mere imputed righteousness that he can be saved.
Christ's Atonement is not a substitution for man's
righteousness, but the source of it, bringing him into
organic relation with the redeemed humanity of God
the Son. So much then as to that view of the
Atonement which regards human nature as wholly
evil and the righteousness of Christians as imputed,
not organic ; an external endowment, not an internal
principle of sanctity. I believe the view which I
have been criticising to be as false as it is certainly
comparatively modern.
' What, then, is the true view of the Atonement ?
It embraces, as I conceive, two ideas : first, the union
of the creation as a whole with the Creator — the
bridging of the chasm that had divided the finite
from the Infinite ; secondly, the reconciliation of
mankind, sinful and exiled, to their heavenly Father.
Let us glance — for there is no space for more — at
THE EUCHAEISTIO SACRIFICE 53
these two ideas respectively. Atonement, as we
know, means at-one-ment, bringing into harmony
again, into unison and agreement, persons or parties
who were at variance and apart. How does this
apply to the reconciliation of the Creator with His
creation ? By what atonement can they be brought
together ? Let us think. One of the most striking
facts revealed to us by modern science is the wonder-
ful and mysterious unity which pervades the universe
and binds all its parts together. There is nothing
isolated. All the forces of nature are correlated.
The stellar systems that fill infinite space are bound
together in all their parts, and are ceaselessly acting
upon and influencing each other : planets revolving
round their suns, satellites revolving round their
planets, and vast solar systems, with their separate
hierarchies of planets, moving and controlling each
other. Nor is it only in the interdependence of the
huge masses of the universe that we find this law of
unity, this mutual action and counteraction, prevail-
ing ; it binds together the minutest atoms, regardless
of distance and intervening obstacles. Every atom
in the universe is so closely connected with every
other atom, and is so affected by it, that we may say
there is a kind of cognisance of each other, a sort of
mutual sympathy. Man longs to be independent,
but it is a vain dream. There is no independence in
the universe. All its parts are correlated, and the
whole is sustained by the reciprocal services of the
parts. " One deep calleth another," and one atom
attracts another on opposite sides of the globe. This
64 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
is not a figure of speech, but a literal matter of fact.
Let me quote one of our leading men of science :
u rjiQ gravity/' he says, " all media are, as it were,
absolutely transparent, nay non-existent, and two
particles at opposite points of the earth affect each
other exactly as if the globe were not between. To
complete the apparent impossibility, the action is,
so far as we can observe, absolutely instantaneous,
so that every particle of the universe is at every
moment in separate cognisance, as it were, of the
relative position of every other particle throughout
the universe at the same moment of absolute time." ^
* This great law of the mutual interdependence
and reciprocal action of the various parts of the
universe was present to the mind of the great
Apostle of the Gentiles, only he looked behind
material forces to the spiritual Power which wields
and controls them. In St. Paul's view matter was
no dead thing, having no kind of relation to man
or God ; on the contrary, he regarded the universe
as one vast whole, differentiated by hierarchies of
being, from inorganic matter up to angelic life, and
all embraced in the Atonement of the God-Man. In
the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Eomans he
pictures " the whole creation " as '* groaning and
travailing in pain together until now," and waiting
to share in the redemption of the human race. You
will find a still more striking passage in the first
chapter of the Epistle to the Colossians, where the
Apostle represents the whole creation, angelic, human,
' Jevons's Principles of Science, ii. 144.
THE EUCHARISTIG SACRIFICE 55
animate and inanimate, as having a part in Christ's
atoning sacrifice. You must have the whole passage
before you in order to appreciate its meaning in all
its range and depth. He speaks of God the Father
as having " delivered us from the power of darkness,
and translated us into the Kingdom of His dear Son,
in whom we have redemption through His Blood,
even the forgiveness of sins : Who is the image of the
invisible God, the Firstborn of all creation : for by
Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and
that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be
thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers :
all things were created by Him and for Him. And
He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
And He is the Head of the body, the Church : Who
is the beginning, the Firstborn from the dead ; that
in all things He might have the pre-eminence. For
it pleased the Father that in Him should all fulness
dwell ; and having made peace through the Blood of
His Cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Him-
self ; by Him, I say, whether they be things inearth,
or things in heaven."
' Try to follow out St. Paul's argument in that
passage. God the Father, you will observe, is not
represented as an angry Deity between whose wrath
and the guilty race of man the Divine Son interposes
as an adequate victim. On the contrary, Father and
Son are portrayed as co-operating in loving harmony
for the redemption of man and the atonement of all
creation. The initiative in this work is given to the
Father as the fount of Deity — the initiative not in
66 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
time, but in the internal relations of the Trinity. It
is God the Father Who " hath made us meet to be
partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light,"
and *' Who hath delivered us from the power of dark-
ness." And this He has done through the mediation
of the Son of His love. The Father is personally
invisible. He is to be seen only in the Son, " Who is
the image of the invisible God," and " the Firstborn
of all creation," as being the efficient and formal
cause whereby the creation was born into a Divine
adoption. The Apostle then goes on to show how
Christ, by means of His creative and mediatorial
office, has brought the whole creation, '* visible and
invisible," within the sphere of His atoning work ;
not "thrones" merely, or "dominions, or principali-
ties, or powers," or "the Church," but " all things,"
" whether they be things in earth, or things in
heaven." " For it pleased the Father that in Him
should all fulness dwell " — that the Son, in other
words, should by His Incarnation comprehend in
Himself the whole universe of being.
* Let us see how this can be. And let us begin
by considering man's relation to the rest of created
life. Man came last in the order of creation ; in that
the conclusion of science agrees with the Mosaic
cosmogony. Man was thus intended to be the copula
that should unite the lower creation with the highest
form of created life, namely, the angeHc. He was in
touch with all^with inorganic matter, with vege-
table and animal life, and with the nature of angels.
Physiologists tell us that man in the early stages of
THE EUCHAKISTIC SACEIEICE 57
his development passes through all the forms of life
inferior to his own. His body is allied to the dust of
the ground. He takes up vegetable and animal life
and transmutes them into his own higher life, and
the lower types of life are thus represented parabo-
lically, as it were, in the human embryo. Now look
for a moment at the typical characteristics of the
different strata of life. The lower the life is, the
more material are its gratifications. In vegetables
the material appetite is everything. The vegetable
fulfils the end of its being best when it most freely
takes and uses all the matter it can assimilate.
Animals possess a higher life than vegetables. They
have a kind of spontaneity, possess an inferior form
of soul endow^ed with emotion, and have a hmited
and circumscribed intelligence. Their life is chiefly
material, and they live mainly for the gratification
of their appetites ; but not altogether. They have an
inchoate soul which needs a higher kind of life to
change animal into person. Man, as I have said, is
related through his body to inorganic matter, and to
vegetable and animal life ; but he is still more closely
related to animal life through his soul. So far as
man consists of body and soul only his life is merely
that of the brute. But God " breathed into his
nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living
soul "—a being endowed with reason, conscience, capa-
city of self-sacrificing love — the " perfect love which
casteth out fear." Through His spirit man is related
to the angelic order, and is enabled to hold commu-
nion with God. Man was thus created to be the
68 THE REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
nexus between the highest and lowest forms of
created Hfe. The animals were brought to him in
Paradise, and he classified them. Dominion was
given him over the lower creation, and if he had
kept his innocence and perfected his character by
self-conscious discipline, the Son of God would still
have become Incarnate, but without need of Cross or
Passion. When man fell, however, he broke the unity
and harmony of creation, and the lower elements of
his nature sobn began to triumph over the higher.
The animal soul, with its brutal appetites, " pressed
down the incorruptible spirit," as the son of Sirach
says. Intellectual development was of no avail when
spirit was dethroned, for the intellect became enlisted
in the service of the animal appetites.^ •
' Now let us go back to the great passage on the
Atonement in St. Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, to
which I have already referred. Just as the innu-
merable worlds which are scattered through infinite
' I quote an impartial witness in ratification of this statement :
" Intellect is not a power, but an instrument ', not a thing which
itself moves and works, but a thing which is moved and worked by
forces from behind it. To say that men are ruled by reason is as
irrational as to say that they are ruled by their eyes. Beason is
an eye — the eye through which the desires see their way to gratifica-
tion. And educating it only makes it a better eye ; gives it a vision
more accurate and more comprehensive ; does not at all alter the
desires subserved by it. However far-seeing you make it, the
passions will still determine the directions in which it shall be turned,
the objects on which it shall dwell. Just those ends which the
instincts or sentiments propose will the intellect be employed
to accomplish : culture of it having done nothing but increase
the ability to accomplish them." — Hekbert Spencer's Social Statics,
p. 382.
THE EUCHAEISTIG SACEIFICE 69
space are not isolated and independent of each other,
but, on the contrary, correlated, so that they are
ceaselessly acting and reacting on each other, not
only in the mass, but in all their particles ; so neither
are the realities of the spiritual world,* its thrones,
dominions, principalities, and powers, isolated facts ;
they are intimately related, and are being brought
back to the primal unity through the Incarnation of
the Eternal Word energising through the Church,
which is His Body. So transcendent a fact as the
Incarnation of Grod could not be limited and ex-
hausted by man's needs ; it affected the universe and
was independent of man's Fall, although that event
had been foreseen and provided for. The angelic
world was interested in the Incarnation, and so was
inanimate nature, all-unconscious as it was of its
discords and its share in the universal adoption. Let
us look at the matter a little more closely. Our Lord
took a human body the same as ours in all its
constituent elements ; a body, therefore, related to
inorganic matter and to vegetable and animal life.
He possessed, like other men, an animal soul which,
apart from spirit, leaves man a brute. He took a
human spirit, including all that we mean by intel-
lectual and moral qualities. And all this was in Him
united to a Divine personality. In this way He made
atonement for the whole of creation, which He united
with Himself, and through Himself with the Triune
Godhead. *' He took not on Him the nature of angels,
but of the seed of Abraham He layeth hold." Had
He taken angelic nature into union with Himself, the
60 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
rest of creation would not have been affected thereby.
But by taking human nature He embraced the whole
universe of life in the fulness of His Atonement.
And we find creation in its typical representatives
celebrating ' His birth ; the manger receiving His
infant form ; the cold air of a winter's night warmed
by the breath of cattle, kinder to Him, though they
knew it not themselves, than the highly favoured
race for whom He came to suffer and to die ; and the
choir of angels proclaiming His birth, not to the kings
and nobles of the earth, but to the gentle shepherds
of Bethlehem. We have some foregleams of this
comprehensive character of the Atonement in the Old
Testament ; for example, in the twenty-third verse
of the fifth chapter of Job. Keferring to man's
redemption, Eliphaz the Temanite says, " For thou
shalt be in league with the stones of the field, and
the beasts of the field shall be in league with thee."
Similarly in Hosea ii. 18 : "And in that day will I
make a covenant for them with the beasts of the
field, and with the fowls of heaven, and with the
creeping things of the ground ; and I will break the
bow and the sword and the battle out of the earth,
and will make them to lie down safely."
' But does this view of the Atonement exhaust
the meaning of the doctrine ? Evidently not. It would
have done so had there been no sin. But sin is
a fact and involves guilt — the feeling of outraged
justice and impending retribution. The sense of un-
worthiness to hold direct communication with God
is one of the deepest feehngs in our nature. We have
THE EUCHARISTIC SACEIFICE 61
examples of it in the histories of the saints of the Old
and New Testaments, and all along the course of
history. The traditions of heathendom testify to the
same truth, and also the universal prevalence of the
doctrine of sacrifice. What, then, do we mean by the
doctrine of the Atonement in this more specific sense ?
It is easy enough to understand that we come into the
world with a disorganised nature, a nature that has
lost its principle of harmony, and in which the animal
predominates over the spiritual. Hereditary evil, both
moral and physical, is a fact too plain to be disputed.
But hereditary guilt ? Can guilt really be hereditary ?
Let us think. Have we anything of the same kind
in secular life ? A nobleman rebels against his
sovereign. What is the consequence ? He forfeits his
life. Is that all ? No ; he forfeits also his nobility,
his possessions, and his privileges, and not for him-
self only but for his posterity. Guilt therefore
may in a sense be hereditary in civil life, but only
in a negative sense. To put a child, still more a
remote descendant, to death for an ancestral crime
would be held a monstrous perversion of justice, re-
volting to the moral sense. Surely then we cannot
ascribe to Almighty God conduct which we should
regard as immoral on the part of man. Our conscience
rebels against the notion that God would consign to
endless torment any human being for a sin committed
by a remote ancestor. In matter of fact God condemns
no one to endless torment. He inflicts no arbitrary
punishment on any one. " The soul that sinneth, it
shall die." " God will have all men to be saved and
62 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
come unto the knowledge of the truth." But what do
we mean by being saved ? Not simply the remission
of punishment. So far from it, the man who has a
real sense of his own guilt has no wish to escape
due punishment. He seeks, on the contrary, to make
reparation for the wrong. God cannot make us happy
by simply forgiving us and imputing to us a righteous-
ness which belongs to another. Our conscience is
burdened rather than relieved by learning that an
innocent person has borne the punishment which
we deserved. Do you suppose you could make all the
criminals in this kingdom happy by a general gaol
delivery ? Far from it, unless you had previously
reformed their characters and rooted their evil habits
out of their nature. You must not believe that God
is keeping any one in a place of torment against that
person's will. " The kingdom of heaven," said our
Lord on one occasion, ** is within you." The kingdom
of hell is also within the sinner's own breast, in the
anarchy and tormenting appetites of a ruined consti-
tution. Men are not punished arbitrarily in the
spiritual world for what they have done here, but
for what they continue to do there as the inevitable
consequence of the habits formed in this world.
Pain does not assail the drunkard to-day as an
arbitrary infliction apart from the excess of yester-
day ; it is the excess of yesterday continued in its
results and impelling him to a repetition of the
cause of his misery. Death makes no breach in the
continuity of human character. Man carries with
him into the spiritual world precisely that character
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICE 63
which he bore in this Hfe. " He that is unjust, let
him be unjust still : and he which is filthy, let him be
filthy still : and he that is righteous, let him be righteous
still : and he that is holy, let him be holy still." The
punishment of the lost is no arbitrary infliction from
without, but a torment springing from within ; from
raging animal appetites or fiendish passions which de-
vour the wretched creatures who have become their im-
potent slaves. So long as sin remains in man's nature
he must of necessity be miserable, for he cherishes in
his bosom the scorpion from which comes his pain.
God strives to root out sin from our nature because
He knows that pardon is otherwise useless. God loves
us, and there is nothing so inexorable as love when it
is genuine. There is no weakness in it. It will inflict
present anguish to save from future misery. And
thus God never passes over the sins of those He loves.
He will not leave them alone, will not abandon them
to themselves. He takes away the desire of their
eyes, sends them cruel disappointments, forces them
into the narrow thorny way, desolates their homes and
leaves their idols all shivered around them, that they
may learn where their true happiness lies. As gold is
put into the furnace to separate the dross from the
pure ore, so God flings men into the furnace of afflic-
tion, that He may separate the sin which He hates
from the soul which He loves. That is why He is
called in the Old and New Testament " a consuming
fire." Fire does not destroy, does not annihilate : it
disintegrates, separates substances which are foreign
to each other. God pursues us with the fire of His
64 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
love, seeking to melt and mould us into conformity
with His will, because that is the only way in
which He can make us happy. But He is never
vindictive, never unwilling to forgive, never requires a
victim, like a pagan deity, to appease offended majesty.
* What then do we mean by the Atonement when
we use it in the sense of propitiation? Now re-
member, to start with, that the barrier to reconcilia-
tion lies always in the will of man, never in the will
of God. Atonement means making at one again
persons who have been sundered. How are they to
be brought together? Analyse your own feelings.
When you have wronged, deeply hurt, one who has
been kind to you, what is your first feeling ? A
longing to make reparation. Forgiveness would be
painful to you without reparation on your part.
Your conscience tells you of a law of compensation
which forbids complete reconciliation, entire atone-
ment, till the law of compensation has been satisfied.
Even a child will yearn to offer some gift, purchased
perhaps with the parent's own money, to expiate its
faults. There is an innate sense of justice in the
breast of man which is a reflex of the Divine justice.
But what do we mean by the Divine justice ? We
mean simply Divine love at war with sin, which is
the contradiction of all that is truly lovable.^ The
* ' Giustizia mosse '1 mio alto fattore :
Fecemi la divina potestate,
La somma sapienza e '1 primo amore,'
Inferno, canto iii.
We may acknowledge the profound truth which underlies this
THE EI3CHAEISTIC SACEIFICE 65
law of compensation or retribution pervades the
universe. In the beginning God made everything
*' very good," and He so ordered the work of His
hands that it should inevitably avenge on the trans-
gressor, sooner or later, every violation of the Divine
order. Man's happiness is therefore contingent on
his conformity to the will of God, and every viola-
tion of that will must entail suffering, which is thus
a finger-post set up by the Eternal Love to warn
the unwary from dangerous paths. God wills the
happiness of every form of created life, and it is
probable that in the worjd of life below man happi-
ness predominates so largely as to reduce conscious
suffering almost to zero. To the animal mere exis-
tence is a joy. Its life is ever in the present. No
regrets haunt it from the past, and coming events
do not cast their shadows before. And when death
overtakes it, either by natural process or violence,
there is probably little or no suffering, as we under-
stand the word. It is when man appears upon the
scene that suffering really begins, ^nd justice is the
form which the Divine love takes to drive man into
the ways of happiness. It is therefore a paralogism
to contrast Divine love and Divine justice as if they
were opposite, or even different, attributes. Love
always gives happiness to those who conform to its
laws ; in the form of justice it inflicts pain on the
sinner, and must continue to do so while he sins.
* But it may be objected that it is not the sinner
explanation of the origin of the cittd dolente without necessarily
adopting all Dante's views on Eschatology.
6G THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
who always suffers, but very often the innocent. In
matter of fact the sinner always does suffer, though the
suffering may be long delayed and he may fail to recog-
nise its cause when it comes. But it is undoubtedly
true that the innocent do suffer for the sins and
errors of others. How is this to be reconciled with
the Divine justice which I have called the offspring
of Divine love ? The answer is that mankind is an
organic unity, a moral organism, so that injury done
to a part is in fact done to the whole. ^ This view
is enforced all through the Bible, and by none more
emphatically than by St. Paul, as in the following
passages : " For as we have many members in one
body, and all members have not the same office ; so
we, being many, are one body in Christ, and seve-
rally members one of another." And these several
members have need of each other, so " that there
should be no schism in the body; but that the
members should have the same care one for another.
And whether one member suffer, all the members
suffer with it ; or one member be honoured, all the
members rejoice with it." Human language bears
witness to this doctrine — in such words, for example,
as " fellow-feeling" and "sympathy ; " and the history
of the race furnishes abundant illustration of it.
Even physically one member may affect injuriously a
' ' See Dr. Kedney's Christian Doctrine Harmonised and its
Rationality Vindicated, i. 265. A striking and profound book,
which has come under my notice as these sheets have been passing
through the press, and which I have not been able as yet to read
through — indeed, to read at all with the care which it evidently
deserves.' This note was written nine years ago.
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICE 67
whole community — may propagate a germ of disease
which vitiates the Hves of all. Spiritual influences,
being much more subtle, are consequently much
more contagious. We are constantly throwing out
moral influences on each other by word, look,
gesture ; and the law of vicarious suffering is thus
seen to pervade the human race. But there is no
injustice, inasmuch as the race is one, a real organism,
moral, intellectual, and bodily; no injustice more
than there is, according to St. Paul's analogy, in the
members of the human body being severally affected
by each other's pains.
* The Eternal Son of God, then, having become
Incarnate, having taken human nature in its
integrity, with the hereditary proclivities of the Fall
cut off by His miraculous Conception, and having, in
St. Paul's language, thus "recapitulated" humanity
in His reconstruction of it, it follows that He also
bore and suffered for its sins. " He was made sin
for us Who knew no sin," and thereby made an
atonement for the whole race.
* Now we all awake, when we begin to reason
about these things, to the consciousness of our un-
worthiness to appear before God. We have a feeling
of guilt on our conscience, which bears witness to our
organic membership of an attainted race. But, in
truth, there is no need to puzzle ourselves about in-
herited guilt. We have sins enough of our own to
humble us and to make us exclaim with Peter:
" Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, Lord."
The natural impulse of fallen man is to hide himself
F 2
68 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
like Adam, from the presence of his Maker. Human
nature therefore needs an atonement, and has always
cried aloud for it ; needs some way of access back to
God, some means whereby the alienation that has
subsisted between man's nature and God's shall be
removed. And this was done by the Incarnation of
the Divine nature in Jesus of Nazareth. By that
transcendent condescension the Son of Man " opened
the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers " — to all, that
is, who choose to avail themselves of the restored
heritage of humanity. God the Son took human
nature in its integrity, and thus learnt experimen-
tally what sin entailed. Through His humiliation,
suffering, and death He fulfilled the law of retribu-
tion which ordains that morally every wrong must
be righted ; that sin is sure to find the sinner out
sooner or later; that humanity, collectively and
regarded as a moral entity, must pay the debt of its
transgression ; that an offence against Eternal Love
must be undone. So, you see, the atonement made
by Christ is in a manner the payment of a ransom
or debt ; but a ransom, not to appease a vengeful
Divine Father, but to liberate mankind from the
thraldom of a disorganised nature. For in sad
truth man unredeemed is in real bondage : bondage
to Nature, which has become his master and tyrant
instead of being his servant ; bondage to ancestral
tendencies towards physical and moral degenera-
tion ; bondage to an obliquity of vision and infirmity
of purpose which make him an easy prey to tempta-
tion. To break the spell of these malign influences ;
THE EUCHAEISTIO SACKIFICE 69
to place at the centre of human nature a new
principle of life from which men may make a fresh
start : — this surely is in a very real sense to pay a
ransom for fallen man ; to break his bonds ; to open
the door of his prison and enable him to regain his
liberty. And this is what Christ did by His atoning
sacrifice — a sacrifice begun when He " emptied
Himself " of His Divine glory, and consummated
when He died on the Cross. Had our Lord been a
mere man He could not have made an atonement.
His acts could have affected none but Himself ; they
could have had no influence on the destiny of the
race. But the Humanity of Christ is not that of
any particular man; it is universal humanity,
humanity in the abstract, humanity viewed germi-
nally. His Manhood therefore reaches to every
member of the race. He is the pure Vine of which
all human beings may become branches ; the Well
of Living Water out of which all may drink and
imbibe eternal life. Man may now approach His Maker
without shame or fear, for he may approach Him in
the nature of the Second Adam, in the very manhood
which God Himself now wears. Humanity is thus
made, as St. Peter does not hesitate to express it,
"partaker of the Divine nature."^ An atonement
has been made which is adequate to all the require-
ments of the case. Look again at the first chapter
* <l>v<ris, not oijcria, i.e. the attributes of God, which are in part
communicable, not His incommunicable essence. It was of the (jyvcris,
not the oiiaia, that the Word emptied Himself, " economically," when
He became man.
70 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of the Epistle to the Colossians in the Hght of the
explanations which I have given, and you will see
what a depth of meaning and moral grandeur is
concentrated in the Apostle's terse statement of the
doctrine of the Atonement as an all-embracing
dispensation existing eternally in the Divine inten-
tion, and not as an isolated fact in time to meet an
unforeseen emergency. It is in the light of that
great truth that St. Paul's references to predestination
must be understood. And it is in that sense that one
of our own Articles of Beligion explains the matter
when it tells us that " we must receive God's promises
[of salvation] in such wise as they be generally set
forth to us in Holy Scripture." '* Generally set
forth ; " that does not mean set forth for the most
part or in a general way, but set forth generically —
that is, as applicable to the entire race. The word
in the Latin version of the seventeenth Article indi-
cates this interpretation. This universality of the
Atonement as covering the whole of creation had
strong hold of St. Paul's mind. He states it as
follows in Eph. i. 9-12 : " Having made known
anto us the mystery of His will, according to His
good pleasure which He hath purposed in Himself :
that in the dispensation of the fulness of times He
might gather together in one [the essential idea of
atonement] all things in Christ, both which are in
heaven, and which are on earth ; even in Him : in
Whom also we have obtained an inheritance, beingpre-
destinated according to the purpose of Him Who
worketh all things after the counsel of His own will :
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICB 71
that we should be to the praise of His glory, who first
trusted in Christ." The word translated " gather
together in one," means " recapitulated," summed up
and reduced to harmonious unity under one Head
through the Incarnation. That is the leading idea
of the Atonement in St. Paul's teaching ; and the
predestination he speaks of is simply that of pre-emi-
nence in a world-wide process.
* And it is this view of it which has made the
doctrine of the Atonement so attractive and subduing,
revolutionising man's ideas not only towards God, or
even towards man, but towards all creation, investing
it with a mystery and sanctity it never had inspired
before. God, as depicted in the Old Testament, says
Arthur Hallam — and we may add still more so as He
is exhibited in the Incarnation — ** was a manifold
everlasting manifestation of one deep feeling — a
desire for human affection. Love is not asked in
vain from generous dispositions;" and Infinite Love
condescending to sue for the love of man becomes
irresistible to all minds who believe in the Incarna-
tion and have not polluted their affections. A
striking illustration of this is given in a letter from
a Christian native in one of the South Sea Islands,
who had been a cannibal. He went up to the altar
one day to receive the Holy Communion, and I will
relate in his own words what followed : " When I
approached the table I did not know beside whom I
should have to kneel. Then suddenly I saw beside
me a man who some years ago slew my father, and
drank bis blood ,i whopa I then swore I would kill th^
72 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
lirst time I should see him. Now think what I felt
when I suddenly knelt beside him. It came upon
me with terrible power, and I could not prevent it,
and so I went back to my seat. Arriving there I
saw in the spirit the upper sanctuary, and seemed
to hear a voice saying, ' Hereby shall all men know
that ye are My disciples, if ye have love one to
another.' That made a deep impression on me, and
it seemed to me in thought that I saw another sight,
a cross, and a man nailed thereon, and I heard him
say : ' Father, forgive them, for they know not what
they do.' Then I went back to the altar."
'Another illustration still more remarkable is
supplied by the famous passage reported from
Napoleon's conversations at St. Helena — a passage
that cannot be quoted too often. "I have been
accustomed to put before me the examples of
Alexander and Caesar, with the hope of rivalling
their exploits, and living in the minds of men for
ever. Yet, after all, in what sense does Alexander,
in what sense does Caesar, live? Who knows or
cares anything about them? . . . But, on the con-
trary, there is just one Name in the world that
lives. It is the Name of One Who passed His years
in obscurity, and Who died a malefactor's death.
Eighteen hundred years have gone since that time,
but still it has its hold upon the human mind. It
has possessed the world, and it maintains possession.
Amid the most varied nations, under the most diver-
sified circumstances, in the most cultivated, in the
rudest races and intellects, in all classes of society,
THE EUCHARISTIO SACRIFICE 73
the Owner of that great Name reigns. High and
low, rich and poor, acknowledge Him. Millions of
souls are conversing with Him, are venturing on
His Word, are looking for His presence. Palaces,
sumptuous, innumerable, are raised to His honour ;
His image, as in the hour of His deepest humilia-
tion, is triumphantly displayed in the proud city, in
the open country, in the corners of streets, on the
tops of mountains. ... It is worn next the heart
in life ; it is held before the failing eyes in death.
Here, then, is One Who is not a mere name. Who
is not a mere fiction. He is dead and gone, but
still He lives — lives as the living energetic thought
of successive generations, as the awful motive power
of a thousand great events. He has done without
effort what others with lifelong struggles have not
done. Can He be less than Divine ? Who is He
but the Creator Himself, Who is Sovereign over His
own works, towards Whom our eyes turn instinc-
tively because He is our Father and our God ? " ' i
Nothing is clearer from the teaching both of the
Old Testament and the New than the necessity of
two factors in the process of man's salvation — God's
grace and man's co-operation. Neither is operative
without the other. The obedience of nature is
mechanical. ' He hath given them a law which
shall not be broken. They continue this day
according to Thine ordinance, for all things serve
Thee.' This is true of all organic life below man.
* Christianity in Relation to Science and Morals, sixth edition,
pp. 153-180.
74 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
It is true even of the animal world. They follow
their nature, a law of mechanical necessity. ' I will
inform thee and teach thee in the way wherein thou
shalt go, and I will guide thee with mine eye.' That
is the rule laid down for man. It is one test of a
good portrait that its eye should follow you, should
be fixed upon you, from whatever part of the room
you examine the picture. God's eye follows us
wheresoever we may wander. '• Thou art about my
path, and about my bed, and spiest out all my ways.'
He appeals to our reason, to our emotions, to our
innate love— if our nature had fair play— of what is
true and beautiful and noble, and to our instinctive
loathing of what is mean, impure, and false. But
His method is that of persuasion, never of irresistible
force. For He made man in His own image, and
endowed him with personahty, which implies the
awful gift of a free will, and therefore the power to
obey or disobey his Creator.
The law imposed on the lower creation is
different. They cannot choose but to obey. And
therefore the Psalmist goes on, after the verse
quoted above : ' Be ye not like to horse and mule,
which have no understanding ; whose mouths must
be held with bit and bridle lest they come near unto
thee.' * * Bit and bridle ' for the brute creation ; for
man the eye of the ' understanding ' and the purity
of heart, to which is promised the vision of God :
this is his only guide, inasmuch as he is — to
quote Bacon's phrase — ' a kind of god ' on earth, a
» Ps. xxxii. 9, 10.
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFIOE 75
vicegerent of the Most High among inferior creatures.
He alone is endowed with power of origination, and
even with some delegated power of creation. A
great poem, or statue, or picture, or masterpiece of
music, is not each of these a creation, a bringing
into being something which existed before only in
the rude material, if indeed even in that ? A great
poem is a real creation out of nothing. And the
statue came out of the mind of the sculptor as truly
as Adam, according to Genesis, came out of the
mind of His Maker. And a composition by Handel,
or Beethoven, or Mozart, what is it but a creation, the
circumambient air being but the medium for giving
expression to the musician's ideas in the sphere of
sound ?
And there is another sense, too, in which man is
truly ' a kind of god.' It is his province and his
privilege to enable natures inferior to his own to
reach their ideal perfection. ' The eyes of all wait
upon Thee, God,' exclaims the Psalmist. The
eyes of many lower organisms wait upon man.
Birds, quadrupeds, fishes, flowers, wait upon man
to lift them out of their natural state and endow
them with attributes which by their own striving
they could never acquire. And when he withdraws
his hand they all relapse to their original state.
In this way men are, as the Apostle tells us,
* fellow-workers with God,' ^ alike in the natural
and spiritual Hfe. It is a mystery, yet a fact,
that God's works are often left imperfect and in-
» 2 Cor, vi. 1,
76 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
complete because man will not do his part ; and
God's intentions are thus frustrated because man
rejects the glorious privilege of being a fellow-
worker with his Maker. And in man's own
salvation this human factor is as necessary as the
Divine. Luther relied on St. Paul especially as his
great authority for his doctrine of salvation by faith
only. But St. Paul is equally emphatic as to the
necessity of works as the fruit of a true faith.
Indeed, faith itself belongs to the category of works,
for it is a human energy. Never was there a more
profitless and needless controversy than that
between faith and works. St. Paul condenses the
whole matter into a single sentence : ' Work out
your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it
is God that worketh in you, both to will and to
work for His good pleasure.' * The cure of
Naaman's leprosy is a parable of God's method as
revealed to us alike in the kingdom of nature and
of grace. * Go and wash in Jordan seven times,
and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou
shalt be clean. But Naaman was wroth, and went
away, and said. Behold, I thought. He will surely
come out to me and stand, and call on the name of the
Lord his God, and move his hand over the place,
and recover the leper. Are not Abana and Pharpar,
rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of
Israel? May I not wash in them, and be clean?
So he turned and went away in a rage.'
Naaman had reason on his side, the reason of
' Phil. ii. 12, 13.
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICE 77
the natural man. The Jordan contained no curative
virtue to cleanse the leper. No test that the skill of
man could apply would have been able to find any
property in the Jordan to heal the smitten Syrian ;
and Abana and Pharpar, coming down from snowy
Lebanon, looked fairer to the eye. But God
had appointed the thirty miles' journey to the Jordan
and the sevenfold bath in its turbid stream to cure
Naaman, and that made all the difference. And
Naaman's noble nature, after his outburst of anger
at what he deemed an exhibition of superstitious
ceremonialism, listened to the saner reason of his
slaves, and received his reward. Men often reason
like Naaman now, and the vice of all that kind of
reasoning is the unconscious presumption of dictating
to Almighty God the terms on which they will
condescend to receive His gifts. Our part is simply
to find out what conditions He has in matter of fact
ordained in each case, and act accordingly.
Now let us apply this to the doctrine of the
Eucharistic Sacrifice. Of course there is no question
as to the completeness of Christ's Sacrifice on the
Cross, no question of any repetition of that sacrifice,
no impious question of any further mactation. But,
on the other hand, our part remains to be done,
namely, to ' fill up on our side the lacking afflictions
of Christ.' Now, in the view of all Christian
antiquity, the Eucharist is in a special manner the
Divinely appointed means for placing Christians en
rapport with the Sacrifice of Christ at once in its
vivifying and mediatorial aspects. That Sacrifice is
78 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
going on now. He is Priest at once and Victim in
heaven. It is in His sacrificial aspect that He appears
to the disciple whom He loved all through the
Apocalypse. He appears as ' a Lamb standing as
though slain ' (wy hacjiayfjLsvov) ; standing because He
' is alive for evermore,' and it is the office of a priest
to stand while offering ; but also ' as a Lamb
sacrificially slain,' to indicate the perpetuity of His
Sacrifice as well as of His priesthood ; bearing on
His glorified Humanity the marks of His victorious
passion. Twenty-nine times is He thus described in
His sacrificial character in the Apocalypse. He is the
Lamb ' in the midst of the throne, standing as though
slain.' The four and twenty elders ' fall down before
the Lamb.' The saints sing, * Worthy is the Lamb that
was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and
strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.' We
read also of * the wrath of the Lamb ; ' the diminutive
apviov indicating His gentleness ; yet a gentleness
that can never make a compromise with sin, and
hence 'the wrath of the Lamb.' The robes of the
saints are * made white in the blood of the Lamb.' And
we read of ' the song of Moses and the Lamb,' and ' the
marriage of the Lamb,' and the * marriage supper of
the Lamb,' and * the bride, the Lamb's wife,' and ' the
Lamb' as 'the light' of the heavenly city, and 'the
throne of God and of the Lamb.'
In this Book, and all through the New Testa-
ment, the Church on earth and the Church in Para-
dise are regarded as one : the one militant, the other
triumphant ; the one enjoying the repose and the
guerdon of victory, the other still on foreign service and
THE EUCHAEISTIC SACEIFICE 79
engaged in unceasing warfare. Yet it is but one
army, one society, * the whole family in heaven and
earth,' as St. Paul calls it. And the Eucharist is
the great bond of union, the nexus between the
Church visible and invisible, uniting both *in one
communion and fellowship in the mystical death ' of
the Lamb. And so we do our feeble best here to join
our Eucharistic adoration with the song of the Lamb :
' Therefore with angels and archangels, and with all
the company of heaven, we laud and magnify Thy
glorious Name ; evermore praising Thee, and saying,
Holy, holy, holy. Lord God of hosts, heaven and
earth are full of Thy glory : Glory be to Thee,
Lord most High.'
It was this view of it that made the ancient un-
divided Church speak of the Eucharist in accents of
awe, calling it by such names as ' the holy sacrifice,'
' the unbloody sacrifice,' ' the tremendous sacrifice.'
Their thought was not on Calvary. That was but a
past incident in the sacrificial life of the Lamb.
Their gaze was not backward, but forward and
upward. Through Christ's own appointed ' Mystery,'
as they also called the Eucharist, they felt that they
came within the penumbra of the worship in heaven ;
' forgetting,' like St. Paul, ' those things which are
behind, and reaching forth to those things which are
before.'
So much, then, as to the rationale of the
Eucharistic Sacrifice. And now let us see what
our own representative divines say upon the doctrine
of the Heal Presence, and the Eucharistic Sacrifice,
its correlative.
80 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
CHAPTEK III
THE EEFOEMATION : ITS CAUSES AND EESULTS
In considering the testimony of the AngHcan divines,
especially those of the sixteenth century, on the
subject of the Eucharist, the first thing that is likely
to strike one is the fact that both sides in the con-
troversy are wont to appeal to them with equal
confidence. But there is, after all, nothing surpris-
ing in this when we regard the circumstances. At
the time of the Eeformation our Church and nation
were engaged in a death-struggle with a politico-
religious polity, the most marvellous creation of
human craft and literary forgeries that the world has
ever seen.^ Historians the least friendly to sacerdotal
claims, like Guizot and Hallam, have freely admitted
the immense debt rendered to the cause of political
' After the Vatican Council Dr. Dollinger began the study of the
history of the Papacy afresh, and he told me some years afterwards that
much as he knew about the system of forgeries on which the Papacy
had been gradually reared, he was not in the least prepared for the
mass of cumulative evidence which his special study of the subject
had revealed to him. He was engaged in arranging his materials
for a great work on the subject when death overtook him. Of
course, a whole series of writers, Aquinas included, accepted these
forgeries in good faith as authentic history.
REFOEMATION CAUSES AND RESULTS 81
progress and of civilisation in general by the Latin
Church of the Middle Ages. But it is a fallacy to credit
the Papacy with all this service. Some of the Popes,
no doubt, deserve all the praise that their most zealous
admirers can bestow upon them ; but it is certainly
open to question whether the Papacy, as a system
and in the long run, has not done more to retard
than to advance the civilisation of Christendom. In
defending the liberties of the Church against the
encroachments of a licentious and tyrannical feudal-
ism, some great prelates were undoubtedly champions
of the cause of freedom in the State as well as in the
Church. But if the Papacy gave a languid support
to Anselm in his contest with William Rufus, it
instigated and supported King John in his con-
spiracy against the rights and liberties of the
Church and State of England in the interest of the
Papacy, and suspended the patriotic Langton from the
primacy for his share in securing the Great Charter.
It has been the rule of Papal policy always to support
either the cause of freedom or of despotism according
as either seemed likely to further the aggrandise-
ment of the Papacy. So that even its contributions
to the cause of freedom have generally proceeded
rather from the calculations of an astute selfishness
than from any spontaneous love of freedom for its
own sake.
At the period of the Reformation the Papal
power, though shaken, was still, both in religion and
politics, the most formidable in Europe ; and it was
apparently prepared to stick at nothing in compass-
82 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
ing its ends. This is a strong statement, which
ought not to be made without convincing proof.
Unfortunately the evidence is abundant and incontro-
vertible. It will suffice here to quote the following
from an authentic and unsuspected source.^ On
May 3, 1583, the Papal Nuncio wrote from Paris to
the Cardinal of Como, Secretary of State under
Gregory XIII. :—
The Duke of Guise and the Duke of Mayenne have
told me that they have a plan for killing the Queen of
England by the hand of a Catholic, though not one out-
wardly, who is near her person and is ill affected towards
her for having put to death some of his Catholic relations.
This man, it seems, sent word of this to the Queen of
Scotland,^ but she refused to attend to it. He was,
however, sent hither, and they have agreed to give him,
if he escape, otherwise his sons, 100,000 francs, as ,to
which he is satisfied to have the security of the Duke of
Guise for 50,000 and to see the rest deposited with the
Archbishop of Glasgow in a box, of which he will keep a
key, so that he or his sons may receive the money, should
the plan succeed ; and the Duke thinks it may. The Duke
asks for no assistance from our Lord [the Pope] in this
affair ; but when the time comes he will go to a place of
his near the sea to await the event, and then cross over
on a sudden to England. As to putting to death that
wicked woman, I said to him that I will not write about
it to our Lord [the Pope], nor should I, nor tell your most
illustrious Lordship to inform him of it ; because, though
I believe our Lord [the Pope] would be glad that God
• Namely, Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, edited by
the Fathers of the Congregation of the London Oratory, with an
Historical Introduction by Thomas Francis Knox, D.D.
* Then a prisoner in England.
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 83
should punish in any way whatever that enemy of his,
still it would be unfitting that His Vicar should procure it
by these means. The Duke was satisfied ; but later on
he added that for the enterprise of England, which in
this case would be much more easy, it will be necessary
to have here in readiness money to enlist some troops to
follow him, as he intends to enter England immediately
in order that the Catholics may have a head. He asks
for no assistance for his own passage. But as the Duke
of Mayenne must remain on the Continent to collect some
soldiers to follow him [the Duke of Guise] (it being
probable that the heretics, who hold the treasure, the
fleet, and the ports, will not be wanting to themselves, so
that it will be necessary to make a fight for it), he wishes
that for this purpose 100,000 or at least 80,000 scudi
should be ready here. I let him know the agreement
there is between our Lord the Pope and the Catholic
King with regard to the contribution, and I told him that
on our Lord the Pope's part he may count on every
possible assistance when the Catholic King does his part.
The Agent of Spain beheves that his King will gladly
give this aid, and therefore it will be well, in conformity
with the provisions so often made, to consider how to
provide the sum, which will amount to 20,000 scudi
from our Lord the Pope, when the Catholic King gives
his 60,000 scudi. God grant that with this small sum
that great kingdom may be gained. The Queen of Scot-
land wrote the other day that she had won over the Earl ^
' Earl of Shrewsbury. Few who came in contact with her could
resist the charm of the unfortunate Mary Stuart. One is glad to
learn that she scorned to listen to any proposal to murder Elizabeth,
cruelly as she was treated by that sovereign. Whatever her faults —
and considering her upbringing and her social and political environ-
ment the wonder is they were so few — few princesses, with so many
temptations to the contrary, have exhibited so much generosity and
magnanimity.
Q 2
84 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
who has her in custody, and that she is sure of being
able to free herself when she pleases, but that she
wishes to wait for a good opportunity. Independently of
this plan, the Duke of Guise expects in a few days informa-
tion from four gentlemen of rank [principali signori} in
England, and he will let me know the result. Meanwhile
he has nothing of moment from Scotland or England to
tell me.
The Cardinal Secretary of State answered this
despatch on May 23 as follows : —
I have reported to our Lord the Pope that your Lord-
ship has written to me in cipher about the affairs of Eng-
land, and since his Holiness cannot but think it good that
that kingdom should in some way or other be relieved
from oppression and restored to God and our holy religion,
his Holiness says that, in the event of the matter being
effected, the 80,000 will be, as your Lordship says, very
well employed. His Holiness will therefore make no
difficulty about paying his fourth when the time comes,
if the Agents of the Catholic King do the same with their
three-fourths : and as to this point, the Princes of Guise
should make a good and firm agreement with the Catholic
Agent on the spot. With regard to our 20,000, since
your Lordship has already in hand 4,000, and to send the
rest without knowing for certain that there will be any
result would be to take trouble for nothing, while not to
send them might injure the affair, if by chance it should
become necessary to pay them, his Holiness thinks it
best that in case of need your Lordship should take up
the whole or part where you are by a bill of exchange on
the credit of some Italian merchant, or other person,
which his Holiness will not fail to meet immediately it
is due : I say the whole or a part because it is not likely
that it will all be needed at once, since it is more probable
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 85
that it will have to be spent in two or three months
rather than in one, in which case your Lordship will
easily supply the first advance with the 4,000 you have
already in your hand, and will have time to write here for
the rest. Nevertheless, if necessity requires it, your
Lordship can adopt the expedient which I have mentioned
of raising the money there ; and do not stop on this account
from doing good. But God grant that this may not prove
like so many other promises which have never had any
result.' *
There is a long and interesting memorandum in
Spanish from Father Persons (sometimes spelt
Parsons), written from Kome, June 30, 1597, to
Don Juan de Ydraquez, which confirms this and
other attempts on the life of Elizabeth, all inspired
from Eome or by the Jesuits. ^ The policy of the
Jesuits, which they moved heaven and earth to carry
out, was to procure an invasion of England by
' Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, pp. xlvi-xlviii. A most
valuable collection of documents, which no student of the Keformation
can afford to neglect.
'^ E.g : ' Hecieron otra traycion que fue que mientras que estavan
tratando con el Duque de Guysa y con Alano y Personio de procurar
y aguardar algunas fuerpas de Espana, de las quales ya avia mucha
probabilidad que vendrian presto, los dos embiaron secretamente a
Ynglaterra un cierto espia que avia sido muchos anos de la Keyna
Ynglaterra en Italia y otras partes, llamado Guilielmo Parry ; el qual
descubrio luego a la Reyna todo lo que passava, come se save por
sus confessiones que estan impresas, y mas, la dixo como tenia
commission para matar tam bien a ella a su tiempo para llevantar a
la Reyna de Escocia y para prevenir la invasion Espanola, la que los
Jesuitas pretendian : y aunque por entonces la Eeyna le agradecio y
regalo, toda via despues le hizo ahurcar ; y este fue el fin del
doctor Parry.' — Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, pp.
387-8.
86 THE REFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
Philip II., who was to rule England either directly
or through a member of his family ; and eventually
Scotland, Elizabeth having been either assassinated,
executed, or deposed. Mary Stuart was to be
restored to liberty, and to the throne of Scotland, on
condition of agreeing to the supersession of her son
on account of his heresy — a device by which Philip
and the Jesuits hoped to unite England and Scotland
in one kingdom under the Spanish crown. The
King of France, on the other hand, and the French
and Scotch Catholics, were opposed to the Hispano-
Jesuit enterprise, preferring the restoration of the
Pope's supremacy by an expedition from France,
aided by a Scotch invasion and an English Roman
Catholic insurrection, which should place both Scot-
land and England under the sovereignty of Mary.
They strove, therefore, to anticipate the Jesuits' plan
by the assassination of Elizabeth. Hence the plot
described above, in which the principals were the
Pope (Gregory XIIL), the Papal Nuncio in Paris,
the Duke of Guise, and the Roman Catholic Arch-
bishop of Glasgow.
I should have thought that the Fathers of the
London Oratory, while pleading perhaps the moral
perturbations caused by the political ethics and
stress of circumstances of that time, would never-
theless have reprobated those repeated attempts on
the life of Queen Elizabeth. On the contrary, I
found, to my great surprise, an elaborate defence of
them. The gist of the argument may be found in
the following extract from Father Knox's interesting
EEFORMATION CAUSES AND RESULTS 87
and remarkably frank ' Historical Introduction.' ^
The foundation of his argument is the following
quotation from the Corpus Juris of the Roman
Church : —
If a temporal lord, after having been required and
admonished by the Church, shall neglect to cleanse his
land from heretical defilement, let him be excommunicated
by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province.
x\nd if he shall through contempt fail to give satisfaction
within a year, let this be signified to the Sovereign Pontiff,
that he may thereupon declare his vassals absolved from
allegiance to him, and offer his land for seizure by Catho-
lics, that they may, after expelling the heretics, possess it
by an incontestable title, and keep it in the integrity of the
faith : saving the right of the principal lord, provided he
puts no obstacle in the way of this and oppose no hin-
drance ; the same law being nevertheless observed with
regard to those who have no principal lords.
On this Father Knox observes : — -
This decree, by its insertion in the Corpus Juris,
became part of the ordinary statute law of the Church.
It had not been abrogated by desuetude in the sixteenth
century ; for Allen and Persons appeal to it as in full
force in a memorandum drawn up for Philip II. ; and
St. Pius V. acted in accordance with it when he issued
his bull deposing Queen Elizabeth. . . . ^
* Father Knox died while the proof sheets of his Introduction
were passing through the press, and the book was published by the
Fathers of the Oratory.
2 The arrogance and insolence of that bull may be judged from
its opening paragraph : ' Kegnans in excelsis cui data est omnis in
csbIo et in terra potestas, unam sanctam, catholicam, et apostolicam
ecclesiam, extra quam nulla est salus, uni soli in terris, videlicet
B8 THE EEFOEMAl:10N SETTLEMEN^T
This Pontifical act was not a mere empty protest.
Its effect was that EHzabeth ceased to be Queen de jure,
while she remained Queen de facto as before.
But she was a usurper, and must be got rid of as
soon as an opportunity presented itself. No such
opportunity occurred during the Pontificate of
Paul V.
It was far, however, from the desire of Gregory XIII.
[who succeeded Sixtus V.] that the bull should remain
without execution. He saw too clearly the ruin to
innumerable souls which resulted from Elizabeth's
continuance on the throne. As spiritual pastor of these
souls, he was bound to use all lawful means to save them
from perishing. Hence, not content with aiding by his
munificent gifts the purely spiritual work of conversion
which was carried on by the colleges of Douay and Eome,
the latter being his own foundation, he left nothing
undone to impel Philip 11. of Spain to overthrow Elizabeth
by force of arms. Thus in 1577, when it had been
arranged that Don John of Austria, after pacifying
Flanders, should undertake the conquest of England and
place Mary Queen of Scots on the English throne,
Gregory XIII. sent Mgr. Sega as his Nuncio to Don John
apostolorum principi Petro, Petrique successor! Eomano pontifici, in
potestatis plenitudine tradidit gubernandam. Hunc unum super
omnes getites et omnia regna principem constituit, qui evellat, de-
Btruat, dissipet, disperdat, plantet, et sedificet, ut fidelem populum,
mutuas charitatis nexu constrictum, in unitate spiritus contineat,
salvumque et incolumem suo exhibeat salvatori.' This bull comes
within the definition of Papal infallibility laid down by the Vatican
Council, and is therefore ' irreformable ' — an immutable article of
the creed of the Eoman Church, binding the members of that Church
to belieye that the Pope alone is by Divine appointment prince over
all nations and kingdoms,' and in that capacity rightfully deposed
Queen Elizabeth, and handed her over to any one who chose to slay her.
REE'OEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 89
with 50,000 ducats in aid of the proposed expedition. The
ill-fated expedition under Sir Thomas Stukely, which was
equipped by Gregory XIII. and sent by him to Ireland,
but which, by the treachery of its commander, was diverted
from its destination, and perished with Sebastian, King of
Portugal, at x\lcazar in Morocco, August 4, 1578, is a
further proof of the Pope's zeal in the same cause. ^
And as to the various attempts to assassinate
Elizabeth, Father Knox suggests the following
apology :—
Let me begin by putting a possible case. In a
country where the executive is pow^erless and might
prevails over right, the chief of a band of robbers has
seized an unoffending traveller and keeps him a close
prisoner until he pays for his ransom a sum which is
quite beyond his power to obtain. Now who can deny
that under these circumstances the prisoner might law-
fully kill the robber, if by so doing he could secure his
escape ? And if he might do it himself, any one, much
more a friend and kinsman, might do it for him, or he
might hire another to do it in his stead. The violent
death of the robber could not in this case be justly
regarded as a murder : it would simply be the result of
an act of self-defence on the part of the innocent man
whom he was holding captive. . . . Thus the parallel is
complete between the bandit chief and Queen Elizabeth.
Both detain with equal injustice the prisoner who has
fallen into their hands. Both have the power and the
will to murder their prisoner if circumstances make it
advisable. Both prisoners are unable to persuade their
captors to release them. If, then, it be no sin in the
captive, either by his own hand or the hand of others,
to kill the bandit chief and so escape, why was it a sin to
' Pp. xxvii-xxix.
90 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
kill Elizabeth, and by so doing to save from a lifelong
prison and impending death her helpless victim, the
Queen of Scots ? If the one act is a laudable measure of
self-defence, why is the other branded vp^ith the names of
murder and assassination ? In a word, if there is no
real disparity between the cases, why should we not use
the same weights and measures in judging of them
both ? ' 1
Certainly this is a startling doctrine, propounded
in the year of grace 1882 by ' the Fathers of the
Congregation of the London Oratory.' In virtue of
the Pope's bull of excommunication Queen Elizabeth
is to be regarded as ' the chief of a band of robbers,*
a * bandit chief,' who may justly be privately
poniarded, or shot, or poisoned. The Fathers
declare that ' there is tio proof ' that Mary was
privy to these projects of assassination ; but any
friend or kinsman might think himself justified in
secretly taking the life of Elizabeth, and the Pope
did well to aid and bless the deed.
But, in matter of fact, the attempts on Elizabeth's
life were not made for the purpose of liberating
Queen Mary, but for the purpose of restoring the
authority of the Pope over the realm of England.
Father Knox had first admitted that the Pope had
* left nothing undone to overthrow Elizabeth by
force of arms ' through a foreign invasion ; and his
Holiness had himself equipped an expedition to
* undertake the conquest of England and place
Mary Queen of Scots on the Enghsh throne.'
» P. u.
KEFOEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 91
But even if the chief object of these persistent
conspiracies and projects of assassination had been
—as it certainly was not — to Hberate Queen Mary,
are they to be excused on that plea ? Here is the
case, as stated by the Papal Nuncio at Paris for the
information of the Pope. ' A Catholic, though not
outwardly ' — that is, who pretends to be a Protestant
— and * who is near the person ' of the Queen, desires
to murder her out of revenge for the judicial execu-
tions of some relations. But he wishes to turn his
revenge to profitable account. He offers the
Queen of Scotland to take the life of Queen Eliza-
beth for the sum of 100,000 francs. On Mary's
refusal, he betakes himself to the Duke of Guise and
Duke of Mayenne. The Duke of Guise is willing to
find the money, which the Roman Catholic Arch-
bishop of Glasgow agrees to hold ' in a box, of which
he will keep the key,' till the deed is done, when the
money is to be paid over to the assassin if he escapes,
and to his sons in the event of his capture. In the
confusion which was to follow the assassination of
the Queen, the Duke of Guise is to land in England
with an army in order to put a Roman Catholic
sovereign on the English throne, and thereby restore
the Pope's supremacy. Of all this the Pope is
confidentially informed, and is asked if he will con-
tribute ' 100,000 or at least 80,000 crowns ' to the
cost of the expedition in case the assassin succeeds
in accomplishing his purpose. The Cardinal Secre-
tary of State, after consultation with the Pope,
replies that * since his Holiness cannot but think it
92 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
good that this kingdom [of England] should be in some
way or other relieved from oppression and restored to
God and our holy religion, his Holiness says that, in
the event of the matter being effected, there is no
doubt that the 80,000 crowns will be, as your
Lordship [the papal Nuncio] says, very well em-
ployed.' It was, therefore, no question of the release
of a captive from * the bandit chief ' [Elizabeth] — the
fate of the captive was a very secondary consideration
— but the restoration over the realm of England of
the intolerable yoke of an Italian prelate claiming
more than regal power. To achieve this, the Pope
is willing to hire the stiletto or the poison of an
assassin who desires to avenge a private quarrel by
murder. Comment is useless.
But even if the case were as Father Knox puts
it, I cannot accept his ethics. I will not admit that
any Christian, still less one who claims to be the
Vicar of Him who bade Peter sheath his sword
because He would not save His own precious life by
violence, would be justified in hiring an assassin to
murder even a * bandit chief ' in order to deliver a
captive.
Now when we remember that there were bands
of Seminarists from Eome and Douay and Spain
scattered all over England in various disguises,
preaching sedition, and teaching that Elizabeth was
a usurper and * bandit chief,' outlawed by the Pope,
and therefore obnoxious to death by the hand of any
one who would thereby do God service, we cannot
feel surprise at the natural revolt against all con-
EEFORMATION CAUSES AND RESULTS 93
nection with the Papacy.^ It was not a theological
so much as a political revolt, the uprising of a free
nation against the domineering insolence and inter-
meddling of a foreign priest in our domestic affairs.
Transubstantiation was eventually made a test, but
of civil loyalty rather than theological orthodoxy.
It was the climax of a struggle that had been going
on for centuries, a struggle between the Crown of
England and the Tiara of Eome. It is a popular
error to suppose that the struggle began with Henry
VIII. He inherited it from a long line of pre-
decessors. It will suffice to give the following
summary of 16 Eichard II. cap. 5 ; and Richard was
by no means the first English king who resisted
the Pope's encroachments. This early Statute of
Praeumunire declares that the Crown of England has
been free at all times ; that it has been under no
earthly subjection, but immediately subject to God
in all things touching the regality of the same Crown,
and of none other. That no submission should be
made to the Pope, who aimed at the perpetual de-
struction of the King, his crown, his regality, and all
his realm, which God defend. The Commons, and
the Lords spiritual and temporal, pledged themselves
to the defence of the liberties of the Church of
England and of the Crown as against the pretensions,
' The Roman Catholic laity of England in the mass had no
sympathy with these Roman intrigues against the liberties of
England and the life of the Queen, as their loyal conduct in the
crisis of the Spanish Armada proved. As for the clergy, they con-
formed to the Elizabethan regime, except about two hundred, till the
bull of excommunication forbade them.
94 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
claims, and usurpations of the Pope, with respect
to sentences of excommunication, and the Pope's
appointment to bishoprics and benefices, or any other
interference with the rights and Hberties of the
Church of England. And all persons getting any
bull from Eome containing any matter whatsoever,
or publishing or putting the same in use, were to
be judged traitors to the King and Kealm ; and being
thereof lawfully indicted and attainted, according to
the course of the laws of the Eealm, would suffer
pains of death, and to lose and forfeit all their lands,
hereditaments, tenements, goods, and chattels, as in
cases of high treason, by the laws of this Eealm.
This internecine struggle between the Papal
Power and the Eealm of England — in its ecclesias-
tical as well as civil character, be it remembered —
reached its crisis in the reign of Elizabeth. We
ought, therefore, to expect in that reign, as in all
crises, the development of the two antagonistic
principles in their most extreme forms. And this is
what, in matter of fact, we do find. The Puritan
exiles returned soured, embittered, hating all forms
and ceremonies, and scorning all authority in
Church and State; republicans in poHtics ^ and
' Elizabeth's leading courtiers countenanced the Puritans up to
the point where they expected to profit, as we shall see further on,
from the qualified triumph of Puritanism. On Burleigh's osten-
tatiously claiming credit one day for the care with which the
courtiers looked after ' the State, ecclesiastical,' Archbishop Parker
wrote to tell him privately, ' that he doubted when his Lordship
used those words, whether he might have smiled or lamented to
think that he would oifer it to their contemplation (who knew so
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND KESULTS 95
anarchists in religion. If they had had their way
then, they would have anticipated the Common-
wealth and abolished both Church and Monarchy.
But Elizabeth and her able ministers were too strong
for them, and the result was a compromise by which
the orthodox rule of doctrine and ritual was laid
down, with a minimum of observances to which the,
recalcitrants were required to conform, leaving the
rest to carry out the maximum. The Puritan
clergy roundly accused the Elizabethan bishops of
accepting what their consciences condemned for the
sake of promotion, and then forcing a detested
ritual on their clergy to save their own dignity.
One of the ablest spokesmen of the Puritans writes
thus some years after Elizabeth's accession : —
These [the returned exiles] at first began to oppose
the ceremonies ; but afterwards, when there was no hope
otherwise of obtaining a bishopric, they yielded, and, as
one of them openly acknowledged, undertook the office
against their consciences. In the meanwhile they
comforted their brethren, whom they perceived to be still
struggling against these things, by promising them free,
liberty in the government of their churches ; and for
some years they kept this promise. On the obtaining of
which liberty they diligently purified their churches
well that it was quite otherwise) that were driven quite out of regard.*
' To which I may join,' adds Strype, ' what the same Archbishop said
another time to the same Lord : " That how secure soever the
nobility were of these Puritans, and countenanced them against the
bishops, they themselves might rue it at last. And that all that
these men tended towards was to tho overthrow of all honourable
quality, and the setting afoot a commonwealth, or, as he called it, a
'popularityy ' — Life of Parker, ii. 323.
96 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
from all the blemishes and defilements of Popery.
Others who had yielded, incited by their example, began
to reform their churches in like manner.*
Here we see in epitome the process by which
the ritual and ceremonial sanctioned by the Orna-
ments Knbric were so ruthlessly abolished in the
dioceses of the Puritan bishops. It was by no pro-
cess of law, but by a gross violation of the law.
The leaders of the returned Puritans conformed, for
the sake of episcopal preferment, to the minimum
of ritual enforced upon them, but silenced the
reproaches of their clergy by promising them a free
hand in the matter of ritual and ' the government of
their churches,' which they immediately proceeded
to strip of all legal ornaments— crosses, crucifixes,
candlesticks, roodscreens, vestments, and painted
windows. The Queen at last interfered to stop the
vandalism, giving the Puritan bishops their choice
of obedience to the law and enforcing it on the
clergy, or the resignation of their sees. They
obeyed sullenly ; but much of the mischief was
irreparable. The self-regard of the bishops smoothed
the path of obedience for them, as one of their
Puritan censors takes care to record. * But when
the bishops perceived that the number and influence
of these parties was increasing among the people,
they thought their dignity would come to nought
unless they compelled the inferior clergy to adopt
the same usages as they did themselves. They took
up the matter therefore at the Queen's command.
• Zurich Letters, ii. 161.
EBFOEMATION CAUSES AND RESULTS 97
They deprived Samson, a most learned man,' and
* more than thirty ' other defiant clergy in London.^
The spirit of toleration was not known in those
days. The party that was up invariably persecuted
the party that was down, and there was not much
to choose between them. And the clergy, it is
lamentable to say, were generally more intolerant
than the laity. Cooper, successively Bishop of
Lincoln and Winchester, urged on Walsingham the
policy of forcing all Eoman Catholics to receive
the Sacrament in the Established Church or go to
prison. But the statesman rejected the advice of
the bishop. On another occasion he proposed to
the Privy Council that some two hundred Eoman
Catholics, ' lustie men, strong and well able to
labour,' should be transported into penal servitude,
while the feebler, who remained behind, should be
* put in some fears, probably by means of the rack.'
But the Privy Council was more merciful than
their spiritual adviser, who spared neither sex.^
Nor was it Eoman Catholics alone whom the Puritan
bishops persecuted. One of them condemned to
the stake a Fellow of Corpus Christi, Cambridge,
for heterodox opinions on the Trinity and Atone-
ment, while another burnt ' a poor half-crazy Arian.'
And to their intolerance most of them added
rapacity in its most odious forms, combined in some
cases with simony, alienating for their own use the
properties of their sees. One of them, says Mr.
* Zurich Letters, ii. 161-2.
» White's Elizabethan Bishops, pp. 60, 190-1, 196.
H
98 THE REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
White in his dispassionate and instructive volume,
* fleeced rather than fed his flock, and was probably
the greatest pluralist that the Protestant Church
has ever known. x\t the time of his consecration
he held one Archdeaconry and ten other benefices,
all of which he held " in commendam." He after-
wards added six more, thus making a total of sixteen,
nine of which were sinecures. . . . His incomings
were unrighteously great, and his outgoings were
scandalously small. He entirely neglected hospi-
tality and charity ; for the better sort were not
entertained at his table, and the wants of the poor
went unrelieved. Indeed, he was oblivious of
common honesty, for though it was his bounden
duty to keep the chancel of his cathedral in repair,
his successor, Morgan, found it roofless. He left
behind him a large fortune, which he bequeathed to
his only daughter.'
I own that I feel but small respect for zeal
against chasubles, or even crucifixes, on the part of
prelates of whom such things can be justly written.
In truth, none of the Elizabethan bishops inspires
admiration, and very few of them respect. Parker
was the best of them ; yet even him his successor
accuses of gross simony.^
The judicial and dispassionate Hallam confirms
this view of the character of the Puritan bishops of
this reign : —
The bishops of this reign do not appear, with some
distinguished exceptions, to have reflected so much
• White's Elizabethan Bishops, pp. 71, 93-4, 160, 190, 196, 209.
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 99
honour on the Established Church as those who attach
a superstitious reverence to the age of the Eeformation
are apt to conceive. In the plunder that went forward
they took good care of themselves. Charges against
them of simony, corruption, covetousness, and especially
destruction of their Church estates for the benefit of their
families, are very common — sometimes no doubt unjust,
but too frequent to be absolutely without foundation.
The Council often wrote to them, as well as concerning
them, with a sort of asperity which would astonish one
of their successors. And the Queen never restrained
herself in treating them on any provocation with a good
deal of rudeness, of which I have just mentioned an
egregious example.*
And we have similar complaints of leading
JReformers in the reign of Edw^ard VI. It is the
latitudinarian Burnet w^ho writes as follows : —
The irregular and immoral lives of many of the
professors of the Gospel gave their enemies great advan-
tages to say, they ran away from confession, penance,
fasting, and prayers, only that they might be under no
restraint, but indulge themselves in a licentious and
dissolute course of life. By these things, that were but
too visible in some of the more eminent among them, the
people were much alienated from them : and as much
as they were formerly prejudiced against Popery, they
grew to have kinder thoughts of it, and to look on all the
changes that had been made as designs to enrich some
vicious courtiers, and to let in an inundation of vice and
wickedness upon the nation. Some of the clergy that
promoted the Eeformation were not without very visible
blemishes : some indiscretions, both in their marriages
and in their behaviour, contributed not a little to raise a
' Hallam's Constitutional History, i. 304.
H 2
100 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
general aversion. It is true that there were great and
shining hghts among them . . . ; but they were few in
comparison with the many had} ■
Nor were the laity who took a leading part in
the Keformation one whit behind the leading divines
in the very mundane motives which quickened their
zeal for reformation. I appeal again to the judicial
Hallam :—
Nor could the people repose much confidence in the
judgment and sincerity of their governors, whom they
had seen submitting without outward repugnance to
Henry's schemes of religion, and whom they saw every
day enriching themselves with the plunder of the Church
they affected to reform. There was a sort of endowed
colleges or fraternities, called chantries, consisting of
secular priests, whose duty was to say daily masses for the
founders. They were abolished and given to the King
by Acts of Parliament in the last year of Henry and the
first of Edward. It was intimated in the preamble of
the latter statute that their revenues should be converted
to the erection of schools, the augmentation of the
universities, and the sustenance of the indigent. But this
was entirely neglected, and the estates fell into the
hands of the courtiers. Nor did they content themselves
with this escheated wealth of the Church. Almost every
bishopric was spoiled by their ravenous power in this
reign, either through mere alienations, or long leases, or
unequal exchanges. Exeter and Llandaff, from being
among the richest sees, fell into the class of the poorest.
Lichfield lost the chief part of its lands to raise an estate
* Hist, of the Eef. iii. 378-9. The italics are in the original.
The editor dots some of Burnet's i's : e.g. a scandal ' between the
Archbishop of York and one Norman, who claimeth the same
bishop's wife to be his.'
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 101
for Lord Paget. London, Winchester, and even Canter-
bury, suffered considerably. The Duke of Somerset was
much beloved; yet he had given no unjust offence by
pulling down some churches in order to erect Somerset
House with the materials. He had even projected the
demolition of Westminster Abbey ; but the chapter
averted this outrageous piece of rapacity, sufficient of
itself to characterise that age, by the usual method, a
grant of some of their estates.
Again : —
I have mentioned in another place how the bishopries
were impoverished in the first Eeformation under
Edward VI. The Catholic bishops who followed made
haste to plunder from a consciousness that the goods
of their Church were speedily to pass into the hands of
heretics. Hence the alienation of their estates had gone
so far that in the beginning of Elizabeth's reign statutes
were made, disabling ecclesiastical proprietors from
granting away their lands except on leases for three lives,
or twenty-one years. But an unfortunate reservation
was introduced in favour of the Crown. The Queen,
therefore, and her courtiers, continued to prey upon their
succulent victim. . . . The documents of that age contain
ample proofs of their rapacity. Thus Cecil surrounded
his mansion-house at Burleigh with estates once belong-
ing to the See of Peterborough. Thus Hatton built his
house in Holborn on the Bishop of Ely's garden.
After giving other examples, including Elizabeth's
own custom of keeping bishoprics vacant for years —
in one case eighteen years — in order to appropriate
the revenues, and in some cases alienate Church
property, the impartial historian adds : * These
transactions denote the mercenary and rapacious
102 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
spirit which leavened almost all Elizabeth's
courtiers.' ^
I have already referred to the spirit of bigotry
and intolerance v^hich characterised the leading
Reformers in Elizabeth's reign, and have given two
examples, out of several, of persons burnt at the
stake for heterodoxy. The two Primates ^ — the
mild Parker, and the somewhat truculent Sandys —
clamoured for the death of the Scottish Queen on
the sole ground of her being a Eoman Catholic.
Sandys, in a letter to Burleigh, urged the Lord
Treasurer * furthwith to cutte of the Scottish
Queene's head.' Persecution,' says Ilallam, 'is
the deadly original sin of the Eeformed Churches ;
that which cools every honest man's zeal for their
cause in proportion as his reading becomes extensive.'
Lutherans, Calvinists, and Anglican Reformers in
the reign of Edward YI., he goes on to show, are
just as amenable to the accusation as the Roman
Catholics whom they denounced. And with less
excuse. * In men hardly escaped from a similar
peril [like Cranmer], in men who had nothing to
plead but the right of private judgment, in men
who had defied the prescriptive authority of past ages
and of established power, the crime of persecution
assumes a far deeper hue, and is capable of far less
extenuation, than in a Roman inquisitor.' * Several
men indicted for heresy in the reign of Edward VI.
» Const. Hist. i. 129, 303. « Parker Corresp. p. 398.
' Const. Hist. i. 130-2.
EEFORMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 103
were bidden peremptorily to choose between recanta-
tion and death, and a Baptist of the name of Joan
Boucher was tried by a commission, of w^hich
Cranmer and Eidley were members, and condemned
to the stake. The young King, not usually disposed
to mercy, was inclined to let her off; but Cranmer
insisted on her being burnt, and burnt she was
accordingly, Bishop Scory preaching her cremation
sermon, while Latimer improved the occasion the
following Sunday at St. Paul's by preaching an
approving sermon. Some Baptist preachers were
also put to death in Elizabeth's reign, and Jewel
declares in his ' Apology ' — a book chained, with the
Bible, in churches — that ' we not only condemn the
old heretics, and pronounce them impious and lost,
and detest them to the gates of hell, but even if they
anywhere break forth and show themselves, we
restrain them severely and seriously with lawful
and civil punishments,' the stake included.
One of the strongest arguments, to my mind, for
the Church of England as a Divine institution, is the
fact of its surviving the rank and luxuriant crop of
tares which mingled with the wheat of the Eefor-
mation. The leading men on all sides — Eoman
Catholics, Puritans, Anglicans — were for the most
part men whose characters inspire no admiration
and very little respect. We behold among them all
a sad lack of spirituality or nobility of character.
Strype gives the following description of the state of
England in the year 1572, which is based on a paper
of suggestions for reform by Burleigh, whose
104 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
language Strype quotes verbally in the Minister's
denunciatory sentences : —
The state of the Church and religion at this time was
but low, and sadly neglected, occasioned in a great measure
by these unhappy controversies about the Church's
government, and other external matters in religion : which
so employed the thoughts and zeal of both clergy and
laity, that the better and more substantial parts of it were
very little regarded. The Churchmen heaped up many
benefices upon themselves, and resided upon none,
neglecting their cures ; many of them alienated their
lands, made unreasonable leases and wastes of their
woods, granted reversions and advowsons to their wives
and children, or to others for their use. Churches ran
greatly into dilapidations and decays ; and were kept nasty,
and filthy, and undecent for God's worship. Among the
laity there was little devotion. The Lord's Day greatly
profaned and little observed. The common prayers not
frequented. Some lived without any service of God at all.
Many more were heathens and atheists. The Queen's
own court an harbour for epicures and atheists,^ and a kind
of lawless place, because it stood in no parish. Which
things made good men fear some sad judgments impending
over the nation.'-^
A sombre picture truly ! and well calculated to
warn ourselves against the danger of allowing the
essence of religion to escape amid the barren logo-
machies which characterise our present controversies,
and which are, for the most part, more about words
than things. A heavy responsibility surely belongs
* The italics are in Burleigh's paper, from which Strype quotes
the expressions.
2 Life of Parker, ii. 204.
REFORMATION CAUSES AND RESULTS 105
to the leaders of the Evangehcal party for decHning
to meet representatives of other theological schools
in friendly conference, with a view to mutual ex-
planations, leading perhaps to a possible concordat.
One inference from Burleigh's paper is inevitable,
namely, the absolute necessity of a court for eccle-
siastical causes, of which the members must have
a competent knowledge of the ecclesiastical history
of England. If the members of the Judicial Com-
mittee in the Purchas and Ridsdale cases had been
thus equipped, they would have avoided the absurd
paralogisms and historical blunders on which those
judgments, as I hope to prove further on, are based.
Fancy arguing the illegality of the full ritual sanc-
tioned by the Ornaments Rubric from its absence
in the deplorable state of desolation described by
Burleigh ! When the ecclesiastical fabrics ' ran
greatly into dilapidations and decays, and were kept
filthy and undecent for God's worship ; ' when ' the
Lord's Day was greatly profaned and little observed ; '
when ' the common prayers were not frequented,'
and ' some lived without any service of God at all ; '
when the Holy Communion in many places was
celebrated only once a quarter, and in not a few
places never at all ; is it so wonderful that vestments,
some of them valuable spoil, which were used only
in the Communion Service, should have generally
disappeared in the general ruin? Yet this is the
strongest proof of their illegality, if we are to accept
the law of the Judicial Committee. Is there a better
way of making men lawless than to impose upon
106 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
them as law what they know to be nonsense ? If
a law is bad or inexpedient, let it be repealed ; but
let it not be perverted in the interest of a party or a
policy. Men will more readily obey a law which
they detest than a plain perversion of a law to which
they vowed allegiance, and which has been twisted
against them by being made to mean precisely the
reverse of what it says. The former case they may
endure as one of oppression. The latter they will
regard as an outrage on their intellectual integrity in
addition ; and men will endure oppression with more
patience than self-stultification. Many a man
would rather go to prison than admit that black is
white, even at the bidding of the Judicial Committee.
But I must reserve for another chapter a full dis-
cussion of the miscarriage of justice which lies at
the root of all our present troubles.
The frightful state of irreligion and depravity
described by Burleigh, and painted in still blacker
colours in some, of the documents published under
the auspices of the Kolls Court, ^ caused a reaction
against Puritanism in the reign of Elizabeth, which,
however, was only partially successful. The leading
statesmen of the day saw the danger of the principles
and doctrines propagated by the returned exiles from
Frankfort and Switzerland. Puritanism was now
declared, in solemn State papers, to be as great a
' It is stated in one of these documents that not only had many
churches ceased to be places of Divine worship, even on Sunday, but
that many of them were turned to vile uses on that holy day, the
parishioners assembling in them to witness cock-fights. This was
the case especially in Lancashire.
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 107
danger on the one hand as Popery had been on the
other. I quote as an example from a letter addressed
by Sir Francis Walsingham to 'Monsieur Critoy,
Secretary of France.' It is an important document,
as the long extract which I subjoin will show, and
its importance is increased by the fact, which Mr.
Spedding, the accomplished editor of Bacon's works,
has proved, namely, that the letter was drawn up by
Bacon, who adopted a few suggestions made by
Archbishop Whitgift, an active member of the Privy
Council. It was sent by Walsingham on behalf of the
English Government to the Government of France : —
I find therefore (writes the English Secretary of State)
that her Majesty's proceedings have been grounded upon
two principles : —
1. The one, that consciences are not to be forced,
but to be won and reduced by* the force of truth, with the
aid of time and the use of all good means of instruction
and persuasion.
2. The other, that the causes of conscience, when
they exceed their bounds and grow to be matter of faction,
lose their nature ; and that sovereign princes ought
distinctly to punish the practice or contempt, though
coloured with the pretence of conscience and religion.
According to these principles, her Majesty at her
coming to the crown, utterly disliking the tyranny of
Eome, which had used by terror and rigour to seek
commandment of men's faiths and consciences, though as
a Prince of great wisdom and magnanimity she suffered
but the exercise of one religion, yet her proceeding towards
the Papists was with great lenity, expecting the good
effects which time might work in them. And therefore
her Majesty revived not the laws made in the twenty-
108 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
eighth and thirty-fifth year of her father's reign, whereby
the oath of allegiance might have been offered at the
King's pleasure to any subject, though he kept his con-
science never so modestly to himself ; and the refusal to
take the same oath without further circumstance was
made treason. But contrariwise her Majesty, not liking
to make windows into men's hearts and secret thoughts
except the abundance of them did overflow into overt
and express acts or affirmations, tempered her law
so as it restraineth only manifest disobedience, in in-
fringing and impeaching advisedly and maliciously her
Majesty's Supreme Power, and maintaining and extol-
ling a foreign jurisdiction. And as for the oath, it was
altered by her Majesty into a more grateful form ; the
harshness of the name and appellation of Supreme
Head was removed ; ^ and the penalty of the refusal
thereof [i.e. of the oath in its modified form] turne(i
only into disablement to take any promotion or
to exercise any charge ; and yet with liberty of being
reinvested therein if any man should accept thereof during
his life. But after, when Pius Quintus had excommuni-
cated her Majesty, and the Bulls of Excommunication
were published in London, whereby her Majesty was in a
sort proscribed ; and that therefore as upon a principal
motive or preparative followed the rebellion in the North ;
yet because the ill , humours of the realm were by that
rebellion partly gauged, and that she feared at that time
no foreign invasion, and much less the attempt of any
within the realm not backed by some potent succour from
without, she contented herself to make a law against that
special case of bringing in or publishing of any Bulls or
' Yet many persons still speak and write of the Sovereign as
♦ Supreme Head of the Church.' The title of ' Head of the Church *
has never been borne by any English sovereign since the accession of
Elizabeth.
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND RESULTS 109
the like instruments ; whereunto was added a prohibition,
upon pain not of treason but of an inferior degree of
punishment, against the bringing in of Agnus Dei, hallowed
beads, and such other merchandise of Rome, as are well
known not to be any essential part of the Romish religion,
but only to be used in practice as love-tokens to enchant
the people's affections from their allegiance to their natural
Sovereign.^ In all other points her Majesty continued
her former lenity. But when about the twentieth year of
her reign she had discovered in the King of Spain an
intention to invade her dominions ; and that a principal
point of the plot was to prepare a party within the realm
that might adhere to this foreigner, and that the Seminaries
began to blossom and to send forth daily priests and pro-
fessed men [i.e. men belonging to religious orders ; mostly
Jesuits], who should by vow taken at shrift reconcile her
subjects from their obedience, yea, and bind many of them
to attempt against her Majesty's Sacred Person ; and that
by the poison which they spread the humours of most
Papists were altered, and that they were no more Papists
in conscience and of softness, but Papists in faction ; then
were there new laws made for the punishment of such as
should submit themselves to such reconcilements or re-
nunciations of obedience. And because it wa^ a treason
carried in the clouds and in wonderful secrecy, and came
seldom to light, and there was no presumption thereof so
great as the recusance to come to Divine service ; because
' This shows the political aspect of many customs and practices
of that time, and the prohibition of them proves, as already
observed, that the motive causes of the Reformation were political
rather than theological. To the unscrupulous machinations of
foreign Papists — the name is appropriate here, for the Pope was the
fons et origo malorum — and the revolutionary violence and excesses
of foreign Protestants, was due the deplorable state to which the
Church of England was reduced in the latter half of Elizabeth's
reign.
110 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
it was set down by their decrees that to come to church
before reconcilement was to live in schism, but to come to
church after reconcilement was absolutely heretical and
damnable ; therefore there were added new laws contain-
ing a punishment pecuniary against such recusants, not to
enforce conscience, but to enfeeble and impoverish the
means of those to whom it rested indifferent and ambiguous
whether they were reconciled or no. And when, notwith-
standing all this provision, the poison was dispersed so
secretly as that there was no means to stay it but by
restraining the merchants that brought it in ; then lastly
there was added another law whereby such seditious
priests of the new erection were exiled, and those that
were at that time within the land shipped over, and so
commanded to keep hence upon pain of treason.
This hath been the proceeding with that sort, though
intermingled not only with sundry examples of her
Majesty's grace towards such as in her wisdom she knew to
be Papists in conscience and not in faction, but also with
an ordinary mitigation towards the offenders in the highest
degree convicted by law, if they would but protest that in
case the realm should be invaded with a foreign army
by the Pope's authority for the Catholic cause, as they
term it, they would take part with her Majesty and not
adhere to her enemies.
For the other part, which have been offensive to this
State, though in another degree ; which named themselves
Eeformers, and we commonly call Puritans; this hath
been the proceeding towards them. A great while, when
they inveighed against such abuses in the Church as
pluralities, non-residence, and the like, their zeal was not
condemned, only their violence was sometimes censured ;
when they refused the use of some ceremonies and rites
as superstitions, they were tolerated with much connivency
and gentleness; yea, when they called in question the
EEFOEMATION CAUSES AND EESULTS 111
superiority of bishops, and pretended to bring a democracy ^
into the Church, yet their propositions were heard, con-
sidered, and by contrary writings debated and discussed.
Yet all this while it was perceived that their course was
dangerous and very popular. As because Papistry was
odious, therefore it was ever in their mouths that they
sought to purge the Church from the relics of Popery ; a
thing acceptable to the people, who love ever to run from
one extreme to another. Because multitudes of rogues
and poverty were an eyesore and dislike to every man,
therefore they put it into the people's head that if disci-
pline were planted there should be no beggars nor
vagabonds ; a thing very plausible. And in like manner
they promised the people may [? many] other impossible
wonders of their discipline. Besides, they opened the
people a way to government by their consistory and pres-
bytery: a thing though in consequence no less prejudicial
to the liberties of private men than to the sovereignty of
princes, yet in the first show very popular. Netherthe-
less this (except it were in some few that entered
into extreme contempt) was borne with, because they
pretended but in dutiful manner to make propositions,
and to leave it to the providence of God and the authority
of the magistrate. But now of late years, when there
issued from them a colony of those that afl&rmed the
assent of the magistrate was not to be attended ; when,
under pretence of a concession to avoid slanders and
imputations, they combined themselves by classes and
subscriptions ; when they descended into that vile and
base means of defacing the government of the Church by
ridiculous pasquils ; when they began to make many
subjects in doubt to take an oath, which is one of the
fundamental parts of justice in this land and in all
places ; when they began both to vaunt of the strength
and number of their partisans and followers, and to use
112 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
comminations that their cause would prevail though
with uproar and violence ; then it appeared to be no more
zeal, no more conscience, but mere faction and division ;
and therefore, though the State was compelled to hold
somewhat a harder hand to restrain them than before,
yet it was with as great moderation as the peace of the
Church and State could permit. And therefore, Sir, to
conclude, consider uprightly of these matters, and you
shall see her Majesty is no temporiser in religion. It is
not the success abroad, nor the change of servants here
at home, can alter her ; only as the things themselves
alter, so she applieth her religious wisdom to methods
correspondent unto them; still retaining the two rules
before mentioned, in dealing tenderly with consciences
and yet in discovering faction from conscience, and
softness from singularity.^
The date of this luminous survey of the eccle-
siastical position in England is not given, but it was
certainly after 1588, for the Spanish Armada is
mentioned in the historical tone of an event that /
had been some time past. The complete discom-/
fiture of that iniquitous invasion destroyed once for
all the dreams of the Papal Court that England could
be coerced into an acceptance of Papal supremacy,
with all its extortions and abuses. The Seminarists,
who had been for years engaged in secretly foment-
ing sedition among the Eoman Catholics of England,
had translated their own hopes into assurances to
the Roman Curia that the apparition of the Armada
in British waters would be the signal for an insurrec-
tion on the part of avowed Eoman Catholics, who
' Baonn'8 Works, viii. 98-101.
EEFORMATION CAUSES AND RESULTS 113
would be joined by a host of crypto-Papists, who
were fain to bow in the house of Eimmon till the
banner of deliverance appeared in sight. The event
falsified these anticipations. There were no crypto-
Papists, and Eoman Catholics distinguished them-
selves in defence of their country's freedom and
rights.
114 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
CHAPTEE IV
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES
PoPEEY having thus ceased to be a political danger,
the reaction against the violence and excesses of the
Puritans naturally increased, and the accession of
James gave it a fresh impulse. That astute sovereign,
with all his pedantry, was a man of great ability,
solid learning — befitting the pupil of George Bu-
chanan — and much political sagacity. Equally
opposed to the excesses and anarchical doctrines of
the Puritans and to the usurpations of the Papacy,
he sought out for the highest offices in the Church
men remarkable for learning, ability, integrity, and
sobriety of character : a policy which was continued
by his son and successor,^ and which gave us the
' Charles I. had great faults ; but he had great virtues also. He
was a munificent patron of art and literature, and did much to
elevate the national character in both departments. The purity of
his life and the sincerity of his religious profession are beyond
dispute. And his love for the Church of England v;as that of a
devout Christian, not of a politician who desired to use the Church
as an instrument of statecraft. The following letter to Alexander
Henderson, written on May 29, 1646, explains his reasons for
rejecting a proposal to abolish Episcopacyin England, and bears the
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 115
great divines of the seventeenth century, who are
par excellence the representative theologians of the
stamp of genuine sincerity. ComiDliance would probably have saved
his life and crown : —
' No one thing made me more reverence the Eeformation of my
Mother, the Church of England, than that it was done — according to
the Apostle's defence, Acts xxiv. 18 — neither with multitude nor with
tumult, legally and orderly ; and by those whom I conceive to have
only the reforming power, which, with many other inducements,
made me always confident that the work was very perfect as to
essentials ; of which Church government being undoubtedly one, I
put no question but that would have been likewise altered if there
had been cause ; which opinion of mine was soon turned into more
than a confidence, when I perceived that in this particular, as I must
say of all the rest, we retained nothing but according as it was
deduced from the Apostles to be the constant universal custom of
the primitive Church ; and that it was of such consequence as by the
alteration of it we should deprive ourselves of a lawful priesthood ;
and then how the Sacraments can be duly administered is easy to
judge. These are the principal reasons, which make me believe that
Bishops are necessary for a Church ; and I think sufficient for me, if
I had no more, not to give my consent for their expulsion out of
England ; but I have another obligation that to my particular is a
no less tie of conscience, which is my Coronation Oath. Now if, as
St. Paul saith — Eom. xiv. 23 — he that doubteth is damned if he eat,
what can I expect, if I should not only give way knowingly to my
people's sinning, but likewise be perjured myself?
* Now consider, ought I not to keep myself from presumptuous
sins? and you know who says, " What doth it profit a man though
he should gain the whole world and lose his own soul? " Wherefore
my constant maintenance of Episcopacy in England, where there
was never any other government [of the Church] since Christianity
was in this kingdom, methinks should be rather commended than
wondered at.'
Hallam, the historian, writes : ' No candid reader, I think, can
doubt that a serious sense of obligation was predominant in Charles's
persevering fidelity to the English Church.' In the same chapter he
gives his judgment concerning those who took away his life : — ■
' It was, as we all know, the act of a bold but very small minority,
who, having forcibly expelled their colleagues from Parliament, had .
i 2
116 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Church of England. No church in Christendom,
during any period of its history, can exhibit a finer
array of great names illustrious for intellectual
power, massive learning, and saintliness of character,
than the Jacobean and Caroline divines : Andrewes,
Barrow, Bull, Bramhall, Beveridge, Hall, Jeremy
Taylor, Cosin, Overall, Ken, Ussher, Waterland,
Montague, Wilson, Pearson, and the like. And the
rank and file of the clergy contained a host of names
not inferior to these. Nor will I omit from the list
the great name of Laud. No name in history has
had less justice done to it. The present and past
generation take their opinion of him from Macaulay's
brilliant parody, and his opponents in his own
generation made him the scapegoat of a bad system
of government which was not his own creation. It
was a period of transition from absolutism to con-
stitutional government, and Laud was unfortunately
a great statesman as well as a great ecclesiastic ;
Prime Minister as well as Primate. The mingling
of the two is not good for either, and Laud the
statesman incurred such odium in administering a
moribund system of secular government as reacted
on the Church of which he became the chief. But
usurped, under the protection of a military force, that power which
all England reckoned illegal. I cannot perceive what there was in
the imagined solemnity of this proceeding, in that insolent mockery
of the forms of justice, accompanied by all unfairness and inhumanity
in its circumstances, which can alleviate the guilt of the transaction ;
and if it be alleged that many of the regicides were firmly persuaded
in their consciences of the right and duty of condemning the king,
we may surely remember that private murderers have often had
the same apology.'— History of England, ii. 186, 227, 228.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 117
he was a great man, and a patron of much that
conduced to greatness. He was devoted to his own
university, Oxford, and spent much of his time and
money to adorn it architecturally and to raise its
standard of learning. He not only built the inner
quadrangle of his own college, and improved its
intellectual equipment by various donations, but he
built the convocation-house and Selden's library
above, and enriched the public collection of books
by the munificent present of 1,300 valuable MSS.
in Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Egyptian, and other
languages, ancient and modern, procured at great
expense. As Bishop of London he found St. Paul's
Cathedral in a state of deplorable dila])idation, and
he had it restored to great magnificence.
And when we read of Laud's rigour against some
of the Puritan clergy under his jurisdiction, it
is fair to recall the description previously quoted
from Burleigh of the lawlessness of the Puritans,
which continued in some dioceses, notably in that of
London, when Laud was promoted to it. Numbers
of the clergy defiantly refused to conform to the
plainest directions of the Prayer Book. Some of
them not only flatly refused to wear the surplice in
any part of the service, but showed their contempt
for Laud's orders in ways like the following, de-
scribed by a contemporary writer : —
* There was one who wore his surplice upon his
heel. He was a kind of half-quarter conformist, and
when he came into the reading-pew, where he must
put on his whites, he used to hold up one of his legs
118 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
behind him (hke a goose), and, resting it upon his
matt, he would hang the surpHce upon his foot, that
he might be able to swear he both wore the surplice
and bow'd the knee at the name of Jesus.' ^ Another
Bishop of this period (Montague) complains of some
of his clergy celebrating the Holy Communion ' in a
cloak or sleeveless jacquet, or horseman's coat.' If
Sir William Harcourt had been Bishop of London
instead of Laud, I have a shrewd suspicion that he
would have dealt with that ' mutiny of the priests '
in a manner considerably more drastic than Laud's.
There was one admirable . feature in Laud's
character which has never received recognition, and
to which Mr. Gladstone was the first to call my
attention. Laud was the first Bishop since the
Reformation who exercised liberality and toleration
in the distribution of patronage. He promoted, or
obtained promotion for, good men who differed from
himself on important theological questions — men
who would now be called good Evangelicals. So
long as they rendered a decent obedience to the
Prayer Book and abstained from railing, and showed
themselves diligent and devout pastors, he promoted
them as readily, as those who were doctrinally in
closer agreement with himself. Bishop Hall is one
out of many examples. Clarendon sums up the
case with terse equity when he says of Laud that
* his learning, piety, and virtue have been attained
by very few ; and the greatest of his infirmities are
common to all, even the best of men.' Clarendon's
' I quote the italics and spelling from the original.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 119
sketch of Laud is fair and discriminatiDg. He was
* made Archbishop of Canterbury,' Clarendon says,
'without the least condescension to the arts and strata-
gems of the Court, and without any other friendship
or support than what the splendour of a pious life and
his unpolished integrity would reconcile to him ;
which was an unskilful measure in a licentious age,
and may deceive a good man in the best times that
shall succeed.' ' He was always maligned and perse-
cuted by those w^ho were of the Calvinian faction,
which was then very powerful, and who, according
to their usual maxim and practice, call every man
they do not love Papist ; and under this senseless
appellation they created him many troubles and
vexations.' * He intended the discipline of the
Church should be felt as well as spoken of, and that
it should be applied to the greatest and most splendid
transgressors as well as to the punishment of smaller
offences and meaner offenders. . . . Persons of
honour and great quality, of the Court and of the
country, were every day cited into the High Com-
mission Court upon the fame of their incontinence,
or other scandal in their lives, and were there pro-
secuted to their shame and punishment ; and the
shame (which they called an insolent triumph upon
their degree and quality, and levelling them with
the common people) was never forgotten, but watched
for revenge.' He also made powerful enemies
by resisting, as Commissioner of the Treasury, the
enclosure of commons, and every kind of jobbery
and corruption over which he could exercise any
120 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
control. He thus united in a common league
against himself crowds of enemies who had nothing
else in common : Puritans, powerful courtiers,
jobbers, peculators, trespassers on the rights of the
people. His scorn of respect for persons, when vice
was to be exposed or punished, was as rare as it was
splendid.^
His death was certainly noble. His enemies
stooped not only to calumny, but even to deliberate
forgery against him. During his three years' im-
prisonment he was subject to every kind of indignity
and insult. His property was confiscated, and he
was fined 20,000^ Every article of comfort was
removed from his cell, and even the papers which
he had prepared for his defence were rudely torn
from him, so that he had to rely on his memory and
ready speech when he was put on trial for his life.
He bore it all with the uncomplaining heroism of a
martyr, and made a speech in self-defence dis-
tinguished by courage, manliness, and pathetic
eloquence. But no defence could have availed, and
he sank in the breakers caused by the collision of the
old order and the new. But to Laud more than to
any other single man is due, under Providence,
the Eeformation settlement of the Church of
England on the foundation on which it has rested
since 1662.
It is to the divines of the seventeenth century,
therefore, rather than to those of the sixteenth, that
we must look as the representative exponents of the
» See Clarendon's Hist, of the Rcbr.Uwn, i. pp. 116, 159, 166.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 121
doctrinal position of the Church of England. The
returned exiles in Elizabeth's reign have, in fact,
left us no theology. They were in constant warfare
with the doctrine and ritual prescribed in the Prayer
Book, and cannot be regarded at all as representa-
tives of the Keformation Settlement. Cranmer and
his colleagues were the chief actors in a period of
transition, and they shared the unstable equilibrium
of their position. To them we owe the Prayer Book
substantially as we now possess it. They are the
divines to whom the Catholic and the Protestant
party have been wont respectively to appeal, and
naturally, as I have observed in the beginning of
this chapter. Their controversy, as I have just
shown, was with the most formidable Power then
in Europe — a Power that had France and Spain at
its back, and stuck at nothing. They were in
rebellion against the supremacy of the Pope, with
its long tale of accumulated extortions and abuses :
a righteous rebellion, but still a rebellion, and there-
fore in need of justification to the multitude. The
Eeformers had to make out a case against a system
which, with varying fortunes, had the prescription
of centuries on its side, and they acted as men in
such circumstances are apt to act. Intent on
damaging their adversary, they were not always
careful to discriminate between the true and the false.
* There is,' as Bacon says, ' a superstition in avoid-
ing superstition, when men think to do best if they
go furthest from the superstition formerly received ; *
and Cranmer and his colleagues were not proof
122 THE BEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
against this superstition. In protesting against
Koman errors they sometimes trespassed against
primitive truth. In doing battle against Kome they
courted the dangerous alliance of Geneva ; so that,
as Thorndike says, ' the tares of Puritanism were
sov^n together with the Keformation.' Cranmer and
Ridley use language which makes it possible to quote
them on either side ; but what we have to consider
is the broad fact that their occasional Zwinglian lan-
guage left so little mark on the Prayer Book. Nor
IS it safe to conclude that their Zwinglian language
connoted to their own minds a Zwinglian sense.
It is the custom of all reformers to insist strongly
on that side of the truth which has been denied or
obscured, and to take the other side for granted. I
have in a previous chapter referred to the verbally
contradictory statements, coincident with identity
of belief, by St. Paul and St. James on the question
of justification by faith and works, each appealing
to Abraham as an example of justification by faith
and works respectively. In like manner when
Cranmer or Eidley, for example, denies that the
substance of Christ's Humanity is present in the
Eucharist, they mean substance in the vulgar, not
philosophical sense — substance material, extended,
localised. This is evident, for they also affirm a
substantial presence. We have a similar ambiguous
use of language in the writings of the early Christian
Apologists, like Minutius Felix and Arnobius, when
engaged in controversy with the heathen ; and they
have accordingly been misunderstood, as some
THE TESTIMONY OP ANGLICAN DIVINES 123
Anglican divines have been, by superficial readers.
They affirm, for instance, that the Christians had
no altars. Yet we know from Tertullian and others
that altars, both name and thing, were undoubtedly
used in the worship of Christians at that time. In
the same way Minutius Felix says that the Chris-
tians had no temples. Yet Christian temples are
recognised in the Diocletian edicts, and Eusebius
vouches for their existence. The explanation is
that, in repudiating temples and altars on behalf of
Christianity, Minutius and Arnobius meant such
temples and altars as were used in Pagan worship.
In fact, all men who are whoUy bent upon a single
object must, for the time being, be more or less one-
sided. And controversialists are, of all men, likely
to be so. For it is the tendency of every dominant
system to force those who are in arms against it into
the most opposite and jealous attitude, from the appre-
hension which they naturally feel lest they should be
misrepresented and overborne by its authority on
those points in which they approximate towards it.
Thus the idolatries of Paganism tended to repress
the ritual of the early Church ; and a similar reserve
on the subject of the Eucharistic Sacrifice was
necessary while the temple was still standing with
its bloody sacrifices and carnal associations.
This natural tendency of controversy should be
borne in mind in reading passages from the AngHcan
divines. Anything can be proved by skilful quotation,
and an author may thus be made to teach the very
•opposite of what he has written. The Beformers
124 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
were confronted by a practical system of teaching on
the subject of the Eucharist which was in some
respects revolting. Take the following from Bishop
Jeremy Taylor's treatise on the Eeal Presence : ^ —
They that deny the spiritual sense, and afi&rm the
natural, are to remember that Christ reproved all senses
of these words which were not spiritual. And, by the
way, let me observe that the expressions of some chief
men among the Eomanists are so rude and crass that it
will be impossible to excuse them from understanding the
words in the sense of the men of Capernaum ; for, as they
understood Christ to mean His ' true flesh natural and
proper,' so do they ; as they thought Christ intended they
should tear Him with their teeth and suck His blood, for
which they were offended ; so do these men not only think
so, but say so and are not offended.^
And then he proceeds to give instances of this
gross belief among Eomanists. So Ussher, in his
'Ajiswer to a Jesuit,' argues against this gross
view of the Eeal Presence, which was then not un-
common. He mentions a horrible legend ' of a Eoman
matron, who found a piece of the sacramental bread
turned into the fashion of a finger, all bloody ; which
afterwards, upon the prayers of St. Gregory, was
converted into its former shape.' ^
Cosin also, in his learned treatise against Tran-
substantiation,'^ relates at length some views held
and discussed by Eoman divines about the Presence
of Christ in the Sacrament which are too repulsively
irreverent for quotation.
» Works, vi. 28. « Pp. 62-4. » Works, iv. 225. * Works-, iv. 225.
THE TESTIMONY OP ANGLICAN DIVINES 125
It was against these gross conceptions of the
Sacrament, and against the imposition of fresh tests
of orthodoxy, that the great Ajiglican divines pro-
tested. This is the key to many words that look
superficially like a denial of the doctrine of the Keal
Presence in the utterances of some of the Keformers.
Cranmer, for example, at his trial in 1553, ' offered
to join issue upon this point, that the order of the
Church of England, set out by the authority of the
innocent and godly- Prince Edward YI. in his High
Court of Parliament, is the same that was used in
the Church fifteen hundred years past.' ^ It is im-
possible to reconcile this declaration with the opinion
that Cranmer was conscious of having introduced
any new doctrine of the Eucharist in either of King
Edward's Prayer Books, except in the repudiation of
Transubstantiation, which was in reality a new
doctrine, not a trace of it existing in any early
Liturgy, including the Koman.
The question, however, as far as my argument is
concerned, is not what the leaders of the Bef ormation
in the sixteenth century believed on the subject of
the Eucharist, but what they intended to impose as
a test of communion on others ; and my study of the
literature of that period has left no doubt on my
mind that at no period in the reigns of Edward VI.
and Elizabeth would belief even in Transubstantia-
tion have disqualified a clergyman for office in the
Church of England, provided he accepted the Eoyal
Supremacy and was careful not to impose his belief
See Jeremy Taylor's Works, v. 238, Eden's edition.
126 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
on others. The line those divines took was that, in-
asmuch as the Sacramental Presence was involved
in mystery, a man should be at liberty to explain it
to his own mind in any way, apart from gross
materialism, which he found most helpful, but he
was not to impose his terminology on others. The
rulers of the nation in Church and State, 'not liking,'
as Secretary Walsingham's State paper already
quoted puts it, ' to make windows into men's hearts
and secret thoughts,' would have gladly allowed a
large and generous toleration if the Papal policy had
not forced them to impose tests, but for political
rather than theological reasons. On the accession of
Elizabeth the vast majority of the parish priests
throughout England submitted to the new regime
and retained their cures. ' Of nine thousand benefices
thus named in England,' says Echard,^ ' fourteen
bishops, six abbots, twelve deans, twelve archdeacons,
fifteen heads of colleges, fifty prebendaries, and eighty
rectors, was the whole number of those that were
deprived.' Camden increases that total a little, and
the latest student of the question says that, on the
most liberal reckoning, 'the number of clergymen
deprived for Papal sympathies between 1558 and
1564 ' ' cannot have greatly exceeded two hundred.' ^
That is to say, of all the clergy in England on the
accession of Elizabeth, probably at least ten thousand,
all conformed with the exception of about two
* Hist of Engl. vol. i. bk. iii. p. 330.
^ The Elizabethan Clergy and Settlement of Religion, by Henry
Gee, B.D., F.S.A.
THE TESTIMONY OP ANGLICAN DIVINES 127
hundred. This is a remarkable and significant fact
on the one side. On the other is the well-known
anxiety of the Queen to make as few changes as
possible, either in the substance or garb of religion.
There can be no doubt that a large majority of the
clergy who conformed did believe in Transubstantia-
tion, and observed unmolested the accustomed ritual.
And this went on till the issue of the Bull of ex-
communication, and the consequent plots against
the Queen's realm and life. But we are left in no
doubt as to the general attitude of the men who had
to do with the piloting of the ship of the Reformation
through the breakers. Edward VI. was more in-
clined than Elizabeth to move in the direction of the
foreign Reformers. Yet in the year 1550 the Council
of Edward VI., with the sanction of the Primate and
Episcopate, recognised and continued to the Roman
Catholic Bishop of Coutances his jurisdiction as Ordi-
nary over the islands of Jersey and Guernsey, though
Papal Supremacy had been abolished there and the
reformed Liturgy was in use.* The Bishop of Cou-
tances accepted the reformed Liturgy for that part
of his ancient diocese, and continued to govern it
formally till the eighth year of Elizabeth, when the
intrigues of the Papal faction, followed by the Bull
of excommunication, severed the Channel Islands
from the See of Coutances. To that arrogant exhi-
* Imagine the indignation of the Protestants who lately demon-
strated at the Albert Hall if such a thing were to happen now ! It is
a great pity that the history of the English Reformation is so little
known bv those who arc most loud in protesting their loyalty to it.
128 THE EBFORMATION SETTLEMENT
bition of intolerable insolence is due no small share
of our troubles in Church and State ever since. The
Bishop of Coutances remonstrated against what he
regarded as arbitrary injustice, and offered, on con-
dition of his jurisdiction being allowed, to give in-
stitution to such priests as the Queen might nominate
from Oxford and Cambridge, waiving the right of pre-
sentation enjoyed by certain abbots in Normandy.^
This interesting incident proves two things : first,
that there was no question then on the part of Eome
as to the validity of Anglican orders ; secondly, that
belief in Transubstantiation, so long as it was not
enforced on others, was no disqualification for office
in the Church of England until the violent action of
the Pope compelled the English Government to
treat Roman Catholicism as treason. It is true that
the doctrine of Transubstantiation is condemned in
one of the Thirty-nine Articles as ' repugnant to the
plain words of Scripture, overthrowing the nature of
a sacrament,' and a doctrine that ' hath given occasion
to many superstitions.' That is undoubtedly true.
In their attempts to explain the term * Transub-
stantiation ' Eoman writers have involved themselves
in a maze of contradictions which no ingenuity can
reconcile. The doctrine was established in the fourth
Council of the Lateran by Innocent III., and its final
authoritative explanation is given in the Catechism
of the Council of Trent. There it is explicitly laid
down that ' in this Sacrament there is no substance
in which the accidents of bread and wine can inhere.'
» Falle's Hist, of Jersey, p. 337.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 129
' The species of bread and wine in this sacrament
exists without any underlying substance.' After
consecration ' there is no longer the substance of
bread or wine, since these accidents cannot inhere
in the body and blood of Christ.' * It follows that,
in a manner altogether above the order of creation,
they subsist of themselves sustained by no substance.'
And then follows the bold declaration that ' this has
been the perpetual and constant doctrine of the
Catholic Church.' '
One hardly knows how to deal with an assertion
which it is as impossible to reconcile with philo-
sophy as with reason and history. Accidents from
which the substance has departed ; which ' cannot
inhere in the Body and Blood of Christ ; ' and which
* subsist of themselves unsustained by any substance,'
are simply unthinkable. It is a doctrine which does
not transcend reason like the mysteries of faith, but
flatly contradicts it.
But now let us turn to the Pope (Innocent III.)
who made Transubstantiation an article of faith.
He teaches that after consecration not the accidents
only remain, but also the natural properties of
bread, sufficing to appease hunger and nourish him
who eats the Sacrament ; so also the consecrated
wine quenches the thirst of him who takes the
chalice. And to these qualities of the bread and
wine which remain after consecration he gives the
' ' Tertium restat, quod in hoc sacramento maximum atque
admirabile videatur quod quidem, jam duobus aliis explicatis, facilius
K
J 30 THE iREFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
scholastic names of ' paneity ' and * vineity.' ^ But a
quality which can be seen, felt, tasted, and is capable
of quenching hunger and thirst, and of being assimi-
lated into the human body, supplies all the tests
by which we verify substance. It will be observed,
moreover, that the doctrine of Innocent III. is here
in direct contradiction to the doctrine of the Cate-
chism of Trent. An awkward fact for believers in
Papal Infallibility.
Those who have read the history of the Council
of Trent will remember the hot contests that went
on between the Franciscans and the Dominicans as
to the mode in which Transubstantiation took place,
and how it taxed all the subtlety of Cardinal
Palavicino to reconcile the two views in his explana-
tion of the Tridentine definition. Christ, he says, is
not present in the Sacrament as water in a vessel,
but as a part is present in the whole ; ^ not a very
illuminating explanation.
a pastoribus tractari posse existimandum est ; panis videlicet et vini
species in hoc sacramento sine aliqua re subjecta constare. Nam
quum antea demonstratum sit, corpus Domini et sanguinem vere in
sacramento esse, ita ut amplius nulla subsit panis et vini substantia,
quoniam ea accidentia Christi corpori et sanguini inhgerere non possunt :
relinquitur, ut super omnem naturfe ordinem ipsa se, nulla alia re
nisa, sustentent. Haec perpetua et constans fuit Catholicss ecclesiee
doctrina, quaj etiam facile eorum testimoniorum auctoritate confir-
mari poterit, quibus antea planum factum est, nullam residere in
Eucharistia panis aut vini substantiam.' — Catech. ex decreto Concilii
Trid. adParochos,De Sacramento Eucharistice, Quaest. xliii. pt. ii. c. vi.
^ Innoc. III. De Myst. Miss. 1. 4, c. 7. Cf. Basnage's Histoirede
VEglise, torn. ii. p. 1623.
2 Istoria del Co7icil. di Trento, 1. 12, c. 7, p. 988.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 131
I have already referred to the gross superstitions
which grew out of the doctrine of Transubstantia-
tion, and if the reader wishes to see additional illus-
trations of these ghastly profanities, he will find
several in the work of a sober and learned Roman
Catholic divine, Dr. Rock's * Church of Our Fathers.' ^
Assuredly our Church is more than justified in
saying that the Tridentine doctrine of Transub-
stantiation *is repugnant to the plain words of
Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament,
and hath given occasion to many superstitions.'
The voluminous and fierce discussions which it has
caused cannot be read without pain and shrinking
by any reverent mind. As if a Divine gift offered to
our faith and love by the Saviour of mankind were
intended as an exercise in intellectual gymnastics !
But the real leaders and guides of the Reforma-
tion settlement under Elizabeth, with true charity,
avoided on their side the fatal error made by the
Church of Rome. So long as Transubstantiation
was held as a mere opinion of the schools, and the
term was not obtruded on others, they * did not like '
— to quote again the striking phrase in the Bacon-
Walsingham State paper — *to make windows into
men's hearts and secret thoughts, except the
abundance of them did overflow into overt and
express acts or affirmations.' In harmony with this
policy the Convocation which revised the Thirty-
nine Articles in 1562 allowed some members, who
hesitated about some of them, to subscribe them in
* Vol. i. c. i. § viii.
132 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
their own sense.^ They acted on the view after-
wards formulated by the Carohne divines, that the
Articles were not so much articles of faith as
* articles of religion,' or of * peace ; ' ^ not a creed,
but a concordat, affording a basis of intercom-
munion for persons to whose minds divine truth
presented itself under different forms and aspects.
For, indeed, different minds are not capable of
receiving the very same image of the truth, and our
varying representations of what we behold are thus
often due to differences in the mental construction of
individuals, or to separate environment or habitude.
The image of the truth is inevitably coloured by
that of the mind which receives it. We should
therefore have patience with each other, and not
too hastily conclude that those who may differ from
us in their language must necessarily differ from us
also in ideas which language can never adequately
clothe. That the Thirty-nine Articles are not
dogmas of faith is evident from the fact that they
are not binding on the laity, or, indeed, on the
clergy either, except as conditions of office.
I will now give a few extracts from some of the
Caroline divines to show the position which they
held in the Eoman controversy of their day, especially
as regards the Eucharist. And I will begin with
Archbishop Bramhall, whose office as an Irish
prelate would naturally dispose him to take up an
antagonistic attitude towards Eome. Yet, as a
» Heylin's Hist. p. 159
2 Biamhall's Works, ii 476, 693.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 133
matter of fact, we find this eminent Anglican divine,
a man of great moderation, and by no means
extreme in his theology, writing in a strain which
would have exposed him to the fierce and scornful
invective of Sir William Harcourt, if that distin-
guished controversialist had lived in those days.
The reaction against the violence and bigotry of
Puritanism on the one hand, and the insufferable
pretensions and intrigues of Rome on the other, had
the effect of causing a rapprochement between
moderate Anglicans and moderate Roman Catholics,
and disposed them to look for points of agreement
rather than of difference. In an interesting des-
patch to his Government on that subject the
Venetian Ambassador in London writes : —
In sum, they [Anglicans] believe all that is taught by
the Church, but not by the Court, of Eome. . . . Both
the Archbishop and the Bishop of Chichester had often
said that there were but two sorts of persons likely to im-
peach and hinder reconciliation, to wit, the Puritans
among the Protestants, and Jesuits among Catholics.^
Heylin bears similar testimony.^ *It was the
petulancy of the Puritans on the one side,' he says,
*and the pragmaticalness of the Jesuits on the
other, which made the breach ' so difficult to heal.
* And had those hot spirits on both sides been
calmed aw^hile, moderate men might possibly have
* Somers's Tracts^ third collection, vol. i. pp. 388-9.
- L'lfe of Laud, p. 413.
134 TEE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
agreed upon such equal terms as would have laid a
sure foundation for the peace of Christendom.*
Thorndike was one of the most learned men of
the seventeenth century, not only as a divine, but as
a man of letters and Oriental scholarship. His
writings were so moderate that the Puritans re-
joiced in his nomination as a member of the Savoy
Conference. His influence and great learning made
themselves felt later in the last revision of the
Prayer Book. Everybody who knows anything
about the subject would now recognise him as one
of the most eminent of that ' historic High Church
School,' to which even Sir William Harcourt con-
cedes a legitimate place in the Church of England.
Thorndike's general position may be gathered from
the following quotations : —
Though I sincerely blame the imposing of new articles
upon the faith of Christians, and that of positions which
I maintain not to be true ; yet I must and do freely
profess that I find no position necessary to salvation
prohibited, none destructive to salvation enjoined to be
believed by it [i.e. Eoman Church]. And therefore
must I necessarily accept it for a true Church ; as in the
Church of England I have always known it accepted :
seeing there can no question be made, that it continueth
the same visible body by the succession of pastors and
laws (the present customs in force being visibly the cor-
ruption of those which the Church had from the begin-
ning), that first was founded upon the Apostles. For the
idolatries — which I grant to be possible, though not
necessary to be found in it, by the ignorance and carnal
affections of particulars, not by command of the Church
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 135
or the laws of it, — I do not admit to destroy the salvation
of those who, living in the communion thereof, are not
guilty of the like.
But while allowing all this, Thorndike goes on to
say that although the Church of Kome holds ' all
that truth which it is necessary to the salvation of
all Christians to believe either in point of faith
or manners/ yet it is ' very much darkened, indeed,
by enhancing of positions, either of doubtful sense,
or absolutely false, to the rank and degree of matters
of faith ; but much more overwhelmed and choked
with a deal of rubbish, opinions, traditions, customs,
and ceremonies.' He also condemns * the half -sacra-
ment,' Papal supremacy, the abuses arising out of
the invocation of Saints, private masses and indul-
gences, and ' the Romish doctrine of Purgatory.' ^
Union of Rome on those conditions he regards as
hopeless.
Bramhall takes the same line. Baxter having
accused him of leaning towards Rome, Bramhall
published a reply from which I quote the following : —
I will confess that freely which Mr. Baxter neither
doth know nor could know but by me, that when my
body was stronger and my wits fresher, when I had some
books and notes of my own, and could have had what
supply I had desired, and opportunity to confer with
whomsoever I pleased. I had then a design indeed to do
my weak endeavour to disabuse the Christian world by the
right stating and distinguishing of controversies between
the Church of Eome and us, and to show,
* Epilogue, Works, vol. iv. pt. ii. pp. 916-7.,
136 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
First, how many of them are mere logomachies, or
contentions about words without any just grounds.
Secondly, how many of them are scholastic subtleties,
whereof ordinary Christians are not capable, and conse-
quently no points of faith.
Thirdly, how many of them are not the controversies
of the Churches, but of particular persons or parties in
those Churches.
Fourthly, how many of our controversies are about
rites and' ceremonies, and things indifferent in their own
nature.
When all these empty names and titles of contro-
versies are wiped out of the roll, the true controversies
between us may be quickly mustered, and will not be
found, upon a serious inquiry, to be so irreconcilable as
some persons have imagined. The two dangerous ex-
tremes are, to clip away something from saving truth,
whereof I do not find the Church of Eome to have been
guilty; and to obtrude erroneous or probable opinions
for articles of faith, whereof I find mmvij in the Church of
Eome to have been most guilty.
These were my thoughts in my younger days, which
age and experience hath rather confirmed and radicated
in me than altered.*
Elsewhere he emphasises the distinction drawn
by the Venetian Ambassador between ' the Court of
Rome ' and ' the Church of Rome.' His Roman
Catholic opponent had urged that *it was not the
Roman religion, nor any public tenet in their Church,
that binds any to those rigorous assertions which
the Protestants condemn.' 'I know it is not their
" religion," ' Bramhall replies : ' our religion and
' Works, iii. 539.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 137
theirs is the same. I know it is not the general
tenet of their Church. But it is the tenet of the
Court of Eome and the governing party amongst
them.' ^ And thus he too, Hke Thorndike, was forced
to own that the governing and dominant party in
the Church of Eome, while it held power, made
union impossible. The prospect is much more
remote now, for ' the governing party amongst them '
— the ' insolent and aggressive faction,' as Newman
called it in 1870 — has captured the whole Koman
Church and revolutionised its constitution and its
creed.
The longing for the reunion of Christendom,
arising from a general sense of the manifold evils of
separation, influenced the best minds even among
the Puritans. Baxter himself lived to modify the
opinions which Bramhall felt obliged to combat.
The following passage, ' faithfully published from
his own MSS. by Matthew Silvester, 1696,' ^ illus-
trates this change : —
My censures of the Papists do much differ from what
they were at first. I then thought that their errors in the
doctrines of faith were their most dangerous mistakes.
But now I am assured that those misexpressions and mis-
understandings of us, with our mistakings of them, and
inconvenient expressing of their own opinions, have made
the difference in most points appear much greater than it
is. But the great and unreconcilable differences lie in
their Church tyranny; in the usurpations of their hierarchy
and priesthood, under the name of spiritual authority
exercising a temporal lordship ; in their corruptions and
' Vol. ii. p. 317. - Baxter's Life, pt. i. p. 131.
138 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
abasement of God's worship ; but, above all, in their
systematic befriending of ignorance and vice. . . . And I
can never believe that a man may not be saved by that
religion which doth but bring him to the true love of God
and to a heavenly mind and life ; nor that God will ever
cast a soul into hell that truly loveth Him. Also at first
it would disgrace any doctrine with me if I did but hear
it called Popery and anti- Christian ; but I have long
learned to be more impartial, and to know that Satan can
use even the names of Popery and anti-Christ to bring a
truth into suspicion and discredit.
This is in substance the line which the Caroline
divines take. What they called ' the usurpations of
the Court,' as distinguished from * the Church, of
Borne,' Baxter calls ' the usurpations of their hierarchy
and priesthood, under the name of spiritual authority
exercising temporal power.' And we have much
need just now to take to heart Baxter's warning,
that ' Satan can use even the names of Popery and
Antichrist to bring a truth into suspicion sifid dis-
credit.'
A few more quotations from Bramhall, who is
generally recognised as a divine of moderate views and
great learning, will help to show the tone towards the
Church of Eome as distinguished from the Curia,
which was then prevalent in England.
The Eoman Catholic Bishop of Chalcedon,
writing against Bramhall, says : ' The Church of
Eome is not homogeneal with the Protestant Church.'
Bramhall replies : —
This is true qua tales,, as they are Eoman and Protea-
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 139
taut. The Eoman Church is not a Protestant Church,
nor the Protestant Church a Eoman Church. Yet hoth
the one and the other may be homogeneous members of
the CathoUc Church. Their difference in essentials is
but imaginary.^
Again : —
A great many of those controversies which raised the
highest animosities among Christians at the first Eeforma-
tion are laid aside already by moderate and judicious
persons of both parties, without any miracle, and are only
kept on foot by some blunderers, who follow the old
mode when the fashion is grown out of date, either out of
prejudice, or pride, or want of judgment, or all together.
And as many controversies of the greatest magnitude
are already as good as reconciled, so more may be.
It was not the erroneous opinions of the Church of
Eome,butthe obtruding them by laws upon other Churches,
which warranted separation. ^
Speaking elsewhere of these erroneous opinions, he
says : —
I do profess to all the world, that the transformation
of indifferent opinions into necessary articles of faith
hath been that * insana laurus,' or cursed bay- tree, the
cause of all our brawling and contention.
So much as to the opinion of the Caroline divines
with regard to our differences with Eome in general.
And when they came to discuss in particular the
subject of the Eucharist they declared, one and all,
that their differences with Eome were entirely re-
' Works, ii. 86. « See vol. iii. pp. 552, 571-2.
140 THE KEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
specting the mode, not the fact, of the Eeal Presence.
They allow the substantia, but object to a con or a
trans. ' The disagreement is only de modoprcBsenticB,'
say Bishops Montague and Bilson. * All the con-
troversy is about the mode,' says Bishop Andrewes.
' The question is not concerning a Keal Presence,'
says Bishop Morton, ' which Protestants do also
profess.' ' I cannot see,' says Cosin, ^ ' where there is
any real difference betwixt us [and the Church of
Eome] about this Real Presence if we would give
over the study of contradiction and understand one
another aright. Maldonatus, *' De Sacr.," p. 143, after
a long examination of the matter, concludes thus at
last with us all.' And he adds: * And so have I heard
my Lord Overall [the author of the sacramental part
of the Church Catechism] preach it a hundred times.'
And with regard to the opinion that the Body of
Christ is present * only in the use of the Sacrament
and in the act of eating, and not otherwise,' he says :
* They that hold the affirmative, as the Lutherans
and all Calvinists do, seem to me to depart from all
antiquity, which place the Presence of Christ in the
virtue of the words of consecration and benediction
by the priest, and not in the use of eating the Sacra-
ment ; for they tell us that the virtue of that
consecration is not lost though the Sacrament be
either reserved for sick persons or other.' And,
although he condemns the abuse of solitary masses,
yet he gives it as his opinion that * better were it to
endure the absence of the people than for the
' Notes on the Book of Common Prayer, first series, pp. 131, 155.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 141
minister to neglect the usual and daily Sacrifice of
the Church, by which all people, whether they be
there or no, reap so much benefit. And this was the
opinion of my lord and master Dr. Overall.' ^
Bramhall says : * Abate us Transubstantiation and
those things which are consequent on this determina-
tion of the manner of the Presence, and we have no
difference with them on this particular.' He thinks
there is * no difference between the Churches if
rightly understood,' ^ and he adds that his own view
» Notes, p. 127.
* Vol. ii. p. 211, iii. p. 165. It is interesting to note what a very
able and candid outsider thinks on this subject. Dr. Martineau
writes as follows in his Slicdies of Christianity (pp. 61-2) : —
• The office of Communion contains even stronger marks of the
same sacerdotal superstitions ; and, notwithstanding the Protestant
horror entertained of the Mass, approaches it so nearly that no
ingenuity can exhibit them in contrast. Near doctrines, however,
like near neighbours, are knowxi to quarrel most.
' The idea of a physical sanctity, residing in solid and liquid
substances, is encouraged by this service. The priest consecrates the
elements by laying his hand upon all the bread, and upon every
fiagon containing the wine about to be dispensed. If an additional
quantity is required, this, too, must be consecrated before its distri-
bution. And the sacredness thus imparted is represented as surviv-
ing the Celebration of the Supper, and residing in the substances as
a permanent quality ; for in the disposal of the bread and wine
that may remain at the close of the sacramental feast, a distinction
IS made between the consecrated and the unconsecrated portion of
the elements ; the former is not permitted to quit the altar, but is to
be reverently consumed by the priest and the communicants ; the
latter is given to the curate. What the particular change may be,
which the prayer and manipulation of the minister are thought
to induce, it is by no means easy to determine ; nor would the dis-
covery, perhaps, reward our pains. It is certainly conceived that
they cease to be any longer mere bread and wine, and that with
them thenceforth co-exist, really and substantially, the body and
M2 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is in substantial agree-
ment with Bellarmine's. His words are : —
The Holy Eucharist is a commemoration, an applica-
tion of the all-sufficient propitiatory Sacrifice of the Cross.
If his [Bishop of Chalcedon's] Sacrifice of the Mass have
any other propitiatory power or virtue in it than to com-
memorate, represent, and apply the merit of the Sacrifice
of the Cross, let him speak plainly what it is. Bellarmine
knew no more of the Sacrifice than we.^
And he goes on to quote Bellarmine in proof of
his assertion. He calls the Eucharistic Sacrifice
* commemorative,' 'representative,' * impetrative,'
* applicative ; ' but denies and challenges any Eoman
Catholic to show * that it is a Suppletory Sacrifice, to
supply the defects of the Sacrifice of the Cross.'
While he strongly insists, in another place, and
in common with the whole Church during the first
six centuries of Christianity, on the reality of a
blood of Christ. Eespecting this "Keal Presence" with the elements,
there is no dispute between the Eomish and the English Church ;
both unequivocally maintain it, and the only question is, respecting
the " Eeal Absence " of the original and culinary bread and wine. . . .
The catechism of our Church affirms that " the body and blood of
Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in
the Lord's Supper." And this was not intended to be figuratively
understood, of the spiritual use and appropriation to which the fai^h
and piety of the receiver would mentally convert the elements ; for
although here the body of Christ is only said to be "taken" (making
it the act of the communicant), yet one of the Articles speaks of
it as " given " (making it the act of the officiating priest), and
implying the real presence before participation. However anxious,
indeed, the clergy of the " Evangelical " school may be to disguise
the fact, it cannot be doubted that their Church has always main-
tained a supernatural change in the elements themselves, as well as
in the mind of the receiver.' ' Vol. ii. p. 88.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES U3
representative and applicative Sacrifice in the
Eucharist, he is careful to add : ' But for any
Sacrifice that is meritorious or propitiatory, by its
own pov^er or virtue, distinct from the Sacrifice of
Christ, I hope the author v^ill not say it. If he does
he v^ill have few partners,' even in the Eoman
Church. And he calls the difference between the
Churches of Eome and England on this question
* a show of empty names to no purpose.' ^
And in reply to the Romanist objection to
Anglican orders — revived recently — that the Anglican
clergy do not receive the power of offering Sacrifice
at their ordination, Bramhall says : —
First they [i.e. Anglicans] acknowledge spiritual and
eucharistical sacrifices, as prayers, praises, a contrite heart,
alms, and the like. Secondly, they acknowledge a com-
memoration, or a representative Sacrifice, in the Holy
Eucharist. Thirdly, they teach that this is not a * nuda
commemoratio ' — ' a bare commemoration' without efficacy,
but that the blessed Sacrament is a means ordained by
Christ to render us capable, and to apply unto us the
virtue, of that all-sufficient Sacrifice of infinite value,
which Christ made upon the Cross ; which is as far as
the moderate Eomanists dare go in distinct and particular
expressions. But the Protestants dare not say that the Holy
Eucharist is a Sacrifice propitiatory in itself, by its own
proper virtue and expiatory efficacy. Whatsoever power
it hath is in relation to the Sacrifice of Christ, as a means
ordained to apply that to true believers. In sum, the
essence of the Eoman Sacrifice doth consist, according to
the doctrine of their own schools, either in the consecra-
' Vol. V. p. 188.
144 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
tion alone, or in the manducation alone, or both in the
consecration and participation; but not at all either in
the oblation or in the fraction or mixtion. Seeing there-
fore the Protestants do retain both the consecration
and consumption or communication, without all contra-
diction, under the name of a Sacrament, they have the
very thing which the Eomanists call a Sacrifice. How is
the world amused with a show of empty names to no
purpose ! *
On the question of Eucharistical adoration
Bramhall is equally clear and explicit. Keplying to
the titular Roman Catholic Bishop of Chalcedon, he
says : —
In the places alleged by him I do not charge the
Church of Eome with idolatry. In the one place I speak
of the adoration of the Sacrament as an abuse, but not
one word of idolatry. In the other place I speak of
the peril of idolatry, but not one word of the adoration
of the Sacrament. ... * The Sacrament is to be adored,',
said the Council of Trent : that is, ' formally the Body
and Blood of Christ,' say some of your authors ; we say
the same. * The Sacrament is to be adored,' that isi
' the species of bread and wine,' say others ; that we
deny, and esteem it to be idolatry. Should we charge the
whole Church with idolatry for the error of a party ? ^
Again : —
We deny not a venerable respect unto the consecrated
Elements, not only as love-tokens sent us by our best
Friend, but as the instruments ordained by our Saviour
to convey to us the Merits of His Passion. But for the
Person of Christ, God forbid that we should deny Him
Divine honour at any time, and especially in the use of
' Ibid. p. 221. - Vol. ii. pp. 86-7.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 145
this Holy Sacrament. We believe with St. Austin, that
' no man eats of that Flesh, but first he adores ; ' but that
which offends us is this, that you [i.e. Eoman Church]
teach and require all men to adore the very Sacrament
with Divine honour. To this end you hold it out to the
people. To this end Corpus Ghristi Day was instituted
about three hundred years since. . . . But that which
weighs most with us is this, that we dare not give Divine
worship unto any creature, no, not to the very Humanity
of Christ in the abstract (much less to the Host), but to
the Whole Person of Christ, God and Man, by reason of
the hypostatical union between the child of the Blessed
Virgin Mary and the Eternal Son, * Who is God over all
Blessed for ever.' Shew us such an union betwixt the
Deity and the Elements, or accidents, and you say some-
thing. But you pretend no such thing. ^
Again : —
Lastly, the Grecians know no Feast of Corpus Christi,
nor carry the Sacrament up and down, nor elevate it to be
adored. They adore Christ in the use of the Sacrament ;
so do we. They do not adore the Sacrament ; no more
do we.^
These last two extracts from Bramhall suggest
two observations. The first is the light which
Bramh all's employment of the term * Christ in
the use of the Sacrament ' throws on Hooker's
employment of that phrase. Bramhall indisputably
believed that the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist
was objective to the recipient and independent of
his faith, and he identifies the doctrine of the
Church of England on this subject with that of the
» Vol. i. p. 20. 2 Vol. ii. p. 634.
146 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Greek Church, of which there is no question.
Nevertheless he declares of both Churches that they
* adore Christ in the use of the Sacrament.'
On the other hand, he is careful to guard against
such a materialisation of the doctrine of the Real
Presence as would constitute a kind of hypostatic
union between the consecrated elements and the
Humanity of Christ. And I am not at all sure that
the warning is not needed now among some of our
clergy and laity. To minds not accustomed to
philosophical speculation there is always some
danger of confusing the Divine Presence with the
material instruments through which God vouchsafes
to manifest Himself or bestow His gifts. These we
are to reverence for His sake, whose Presence sanc-
tifies them for some use beyond their natural
capacity. Moses was urgently forbidden to approach
the Burning Bush on Horeb till he had paid
reverent homage to the Divine Presence manifested
there. The Presence was objective to Moses and
independent of him, and worship was due to it, not
to the material instrument of its manifestation,
Nor would worship have been due to the Bush if
removed elsewhere and reserved as an object of
adoration apart from the particular use for which it
was there and then selected. In like manner the
reservation of the Blessed Sacrament, as far as I
know the mind of the primitive Church, was for the
sake of Eucharistic communion only, and not for
the sake of adoration apart from communion. It is
in that sense, and in that sense only, that I advocate
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 147
reservation, which I hope will be conceded on
condition that developments which are Eoman
rather than Catholic shall be abandoned, including
the unauthorised Feast of Corpus Christi.
The specimens which I have now given will, I
think, suffice to exhibit the teaching of that distin-
guished body of learned theologians known as the
Caroline divines, and it will be seen that it is the
very doctrine which Sir William Harcourt conscien-
tiously thinks so directly inconsistent with the doc-
trine of the Church of England as to entitle him to
denounce all clergy who teach it as ' perjured
priests.' I am sure that the late distinguished
leader of the Liberal party in the Hous€ of Commons
did not know this when he fired off his invectives
in Parliament and in the press. But does it not
follow that he has still a good deal to learn before
he is competent to sit in Moses' seat and fulminate
his decrees as to the limits of toleration in the
Church of England ? Admirable Crichtons are rare.
It is given to few men to excel alike in politics and
theology, and it is no disparagement to Sir Wilham
Harcourt's great gifts to say that he is not one of the
elect in that particular, like Bacon, and Leibnitz,
and Gladstone. Knowledge of theology, which
embraces knowledge of ecclesiastical history, does
not come by the light of nature even to the most
intellectual. It requires the reading and mastery of
a good many books, and cannot be got up for a
parliamentary speech or newspaper controversy by
a cursory inspection of indexes or encyclopaedias.
l2
148 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Theology is, moreover, a science, and has, Hke all
sciences, its technical terminology, which may easily
mislead the unlearned. It is easy to imagine the
withering scorn with which Sir William Harcourt
would lash any rash layman who dared to lay such
rude hands on the sacred ark of constitutional law
as he has himself laid on an ark not less sacred.
How easy it would be to make fun of such doctrines
of constitutional law as that ' The King can do no
wrong,' and that ' The King is immortal.' Adopting
Sir William Harcourt's critical method, one might
exclaim : ' What pernicious heresy ! What political
cretinism ! What grovelHng superstition ! What
imbeciles those lawyers must be to offer such stuff
to laymen whose minds have not been obfuscated
by long burrowing among dusty text-books and
musty statutes ! ' I must venture to say, with all
respect, that this is not the spirit and temper in
which questions that touch the tenderest and
holiest feelings of human beings ought to be dis-
cussed.
I have so far presented, as I think, a fair review
of the doctrine of the Eucharist as held by the
Church of England down to the flight of James II.
I will now bring my review down to our own time
by putting into the witness-box a few men who will
be universally recognised as moderate in a sense
which would be considered inapplicable to the
Tractarian School. My first witness shall be the
moderate and very learned Archbishop Wake,
whose life covers the latter half of the seventeenth
THE TESTIMOl^Y OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 149
century and the first part of the eighteenth. Before
he became a bishop he had a controversy with the
celebrated Bossuet, who in the course of it had ex-
plained that Komanists 'understand the word
" offer," when they apply it to the Mass, in a
larger signification than what the Apostle (in the
Epistle to the Hebrews) gives it ; as when we are
said to offer God whatever we present before Him ;
and that it is thus they pretend to offer up the
Blessed Jesus to His Father in the Mass, in w^hich
He vouchsafes to render Himself present before
Him.'
That this [Wake retorted] is to prevaricate the mean-
ing of that phrase, the doctrine of the foregoing article
[of the Council of Trent] shows. If Christ be in the
Mass a true and proper Sacrifice,^ as was there said, it
will necessarily follow that there He must be truly and
properly sacrificed : and one essential »property [of sacri-
fice] being the true and real destruction of what is
offered, insomuch that when there is not a tru^ and
proper destruction, neither can there be, as they them-
selves acknowledge, a true and proper sacrifice, it must
be evidently false in these men to pretend that, by offering
in this matter is meant only a presenting of Christ before
God, and not a real change and destruction of His Body
offered by them. . . . Though Christ be acknowledged
to be really present after a Divine and heavenly manner
in this Holy Eucharist, yet will not this warrant the
adoration of the Host, which is still only bread and
wine ; . . . nor will such a real presenting of our
Blessed Lord to His Father, to render Him propitious to
' The italics here and throughout are Wake's.
150 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
us, make the Eucharist any more than a metaphoricaly
not a true cmd proper propitiatory Sacrifice}
I venture to think that Wake goes too far in
insisting that a true sacrifice must of necessity
imply the 'real destruction of what is offered.' I
have in a previous chapter argued that the essence
of self-sacrifice is in the surrender of the will, and
that the death of the human victim is abstractedly a
separable accident. But I have quoted the passage
because it is an excellent illustration of language
which may be appealed to by both parties in this
controversy. In using the term ' metaphorical ' as
describing the Eucharistic Sacrifice, Wake might be
quoted by a careless controversialist as teaching
pure Zwinglianism. But the context gives the
adjective * metaphorical ' a different meaning. The
following are the points of the passage : —
1. Wake objected to a true and proper Sacrifice
in the Eucharist.
2. By a true and proper Sacrifice he meant the
true and real destruction of the Victim.
3. He believed in a ' metaphorical ' offering in
the Eucharist.
4. By a ' metaphorical ' offering he meant ' a
real presenting of our Blessed Lord to His Father,
to render Him propitious to us.'
This is simply the doctrine of Bramhall and
Andrewes, and the, whole school of Caroline divines.
After Wake became Archbishop of Canterbury
' Wake's Exposition, pp. 69, 70.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 151
he entered into a friendly correspondence with the
eminent French historian and theologian," Dupin,
with a view to union between the Anglican and
Gallican Churches. The Church of France was
strongly opposed to Ultramontanism, as indeed it
continued to be till it was forcibly revolutionised by
an unholy alliance between the secular arm of
Napoleon and the spiritual arm of the. Pope.
Experience as well as reflection taught Napoleon
the impossibility of expelling religion from among
the dominant factors of civil government ; so he
determined to enlist it in his service. To that end
he captured the Pope ; and the Pope secure in his
grasp, the next thing was to destroy the indepen-
dence of the bishops and clergy, The bishops were
forced to surrender their sees, and France was, in
violation of Catholic principles, carved into new
sees by Napoleon, which were filled with Napoleon's
nominees, deprived of their ancient rights and made
dependent on the Pope. The inferior clergy were
also deprived of their canonical rights and made
subservient to the bishops. Thus Napoleon believed
that he held the entire control of the conscience of
France by making the clergy subservient to the
bishops, the bishops to the Pope, and the Pope to
himself. Our Roman brethren sometimes twit us
with the subservience of our bishops at the period
of the Reformation to the Sovereign. But, at the
worst, our bishops never descended to the degrada-
tion inflicted on the Church of France by Napoleon,
using the Pope as his tool.
152 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Nothing came of the correspondence between
Wake and Dupin. But it is noteworthy that so
moderate a Churchman as Wake should have enter-
tained the idea of a union between the Churches of
France and England on the basis of mutual explana-
tions. Wake desired to get both Churches ' to agree
to communicate in everything we can with each
other, . . . and join in the public service, and yet leave
one another in the free liberty of believing Transub-
stantiation or not, so long as we do not require any-
thing to be done by either in consequence of that
opinion.' ^
To this I may add, since it is short, the following
passage from a ' Discourse on the Sacrament of the
Lord's Supper,' by Dr. Edward Felling, a canon of
Westminster Abbey, and a contemporary of Wake : —
Though there be no grounds in the world for the
opinion of Transubstantiation, yet we must not conceive
that Christ is not verily, really, and of a truth, in the
Sacrament. He may be really present, though there
may be no reason to believe that He is present after a
corporal manner. For two different substances and
natures may be joined and go together, though they
remain distinct in themselves and in their properties ; as
the soul and flesh of a man are united in the same person,
and as the Humanity and Divinity of Christ were joined
together in the same Lord.
This way of stating the doctrine of the Real
Presence is sometimes called Consubstantiation ;
but erroneously, for Consubstantiation, as I have
» Mosheim, Hist. iv. 286. Maclaine's edition.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 153
already explained, does not mean in theological
language the co-existence of two diverse substances,
but an identity of substance in two subsistences.
I will conclude this part of my argument with
the testimony of two eminent men of our own time,
the late Eev. Sir William Palmer and the late
Bishop Thirlwall. The former worked for a time
with the leaders of the Oxford Movement. 'He
was,' says Newman,' * the only really learned man
among us. He understood theology as a science ;
he was practised in the scholastic mode of contro-
versial writing, and I believe was as well acquainted
as he was dissatisfied with the Catholic schools.
He was as decided in his religious views as he was
cautious and even subtle in their expression, and
gentle in their enforcement.'
Again : —
Mr. Palmer about the same time [1836-7] was pro-
jecting a work of a similar nature [to Newman's * Pro-
phetical Office of the Church '] in his own way. It was
published, I think, under the title, * A Treatise on the
Christian Church.' As was to be expected from the
author, it was a most learned, most careful composition ;
and in its form, I should say, polemical. So happily
at least did he follow the logical method of the Eoman
Schools, that Father Perrone, in his treatise on Dogmatic
Theology, recognised in him a combatant of the true cast,
and saluted him as a foe worthy to be vanquished. Other
soldiers in that field he seems to have thought little better
than the lanzknechts of the Middle Ages, and, I dare say,
with very good reason. ... As to Mr. Palmer's book, it
• Apologia, p. 108.
154 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
was one which no AngUcan could write but himself — in
no sense, if I recollect aright, a tentative work. The
ground of controversy was cut into squares, and thus
every objection had its answer.^
The exact title of Palmer's book is ' A Treatise
on the Church of Christ.' I made Newman's ac-
quaintance some years after his ' Apologia ' was
published, and I remember his telling me that he
still regarded Palmer's book as the ablest exposition
ever written of the position of the Church of Eng-
land since the Keformation, especially as against
Eome. Dollinger had an equally high opinion of
Palmer's ' Treatise,' and told me that he would con-
sider a new edition of the book, brought up to date,
* an event for Christendom.' He repeated the
phrase in a letter to Mr. Gladstone, who quite
agreed with him. At the earnest solicitation of Mr.
Gladstone I undertook a new edition of the book,
and spent a good deal of time working on it in Dr.
Bollinger's library at Munich, under the direction
of that illustrious scholar and divine. But the
publication was interrupted for private reasons, into
which it is not necessary to enter here. I hope,
with the aid of a friend, to bring out before very
long a work which covers Palmer's ground, and
will attempt to meet some problems which did not
exist when he published his masterly * Treatise '
sixty years ago. Perrone made an elaborate reply
to Palmer; but no dispassionate reader of both
• Apologia, p. 142.
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 155
* Treatise ' and reply will think that Perrone ' van-
quished ' his opponent.
Warmly, however, as Palmer sympathised with
the Oxford Movement in its earlier stages, his
cautious temperament was repelled by some of its
later developments, and he eventually broke with it
altogether. So that, on the whole, he may be
regarded as one of the most moderate as well as one
of the most learned of Anglican divines, and at the
same time one of the most formidable opponents of
the Boman claims. Let us see, then, what Palmer
says as to the Reformation settlement under
Cranmer at the period when the foreign Reformers
wielded their greatest influence in England — in
other words, when Protestantism reached its high-
water mark in the Church of England. The italics
in the following quotation are Palmer's : —
It is asserted that our Church, having stedfastly
adhered to the whole Eomish doctrine in the reign of
Henry VIIL, relinquished it immediately after the acces-
sion of Edward VI. and became Zwinglian, rejecting
especially the Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist. This
assertion arises from an erroneous view of facts, and from
not distinguishing the opinions of individual theologians
from the public and authorised doctrine of the Church of
England.
It is a fact, that no new formulary was published by
authority of the Church during the whole reign of Edward
VI. The forty- two Articles of Religion compiled (it is
supposed) by Cranmer, Ridley, and others, in 1552, were
never authorised by Convocation, though the Royal
Council most unjustifiably published them as so ap-
156 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
proved, for which Archbishop Cranmer remonstrated with
them in vain : nor were they ever at any time received as
a formulary of the Church of England, having been put
forth by the King but a few days before his death in 1553,
and only subscribed by a few clergy in Canterbury, Norwich,
and London, and in the University of Cambridge, who were
solicited, but not compelled, to subscribe by the bishops
Cranmer and Ridley. From this time we hear no more
of them as of any authority. That no new doctrine was
established in the Church of England during this reign
appears from Burnet, who observes with reference to the
above Articles : * It seemed to be a great want that this
was so long delayed, since the old doctrine had still the
legal authority on its side.' Yet these Articles, as we have
seen, were never in force.
It seems plain, indeed, that during the whole reign of
Edward VI. the doctrine of the Church of England was
most authentically represented by the Formulary of
Instruction formally approved by the Convocation of
Henry VIII. a.d. 1543, entitled ' The Necessary Doctrine
and Erudition,' a book which was most assuredly quite
opposed to the Zwinglian doctrines. This book was
of authority in the Church of England during the re-
mainder of King Henry's reign. In 1546 Archbishop
Cranmer, in writing to the King concerning the abolition
of certain ceremonies, recognises it as of authority in the
Church. The First Book of our Homihes, published in
1547 (the first year of Edward VI.), chiefly relates to
Christian morals, but it terms matrimony a Sacrament
[indeed, the Second Book of Homilies speaks of Ordina-
tion and * other Sacraments ' besides Baptism and the
Eucharist] ; and at the end of this Book of Homihes we
read of ' the due receiving of Christ's Body and Blood
under the form of bread and wine.' This is all very con-
sistent with 'The Necessary Doctrine,' but it is not
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 157
Zwinglian. Immediately after the publication of the
HomiUes, Gardiner objected to the doctrine of Justifi-
cation there laid down, as inconsistent with that of * The
Necessary Doctrine,' assuming the latter to be of au-
thority still. Again, in 1551, in arguing against the
opinions of Cranmer on the Eucharist, he appealed to the
doctrine confessed by the whole clergy of England in
an open Council, ' and never hitherto by any public Council
or anything set forth by authority impaired.' Nor could
any effectual answer be made to this ; and, accordingly, not
only does Cranmer disclaim the notion that Gardiner had
been brought to trial for his doctrine on the Eucharist,
but none of the bishops of the Popish party, who were
expelled from their sees in Edward's reign, were deprived
on pretence of their holding doctrines contrary to those
of the Church, but for disobedience to the Eoyal Council,
or for treason.
Thus it appears that the authorised doctrine of the
Church of England, during the whole of Edward the
Sixth's reign, was that of the Eeal Presence, in the
strongest and most decided sense. ^
There is, of course, no pretence for saying that
the Church of England has changed or modified her
doctrine on this subject since Edward VI. ; on the
contrary, all the alterations in her formularies since
then have been in the direction of giving greater
emphasis to the doctrine of the Eeal Presence,
which Palmer states as follows : —
She believes that the Eucharist is not the sign of an
absent Christ, and that those who partake of it receive
not merely the figure, or shadow, or sign of Christ's Body,
' A Treatise on the Church of Christ, i. 508-511.
158 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
but the reality itself. And as Christ's Divine and
Human Natures are inseparably united, so she believes
that we receive in the Eucharist not only the Flesh and
Blood of Christ, but Christ Himself , both God and Man.'
The late Bishop Thirlv^all, one of the most
learned and one of the ablest of Broad Churchmen,
sums up the case as follows, with bis usual judicial
impartiality and accuracy:—
The Church of England has dealt with the subject in
a spirit of true reverence as well as of prudence and
charity. She asserts the mystery inherent in the institu-
tion of the Sacrament, but abstains from all attempts to
investigate or define it, and leaves the widest range open
to the devotional feelings and the private meditations of
her children with regard to it. And this liberty is so
large, and has been so freely used, that, apart from the
express admission of Transubstantiation or of the grossly
carnal notions to which it gave rise, and which, in the
minds of the common people, are commonly inseparable
from it, I think there can hardly be any description of
the Eeal Presence which, in some form or other, is
universally allowed, that would not be found to be
authorised by the language of eminent divines of our
Church ; and I am not aware, and do not believe, that
our most advanced Kitualists have in fact outstepped those
very ample bounds.^
Lastly, the doctrines of the Eeal Presence,
Eucbaristic Sacrifice, and Eucbaristical Adoration
came up for judicial determination before the Court
» A Treatise on the Church of Christ, i. 527.
^ Charge delivered hy the Bisliov of St. Davids in the year 186G,
pp. 97-8,
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 159
of Arches and the Judicial Committee, and were de-
cided to be in accordance with the teaching of the
Church of England. The final Court was unanimous
in affirming the legality of the two former, and
affirmed the legality of the latter, 'not without
doubts and divisions of opinion ; ' and this in an
undefended case, and in spite of the crude a.nd provo-
cative language of Mr. Bennett.
Let the reader now compare the doctrine of the
Church of England, as I have exhibited it in the
preceding pages, with the representation of it given
in the following quotation from a letter v/ritten by Dr.
Taylor, Archdeacon of Liverpool, on October 14, 1898,
and published in the ' Times ' of the following day : —
The Eeformers denied and denounced both Transub-
stantiation and Consubstantiation, and embraced the
purer views of Zwinglius, which denied any presence in
the elements, but maintained a presence in the due
ministration of the ordinance, to the soul of the faithful
recipient.
Yet Archdeacon Taylor has been active not only
in denouncing all who hold the doctrine which I
have now shown to be that of the Eeformers ; he
has, in addition, given his support to a Bill which
has for its object the expulsion of all who will not
hold his own ' purer views of Zwinglius,' which are
not only out of harmony with the formularies of the
Church of England and with the teaching of the
Anglican divines, but are repudiated even by the
Presbyterianism of Scotland and the Wesleyanism
of England. The Duke of Argyll emphatically re-
160 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
pudiated in the ' Times ' the attribution of Zwing-
Hanism to Scottish Presbyterianism, and claimed
for it the doctrine of a Keal Presence barely distin-
guishable from Transubstantiation.
At the time that Archdeacon Taylor was pro-
claiming his rejection of Anglican doctrine and his
adhesion to 'the purer views of Zwinglius,' Mr.
Price Hughes was denouncing in the ' Methodist
Times ' * the deadly consequences of Zwinglianism,'
of ' the fatal Zwinglian view.' * To regard the
Lord's Supper,' says the President of the Wesleyan
Conference, ' as nothing more than a mere com-
memorative rite is to play directly, on the one hand,
into the hands of the Unitarians, and on the other,
and much more, into the hands of the Komanists.
. . . Our sacramental service is as definite and pro-
nounced as the Anglican service on which it is
based, and with which it entirely agrees.'
Thus we see that the Archdeacon of Liverpool
would degrade our doctrines far below the standard
of orthodox Nonconformists, and would expel even
men like Mr. Price Hughes from his communion.
Yet Protestants of his type protest that they have
no desire at all to abridge the comprehensiveness of
the Church of England! How subtle is the power
of self-deception !
This seems to be the most convenient place for
offering some criticism on the objections made in
this controversy to the reservation of the Blessed
Sacrament for the Communion of the Sick. It is
assumed, and by men of far greater learning, ability,
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 161
and authority than myself, that reservation is
plainly and indisputably forbidden by the 28th Article
and the post-communion rubric. Let us see.
The article says : ' The Sacrament of the Lord's
Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved,
carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.' The mean-
ing of the article is perhaps more fully and clearly
brought out in the Latin version, which is of equal
authority with the English : ' Sacramentum Eu-
charistise ex institutione Christi non servabatur,
circumferebatur, elevabatur, nee adorabatur.' The
substitution of ' Eucharistia ' here, and in the pre-
ceding clause of the article, for ' Coena Domina ' is
significant. In its theological connotation the
word implies more than *the Lord's Suppet' — an
expression which, though susceptible of the highest
doctrine, and used even in the Church of Kome,
lends itself more easily than * Eucharist ' to a
Zwinglian meaning. Ducange's definition of
* Eucharistia ' is ' Sacrum Corpus Qhristi in Missae
sacrificio confectum.' The authors of the article,
while excluding Transubstantiation, were careful
to use language which implied the reality of the
Presence, not only by substituting * Eucharistia ' for
* Coena Domini,' but by declaring that * the Body of
Christ is given' as well as 'taken' ('accipitur '),
though of course ' only after an heavenly and
spiritual manner.'
I suppose we may also infer that the imperfect
tense of ' reserved ' (' servabatur ') was used advisedly,
implying, that is, that no custom of reserving the
M
162 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Sacrament followed from the ' institution ' of it by
Christ. That is an historical truism, and certainly no
prohibition of reservation for the sick can be inferred
from it.
But we are not left to inference in the matter.
The 28th Article was drawn up in 1562. Two
years previously a Latin edition of the Prayer
Book was published by authority, and in this the
rubric in Edward's First Prayer Book ordering
reservation for the Communion of the Sick was
restored in a slightly abbreviated form. The Latin
Prayer Book was prescribed for public use * in the
Churches and Chapels ' of the universities and
public schools. It was added, however, that in the
case of domestics who did not understand Latin,
and of parishes attached to any college, the service
should be used and the Sacraments administered in
English. But it may fairly be assumed that in
those cases the rubric on reservation would apply.
Now surely it is altogether unreasonable to sup-
pose that the very same authority which ordered
reservation in the Latin Prayer Book should at the
same time condemn and forbid it in one of the
Articles of Eeligion. We may, indeed, assume that
the article was intended to express disapproval —
condemnation seems to me too strong a word for its
cautious language— of carrying about the Sacrament
in solemn procession. It is a ceremony confined
exclusively to the Latin Church, and is com-
paratively modern even in it, not being traceable
farther back than the fourteenth century. It has
THE TESTIMONY OP ANGLICAN DIVINES 163
never existed in the Russian Church, or in any of
the Oriental Churches. But reservation for the
Communion of the Sick, carried without any parade
or ceremony, has always been common to all the
Churches of the East. I may add that the elevation
of the chalice is likewise unknown to the Eastern
Churches, and is not a universal rule even in Latin
Christendom.
So much as to the 28th Article. Let us now
look at the rubrics which are relevant to the question
of reservation. A rubric in the Office for the Com-
munion of the Sick in the First Prayer Book of
Edward VI. sanctioned it explicitly. In the Second
Prayer Book this rubric was omitted. Does the
omission necessarily mean prohibition ? That does
not seem to me to follow, and I offer the following
reasons : The rubric of 1549 positively ordered
reservation : * Then shall the priest reserve,' &c.
This is omitted in 1552. The order is withdrawn,
but the practice is not forbidden. That I am not
splitting hairs here seems to me evident from another
rubric. In the Book of 1549 there is a rubric, not
merely sanctioning, but, like the rubric on reserva-
tion, enjoining by name what are called the Eucha-
ristic vestments. In the Book of 1552 this rubric is
not simply omitted ; there is another rubric substi-
tuted for it which prescribes the use of the surplice
only and forbids the use of the other vestments by
name. We see, therefore, that when the revisers in
1552 intended omission to mean prohibition they
said so in so many words. Is it an unfair construo-
M 2
164 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
tion that the simple omission of the positive in-
junction left the practice optional in the matter of
reservation ?
In 1559 the Prayer Book was again revised and
a few alterations were made. But the question of
reservation was not touched. The only reference to
the question was a rubric which permitted the
celebrant to *have to his own use' whatever re-
mained of the bread and wine, making no distinction
between consecrated and unconsecrated.
Taking these facts in conjunction with the Latin
Prayer Book, the inference seems to me inevitable
that Elizabeth and her advisers intended reservation
to be the rule in seats of learning where there was
no danger of its being abused, and left optional else-
where. Let us remember that of upwards of ten
thousand priests in England at that time only two
hundred at the most refused to accept the Prayer
Book. Let us remember also that the sagacious
policy of Elizabeth and her wise ministers was to
give as little umbrage as possible to the settled
convictions and traditional religious habits of her
subjects, lay and clerical, as long as they recognised
her supremacy ; a proof of which policy I have
already given in the fact that some objectors to the
Thirty-nine Articles were persuaded to sign them in
their own sense. There can be no reasonable doubt
that the great majority of the ten thousand clergy
celebrated the Sacrament in the old vestments and
with the usual ceremonial, and in all probability
continued to reserve the Sacrament and carry it in
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 165
procession to the sick. This seems to me to explain
the very mild language of the 28th Article; not
condemning, yet discouraging, the carrying about of
the Sacrament, but making no reference at all to
reservation for the sick, and certainly not forbidding
it in face of the sanction of the Latin Prayer
Book. To this must be added the fact that the
Puritans appear to have made no sort of objection
to the reservation of the Sacrament for the Sick.
The changes in a Protestant direction made in the
Prayer Book of 1549 were chiefly at the instigation
of Bucer, who does not appear to have made any
objection at all to the rubric sanctioning reservation.
What the Puritans objected to, and very strongly,
was the Office for the Private Communion of the
Sick ; and it would seem that they would prefer
reservation to what they regarded — and truly — as an
innovation on the custom of Christendom. Our great
Anglican divines —Bingham, for instance — take the
line of apologising for private communion, and are
glad to fall back in justification of the innovation on
two or three instances in the primitive Church.
Now we come to the last revision of 1662. We
know that the revisers of that book were men who
wished to go back as far as circumstances would
permit to the Prayer Book of 1549. It is therefore
improbable in the highest degree that they would
gratuitously prohibit what the revisers of 1552 and
1559 had left open. The rubric of 1559 said : ' And
if any of the Bread and Wine remain the curate
shall have it to his own use.' The revisers of 1662
166 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
changed the full stop into a semicolon and added
the words, * but if any remain of that which was
consecrated, it shall not be carried out of the church,
but the priest and such other of the communicants
as he shall then call unto him shall, immediately
after the Blessing, reverently eat and drink the
same.' Surely the logical and grammatical con-
struction of this added clause is governed and
limited by the clause to which it is appended.
It is not a new and independent rubric. It
is an explanatory addition to a previous rubric,
which allowed the priest to carry home for domestic
use what remained of the elements. The new clause
explains that this permission does not apply to the
consecrated elements. They are not to be used for
common purposes, but are to be reverently consumed
in church before the congregation departs.
This I hold to be the reasonable and natural
construction of the rubric. It is a recognised rule of
syntax that the apodosis is governed and explained
by the protasis, and does not travel beyond it if there
be nothing else to make that necessary. Is there
anything else here ? Yes, but in an opposite sense.
The addition was made to the rubric on the sugges-
tion of Cosin, and Cosin himself has left us the
explanation. The rubric of 1559, he says, was
* abused ' by some clergy carrying home for domestic
use what remained of the consecrated as well as the
unconsecrated elements. This became a great scan-
dal, he says, and was used by Eoman Catholics as a
handle against the Church. Therefore the clause
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 167
was added which forbade the clergy to carry home
what remained of the consecrated as well as of the
unconsecrated bread and wine. The question of
reservation for the sick does not come in at all. It
does not seem to have been within the purview of
the revisers, having never been forbidden, and being
still enjoined in seats of learning.
But it is objected that the practice of reservation
has been disused for three hundred years. How do
we know that ? There was not a universal press
during those three hundred years ; and even if there
were, communion of the sick by reservation would
be no more recorded than communion by private
celebration. What record is there at this moment
of the parishes where reservation is practised ? To
argue the non-existence of a private usage of that
kind from the absence of formal evidence is a most
fallacious mode of reasoning. If, however, diligent
search were made I have no doubt that evidence
would be forthcoming. After reading a letter of
mine on this subject in the ' Times,' the Eev. T.
Keble sent me from Bisley Vicarage, Stroud, on
December 8 last, the following note :—
I was told yesterday by a lady, nearly ninety-one
years old, that she remembered that her father, a very
conscientious country clergyman, was in the habit of
taking the Blessed Sacrament from the altar to a sick
person who lived near the church, while the communi-
cants waited in their places until his return.
This takes us back before the Oxford Movement,
and evidently denotes a tradition in the family, or
168 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
circle, or parish of this clergyman. The reign of the
Commonwealth doubtless destroyed a great many
customs and usages that had been prevalent till then ;
but many survived that cataclysm of which no record
would, in the ordinary course of things, have come
down to us. Yet the custom of this old lady's father,
with the sympathetic acquiescence of his parishioners,
shows how unsafe it is to rely on sweeping generalis-
ations.
But we are told that litera scripta manet.
Whatever may have been the intention of the revisers
of 1662, the letter of their rubric is plain beyond a
doubt ; and, rubrics being statute law, they must be
construed literally. I wish that some of those who
use that argument would apply it to the interpreta-
tion of the Ornaments Bubric. But it is a sound
argument, and I am willing to test my interpretation
of this rubric by it. Here is the rubric : —
And if any of the Bread and Wine remain uncon-
secrated the curate shall have it to his own use ; but if
any remain of that which was consecrated, it shall not
be carried out of the church, but the priest, and such
other of the communicants as he shall then call unto
him, shall, immediately after the Blessing, reverently eat
and drink the same.
Now I venture to say that these words, so far
from forbidding reservation, exclude that interpreta-
tion. The celebrant does not reserve for the com-
munion of the sick what may chance to remain after
administering the Sacrament to those present.
After consecration he sets aside what he intends to
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 169
carry to the sick, and then begins to distribute to
those who intend to communicate. If any part of
that remain it is not to be carried out of church in
the manner condemned by Cosin, but is to be con-
sumed in the manner prescribed. But there is no
' if,' no doubt, no sort of contingency, in regard to
the consecrated portion of the Sacrament reserved
for the sick ; so Httle, indeed, that if either element
should fail in administering the Communion in
church, the priest does not replenish paten or chalice
from the reserved portion : he consecrates afresh.
I say confidently, therefore, that the little word
* if ' entirely excludes the ordinary interpretation of
the so-called rubric on reservation. It does not touch
reservation. It has altogether a different aim and
purpose ; and whatever the position of the question
of reservation was in point of law before the revision
of 1662, that it still remains. To my mind that
position is quite plain : it is distinctly legal. Eeser-
vation is not forbidden in any of the formularies of
the Church of England, and it is enjoined in one —
the Latin Prayer Book — which is still legal in our
universities and public schools. An aged peer told
me the other day that it was used in Christ Church
when he w^as an undergraduate there. Keservation,
moreover, has always been practised in the Scottish
Episcopal Church.
I respectfully submit therefore that a bishop
would be acting ultra vires who should forbid
reservation for the sick when circumstances made it
expedient. I am not arguing for superseding private
170 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
celebrations by the substitution of reservation. I
think private celebrations are edifying when the
requirements of the rubric can be satisfied. They
are these. The sick man ' must give timely notice
to the curate, signifying also how many there are to
communicate with him (which shall be three, or two
at the least), and having a convenient place in the
sick man's house, with all things necessary so pre-
pared, that the curate may reverently minister, he
shall then celebrate the Holy Communion.'
All this supposes leisure, and a private house, and
decent surroundings. It certainly does not contem-
plate a sudden emergency or the crowded lodgings
and squahd surroundings of our great towns. It is
a simple fact within my own experience and the ex-
perience of all clergy who have served among the
poor in London, that the requirements of the rubric
cannot always be satisfied as to the number of assist-
ing communicants or the accessories of reverence or
even decency. The following letter, which I ex-
tract from a newspaper, relates an experience by no
means exceptional : —
Sir, — The experience of Dean Hole, among villagers
in cottages, is very different from that of the London East
End clergy among lodgers.
A curate, forbidden by his vicar (in obedience to the
bishop) to reserve under any circumstances, went to
communicate a dying parishioner. He found a fellow-
lodger in the same room lying on his bed, mad drunk,
cursing and swearing and threatening his wife, who was
in vain trying to pacify two frightened children. There
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 171
Was another poor woman also on a sick bed in the same
room.
The curate went to the neighbouring mission church,
celebrated with no communicants, and administered to
the poor woman the reserved Sacrament. ' You did
wrong ; but I should have done the same,' was the vicar's
remark when the curate told him this. A Layman.
The fact is, the rubrics of the Prayer Book are a
body of general directions which were not, I believe,
intended to be enforced in every case au pied de la
lettre. They must be construed by the rule of rela-
tive importance, reason, and that very uncommon
faculty, common-sense. Let us test some of them by
the rigorous method of literal interpretation now
come suddenly into vogue. There is a rubric after
the Nicene Greedy which forbids all notices ' during
the time of Divine Service ' except those * prescribed
by the rules of this book ' (previously named) * or
enjoined by the Queen or by the ordinary of the
place.' There is hardly a parish in London in
which that rubric is not violated every Sunday. The
same rubric orders the sermon to begin immediately
after the publication of notices. If omission is
prohibition, that rubric is violated in every church
in which the sermon is preceded by a hymn or
collect. There are parishes, again, in which the
Athanasian Creed is systematically omitted ; in
which the rule of daily service is systematically
broken ; in which the services for Saints' days are
never kept ; in which the Holy Communion is cele-
brated only once a month or seldomer ; in which
172 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
such high festivals as the Epiphany and Ascension
Day are never observed ; and where the Holy Com-
munion is never celebrated even on Whitsunday,
unless it happens to fall on the first Sunday in the
month.
Per contra^ take the case of a clergyman who
observes all these rubrics. He is, let us suppose,
administering the Holy Communion in the parish
church, and while he is thus engaged, word is
brought to him that a man, who has just met wi^h
an accident outside the church, is dying and earnestly
desires to receive the Sacrament According to the
ordinary interpretation of the rubric, the officiating
priest is to finish the service in church ; consume
what remains of the consecrated elements ; then go
home and return with a table and a fair linen cloth,
and fresh bread and wine ; and meanwhile scour
the parish for two or three who will communicate
with the dying man ; and then, when everything is
ready, after perhaps an hour's delay, he is to begin
a service which certainly occupies twenty minutes.
Must we seriously believe that the man who goes
through all that Pharisaic formalism is a more loyal
servant of the Church than he who carries the
Sacrament there and then out of the church to the
dying man ? And are we to conclude that the man
who disregarded this literalism and put a generous
and Christian interpretation on the rubric would be
convicted as an offender by any Court in the land ?
One whom we all revere, and who declared that He
* came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it,'
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 173
answered the cavils of the Procrustean rubricians of
His day by the memorable pronouncement that * the
Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.'
I venture to think that I am acting in the spirit of
that charter of evangelical exegesis when I say that
the Prayer Book was made for man, not man for the
Prayer Book. Those who now raise the cry of
' lawlessness,' while disregarding its spirit, would, if
they had their way, soon reduce the Church of
England to a condition of hopeless catalepsy. They
would kill all enthusiasm, all spontaneity, all zeal,
all, in fact, that has made the Church of England
what she is — one of the noblest factors, with all her
faults and blunders not a few, in the orderly develop-
ment of our nation.
The fact is, we live in an age in which, for
various reasons, the minds of men are so fixed on
the visible and tangible that they find it hard to
realise any existences which elude the scrutiny of
the senses. The world we see seems so all-em-
bracing as to leave no room for any other. And
the wonderful progress of physical science during the
last half-century has tended to deepen this feeling.
Men's minds have been so set on the mechanism of
nature that they have, to a large extent, lost sight
of the end in the process, of the hidden cause in the
visible effect. Some readers will remember a
striking illustration in * The Life and Letters of
Charles Darwin,' ^ of this deadening effect of physical
» Vol. i. p. 100.
174 ■ THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
studies on the higher faculties. The passage is
worth quoting : —
Up to the age of thirty, or beyond it, poetry of many
kinds, such as the works of Milton, Gray, Byron, Words-
worth, Coleridge, and Shelley, gave me great pleasure ;
and even as a schoolboy I took intense delight in
Shakespeare, especially in the historical plays. I have
also said that formerly pictures gave me considerable,
and music very great, delight. But now for many years
I cannot endure to read a line of poetry. I have tried
lately to read Shakespeare, and found it so intolerably
dull that it nauseated me. I have also lost my taste for
pictures or music. Music generally sets me thinking too
energetically on what I have been at work on instead of
giving me pleasure. I retain some taste for fine scenery,
but it does not cause me the exquisite delight which it
formerly did. . . . This curious and lamentable loss of
the higher aesthetic tastes is all the odder, as books on
history, biographies, and travels (independently of any
scientific facts which they may contain), and essays on
all sorts of subjects, interest me as much as ever they
did. My mind seems to have become a kind of machine
for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts ;
but why this should have caused the atrophy of that part
of the brain alone, on which the higher tastes depend,
I cannot conceive. A man with a mind more highly
organised or better constituted than mine would not, I
suppose, have thus suffered : and if I had to live my life
again, I would have made a rule to read some poetry and
listen to some music at least once every week ; for perhaps
the parts of my brain now atrophied would thus have been
kept active through use. The loss of these tastes is a loss
of happiness, and may possibly be injurious to the intellect,
THE TESTIMONY OF ANGLICAN DIVINES 175
and more probably to the moral character, by enfeebling
the emotional part of our nature.
It is odd that a man so familiar with the law of
degeneration tending to atrophy, which results from
the disuse of any limb or faculty, * could not con-
ceive ' why his ' higher tastes ' should, from disuse,
have been smitten with decay. The same process
of degeneration is apparent in his spiritual faculties.
He says truly in his ' Origin of Species ' that his
argument does not touch the question of creation,
but only of processes. The doctrine of evolution
leaves the origin of life in the impenetrable mystery
in which it found it. Ajid Darwin, accordingly,
seems to have been then a believer in an originating
Creator. But we can trace through his letters the
gradual evaporation of this belief, not so much from
any process of reasoning as from the ossification,
through disuse, of that part of his mental structure.
Darwin himself perceived, when too late, the proper
corrective — namely, the regular exercise of the
faculties which had been allowed to become atro-
phied.
Researches into the physical constitution of
nature have undoubtedly in this way had con-
siderable influence in turning men's minds away
from the spiritual side of nature, and made them
rest in the things which are seen as if they were
the only things. And yet the very discoveries of
modern science, which are supposed by some to
militate against belief in a spiritual world under-
176 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
lying and interpenetrating this, will surely seem to
a reflecting mind, whose spiritual faculties are on
the alert, to confirm that belief in a wonderful
manner. And indeed it is this dull apprehension
as to the existence of a spiritual world close to us,
not far away, which is at the root of the ordinary
objections to the sacramental system. Minds which
regard the spiritual world as a fixed place in space
beyond the sidereal system find it hard to believe
in real, veritable, spiritual substances behind
material veils. And yet the whole of this world
which we inhabit is in truth a sacramental system,
an economy of outward and visible signs veiling
realities hidden behind them.
But this will more fitly form the subject of a
separate chapter,
177
CHAPTEK V
PEOPINQUITY OF THE SPIRITUAL WORLD
Nothing has struck me more, in contemplating the
modern discoveries of physical science, than the
light which they appear to me to throw on the
glimpses into the spiritual world which Holy Writ
incidentally, and as it were casually, vouchsafes to
us. If we are to believe the Bible, the spiritual
world is not a region far away in space, but close to
us ; and we do not see its sights or hear its sounds
simply because our present organs are too dull to
apprehend them. We are thus in the condition of
a man born deaf and blind into this world of sense.
He is in the midst of two worlds, of which, however,
he knows next to nothing. For him the abounding
beauties of nature in the sphere of sight and sound
are as if they were not. Let his eyes be opened,
and he finds himself at once in the midst of a world
of which before he had no conception — nothing but
the vaguest notion from the report of those who had
eyes to see. Open his ears, and another world is
disclosed to him which his want of hearing had till
then concealed from him.
N
178 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
This is the sort of relation in which Holy Scrip-
ture represents us as standing towards the spiritual
world. Let us take a few instances.
When Elijah was about to leave the earth, and
Elisha prayed for ' a double portion of the spirit ' of
his departing master, the latter answered, * Thou
hast asked a hard thing. Nevertheless, if thou see
me when I am taken from thee, it shall be so unto
thee ; but if not, it shall not be so.' What did the
prophet mean by * if thou see me when I am taken
from thee ' ? Surely this : that if Elisha was able
to see the spiritual transformation which his master
was about to undergo, that would in itself be a suffi-
cient proof to him that spiritual organs were opened
within him which placed him in communication
with the spiritual world. Elisha did see the trans-
lation of his master, and found himself at once en-
dowed with the gift of seership, which enabled him
to reveal the secret counsels of the Syrian King,
who consequently sent an army to arrest him.
' And when the servant of the man of God was risen
early, and gone forth, behold, an host encompassed
the city, both with horses and chariots. And his
servant said unto him, Alas, my master ! how shall
we do ? And he answered. Fear not : for they that
be with us are more than they that be with them.
And Elisha prayed and said. Lord, I pray thee open
his eyes that he may see. And the Lord opened
the eyes of the young man, and he saw ; and, behold,
the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire
round about Elisha.*
PKOPINQUITY OF THE SPIEITUAL WOELD 179
It is evident that the * eyes ' which the prophet
prayed might be opened were not the bodily eyes of
the young man. These were open before, and saw
nothing but the Syrian host. A new sense was
opened which revealed to the youth the agencies of
Divine Providence invisible to mortal sight, which
protect the servants of God.
In S. Luke's Gospel (iii. 21, 22) we read : ' Now
when all the people were baptized, it came to pass
that, Jesus also being baptized and praying, the
heaven was opened, and the Holy Ghost descended in
a bodily shape like a dove upon Him, and a voice came
from heaven which said, Thou art my beloved Son ; in
Thee I am well pleased.' In S. Matthew's account the
expression is, ' The heavens were opened unto^Him.'
The meaning evidently is that prayer on the part
of Jesus was in fact the opening of His sinless soul
to that spiritual world which the gross environment
of the mortal body hides from the multitude.
Another incident of similar import in our Lord's
life is related in S. John's Gospel (xii. 27-29) : —
* Now is My soul troubled ; and what shall I
say ? Father, save Me from this hour ; but for this
cause came I unto this hour. Father, glorify Thy
name. Then came there a voice from heaven, say-
ing, I have both glorified it and will glorify it again.
The people, therefore, that stood by and heard it
said that it thundered : others said. An angel spake
to Him.'
That is to say, the heavenly voice which fell in
articulate accents on the sensitive ear of our Saviour
V 2
180 THE EBFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
sounded like the rumbling of distant thunder on the
duller organs of those who were about Him.
I believe that several of the discrepancies in the
Gospel record of our Lord's Resurrection may be
explained in the same way. Woman's more refined
and delicate organisation is naturally more sensitive
to spiritual influences than man's, and this is pro-
bably the reason why the devout women who visited
the tomb of the risen Saviour saw more of the
spiritual world than Peter and John, Mary, whose
absorbing love and intense grief had, no doubt,
quickened her spiritual perceptions, saw two angels ;
the other women saw only one ; Peter and John saw
none. In fact, each saw more or less according as
the spiritual organs were in each case rendered more
or less sensitive to spiritual influences.
My next illustration shall be from an incident in
the account of the martyrdom of S. Stephen, re-
corded in Acts vii. 55-57 : —
VBeing full of the Holy Ghost, he looked up
stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God,
and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, and
said. Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son
of Man standing on the right hand of God.'
Now where was the heaven into which the dying
martyr gazed ? Millions of miles away, beyond the
starry firmament ? Was his mortal sight miracu-
lously endowed with a telescopic power of traversing
in a moment the planetary spaces and- looking into
a world of supersensuous glories behind them ? Is
it not plain, on the contrary, that a new sense was
I
PROPINQUITY OF THE SPIRITUAL WORLD 181
opened in himself, which enabled him to see through
the integuments of the natural life into the world of
unseen realities which lie above it, not in space, but
in altitude of being ? The ' everlasting doors ' were
* lifted up,' and the protomartyr was vouchsafed a
glimpse into a world of unearthly splendours close
to him, where his Divine Master- was standing ready
to receive His faithful servant. But the persecutors
of S. Stephen saw nothing but the rapt gaze of their
victim ; for the world which was revealed to him is
* spiritually discerned,' and they lacked that spiritual
insight.
Another illustration in point is the narrative of
the conversion of S. Paul. The account given in
Acts ix. says that * the men which journeyed with
him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no
man.' S. Paul himself, on the other hand, says,
' And they that were with me saw indeed the light,
and were afraid ; but they heard not the voice of
Him that spake to me ' (Acts xxii. 9). And cavils
against the inspiration of the Acts are sometimes
founded upon this seeming discrepancy. What is the
explanation ? Evidently, that S. Paul's companions
heard the sound, while his ear alone caught its
articulate language : ra (jxcvrjivra awsrovai.
These examples will suffice to show the general
teaching of the Bible touching the relation between
the world of sense and that of spirit. And now let
us see what physical science has to say upon the
subject.
We talk of five bodily senses ; but in strictness of
182 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
speech we have only one sense — that of touch. Our
vision of external objects is nothing else but sensa-
tions made on the retina of the eye by contact with
the vibrations of an external substance. To produce
the sensation of scarlet, 477 billions of vibrations
break upon the retina every second, while a ray of
violet is caused by no fewer than 700 billions of
vibrations. Waves of light above or below these
limits in number are invisible to the human eye ;
that is, they move too rapidly or too slowly to make
any impression on the optic nerve. This is but
another way of saying that objects innumerable may
exist in the midst of us which are of so subtile a
nature as to elude our visual organs. * Myriads of
organised beings may exist imperceptible to our
vision, even if we were among them. ' ^
And the same observation is applicable to the
phenomena of sound. Notes above or below a
certain pitch, though the air be resonant with them
to more delicate organisations, are inaudible to the
human ear. In his interesting book on the Glaciers
of the Alps Dr. Tyndall tells the following anec-
dote : —
I once crossed a Swiss mountain in company with a
friend; a donkey was in advance of us, and the dull
tramp of the animal was heard by my companion ; but
to me this sound was almost masked by the shrill
chirruping of innumerable insects, which thronged the
adjacent grass. My friend heard nothing of this ; it lay
quite beyond his range of hearing.
* Grove's Correlation of Physical Forces^ p. 161. Fourth edition.
PEOPINQUITY OF THE SPIEITUAL WOELD 183
Another illustration of this fact is given in Mr.
Skertchly's ' Dahomey as it is.' ^ Speaking of the
large bats of that region he says : —
They utter a sharp chirrup, something like the squeak
of a rat, but very much higher in pitch, so high, indeed,
that I have frequently come across individuals whose
acoustic powers had not sufficient range to permit of
their hearing the note ; and on more than one occasion
I have said to Buchan [his half-caste servant], ' What a
noise these bats are making ! ' Upon which he has
observed to me, * Bats have no mouths for talking,' he
being perfectly unconscious of their vocal powers.
Some remarkable instances of the superior power
of hearing possessed by insects are given in an in-
teresting correspondence in the ' Times ' of
November 1874. I quote the following : —
Adapting the concluding sentences of the letter of the
Eev. F. O. Morris in the * Times ' of Saturday, it may be
observed that there are doubtless more sounds uttered
on the earth and in the air than can reach our ears. It
is well known that to many persons both the grasshopper
and the bat are dumb, and it is probable that moths and
other insects attract each other by calls inaudible to us,
rather than by scent.
One night, a few years ago, I had a female tiger-moth
in a gauze cage, in a room opening into a garden. I had
reared the moth from a caterpillar myself. The room
was full of tobacco smoke, and the garden was in the
middle of a town ; yet in less than two hours no less than
five male tiger-moths flew to the cage. Though I have sat
in the same room hundreds of nights with the window open
» Pp. 50, 51.
184 THE EEFOEMATIOK SETTLEMENT
and a light burning, I never before or since knew a tiger-
moth to be attracted thither. It seems almost impossible
that these moths could have been led to the spot from
other walled-in, and in some cases distant, gardens, in
any other way but by a call in the stillness of the night.
But the captive moth made no perceptible noise, even
with its wings.
There is nothing unreasonable, therefore, in
believing that persons in a state of spiritual tension
may be cognisant of sights and sounds which make
no impression, or only a vague and meaningless im-
pression, on the multitude. When we reflect, to
quote the words of an eloquent writer, * that there
are waves of light and sound of which our dull senses
take no cognisance, that there is a great difference
even in human perceptivity, and that some men,
more gifted than others, can see colours or hear
sounds which are invisible or inaudible to the great
bulk of mankind, you will appreciate how possible it
is that there may be a world of spiritual existence
around us — inhabiting this same globe, enjoying the
same nature — of which we have no perception ; that,
in fact, the wonders of the New Jerusalem may be in
our midst, and the songs of the angelic hosts filling
the air with their celestial harmony, although un-
heard and unseen by us.' ^ Truly 'there are more
things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our
philosophy.'
All this will sound supremely foolish to some of
' Religion and Chemistry, p. 107. By Professor J. P.
Cooko.
PROPINQUITY OF THE SPIRITUAL WOELD 185
the robust critics of the day. A well-known writer,
for example, contributed to a leading journal ^ some
' Letter signed * S.' in Pall Mall Gazette of Jan. 26, 1875. The
writer was the late Sir J. Fitzjames Stephen, a man of powerful
intellect, but without any aptitude for metaphysics. This is shown
in a curious volume of anonymous Essays by a Barrister (p. 151), in
which he gravely argues, in opposition to the doctrine of the necessary
laws of thought, that there may be a world where omnipotence may
cause two and two to make five instead of four. After giving some
reasons for this paradox he proceeds : —
' It would also be possible to put a case in which two straight
lines should be universally supposed to include a space. Imagine a
man, who had never had any experience of straight lines through the
medium of any sense whatever, suddenly placed upon a railway
stretching out in a perfectly straight line to an indefinite distance in
each direction. He would see the rails, which would be the first lines
he had ever seen, apparently meeting, or at least tending to meet at
each horizon ; and he would thus infer, in the absence of all other
experience, that they actually did enclose a space, when produced
far enough. ... In such a world, therefore, the impossibility of
conceiving that two straight lines can enclose a space would not
exist.'
All this is a pure ignoratio elenclii. The question is not whether
there may not be a world inhabited by beings so constituted as to
believe that two and two make five, and that two straight lines
running parallel can enclose a space, but whether the human mind
can accept such paradoxes for truths— whether, on the contrary, the
axioms of mathematics do not present themselves to the mind, the
moment it embraces them, as irreversible and eternal. The inference
of the man on the railway would be that the lines were not really
straight, or that his eyes deceived him. Strange to say, Mr. John
Stuart Mill quotes these paradoxes with approbation in his Examina-
tion of Sir W. Hamilton's Philosophy (ch. vi.) — a weak piece of
reasoning, in my opinion. Both he and Fitzjames Stephen fail to see
the fundamental difference between necessary laws of thought and
empirical knowledge. Once the human mind gets hold of a mathe-
matical axiom it cannot conceive its contradictory. But all our ex-
perience of sunrise does not forbid the thought of its one day rising
no more — a catastrophe, indeed, towards which astronomers tell us
the sun is travelling.
186 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
years ago a long and most scornful attack on the
doctrine of Sacrament alism. His argument brought
him naturally into collision with the scholastic dis-
tinctions between matter and form, substance and
accident ; and here is the sort of criticism to which
his superficial study of the question tempted him : —
I suppose it requires no argument to show that far
the greater part of this is nonsense. * Virtual contact '
and forms without matter, for instance, are unmeaning
expressions and make nonsense of the propositions in
which they occur. The whole speculation is spun out
of the very distinction about matter and form, substance
and accident, which is essential to the controversy about
the Sacraments. So much of the theory as is not non-
sense is simply a play of fancy, resting on no foundation
at all, and which an ingenious person might twist into
any shape he pleased. I quote this partly in order to
show the character of what is called scientific theology
and the silliness of the results which its method of pro-
cedure produces, and partly because it shows how of two
doctrines, the intrinsic value of which is identical, one
falls into neglect and contempt because it does not
interest mankind, while the other lives and flourishes
because it relates to specific tangible objects upon which
people can gratify the longing for idolatry, which lies so
deep in the human heart, and which serves as a founda-
tion for the most exalted ideas of priestly power. ... I
think it may furnish matter of reflection to some of the
clergy to hear the undisguised expression of a layman's
opinion on this matter. Others probably think as I do.
Well, then, I for one look upon these doctrines not
merely as being intellectually absurd, but as being
morally injurious in the highest degree. I would as
soon see my son or daughter lie or steal as I would see
PKOPINQUITY OF THE SPIETTUAL WOELD 187
them bow to the Host or believe that the Communion is
anything but a bare figure or symbol.
In contrast with this supercilious sciolism, I have
much pleasure in quoting the following passage from
one of the ablest philosophical treatises of the day : —
Provided that there be no clear and absolute conflict
with known laws of nature, there is nothing so impro-
bable or apparently inconceivable that it may not be ren-
dered highly probable, or even approximately certain, by
a sufficient number of concordances. In fact, the two
best founded and most conspicuously successful theories
in the whole range of physical science involve the most
absurd suppositions. Gravity is a force which appears
to act between bodies through vacuous space ; it is in
positive contradiction to the old dictum that nothing
could act but through some intervening medium or sub-
stance. It is even more puzzling that the force acts in
perfect indifference to all intervening obstacles. Light,
in spite of its extreme velocity, shows much respect to
matter, for it is almost instantaneously stopped by opaque
substances, and to a considerable extent absorbed and de-
flected by transparent ones. But to gravity all media are,
as it were, absolutely transparent, nay non-existent ; and
two particles at opposite points of the earth affect each
other exactly as if the globe were not between. To com-
plete the apparent impossibility, the action is, so far as
we can observe, absolutely instantaneous, so that every
particle of the universe is at every moment in separate
cognisance, as it were, of the relative position of every
other particle throughout the universe at that same mo-
ment of absolute time. Compared with such incompre-
hensible conditions, the theory of vortices deals with
common-place realities. Newton's celebrated saying,
hypotheses nonfingOf bears the appearance of pure irony;
188 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and it was not without apparent grounds that Leibnitz
and the greatest continental philosophers charged New-
ton with re-introducing occult powers and qualities.
The undulatory theory of light presents almost equal
difficulties of conception. We are asked by physical
philosophers to give up all our ordinary prepossessions,
and believe that the interstellar space which seemed so
empty is not empty at all, but filled with something im-
mensely more solid and elastic than steel. As Dr. Young
himself remarked, * the luminiferous ether, pervading all
space, and penetrating almost all substances, is not only
highly elastic, but absolutely solid ! ! ! ' Sir John
Herschel has calculated the amount of force which
may be supposed, according to the undulatory theory of
light, to be exerted at each point in space, and finds it
to be 1,148,000,000,000 times the elastic force of ordinary
air at the earth's surface, so that the pressure of the
ether upon a square inch of surface must be about
17,000,000,000,000, or seventeen billions of pounds.
Yet we live and move without appreciable resistance
in this medium, indefinitely harder and more elastic
than adamant. All our ordinary notions must be laid
aside in contemplating such an hypothesis ; yet they are
no more than the observed phenomena of light and heat
force us to accept. We cannot deny even the strange
suggestion of Dr. Young, that there may be independent
worlds, some possibly existing in different parts of space,
but others perhaps pervading each other unseen and un-
known in the same space. For if we are bound to admit
the conception of this adamantine firmament, it is equally
easy to admit a plurality of such. We see, then, that
mere difficulties of conception must not in the least
discredit a theory which otherwise agrees with facts, and
we must only reject hypotheses ivhich are inconceivable in
PROPINQUITY OF THE SPIRITUAL WORLD 18^
the sense of breorking distinctly the priniary lawsoftliought
and nature.
Again: — ^
Scientific method leads us to the inevitable conception
of an infinite series of successive orders of infinitely small
quantities. If so, there is nothing impossible in the
existence of a myriad universes within the compass of a
needle's point, each with its stellar systems, and its suns
and planets, in number and variety unlimited. Scietwe
does nothing to redtice the number of strange things that we
may believe. When fairly 'pursued, it makes large drafts
upon our powers of comprehension and belief}
For the sake of convenience I will here re-quote
the passage from Leibnitz on the doctrine of the
Eeal Presence : —
As I have been the first to discover that the essence
of a body does not consist in extension, but in motion,
and hence, that the substance or nature of a body, even
according to Aristotle's definition, is the principle of
motion (evrcXc^f la) and that this principle or substance of
the body has no extension, — I have made it plain how
God can be clearly and distinctly understood to cause the
substance of the same body to exist m many different
places?
And w^hat could have seemed more incredible
before experience than wireless telegraphy? The
young Italian electrician Marconi has invented a
system of telegraphy without wires, which does not
» The Principles of Science, vol. ii. pp. 144, 145, 467. By W. S.
Jevons.
■^ Compare his System of Theology, pp. 99, 100 ; also Sir W.
Hamilton's Discussions in Philosophy, pp. 604-7.
190 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
depend on electro-magnetic, but on electrostatic
effects — that is to say, on electric waves set up at
the rate of 250,000,000 vibrations a second. Facts
like these bring almost within the range of credibility
such stories as that of Kinglake hearing, in the
stillness of the Sinaitic Desert, the sound of the
church bells in his Somersetshire home.^
Some other interesting illustrations of this sub-
ject are supplied by the phenomena consequent on
the grand eruption of Krakatoa in 1883, as described
in a fascinating volume published by a committee of
experts under the auspices of the Koyal Society.
The air-waves varied in rapidity from 13 h. 48 m.
to 124 h. 30 m. in passing between Krakatoa
and Kew, differing, I suppose, with the violence of
the explosions. The sound of the explosions was
heard ' very nearly three thousand English miles
from Krakatoa.' * Several times during the night '
(of the eruption) * reports were heard coming from
the eastward like the distant roar of heavy guns.'
At Diego Garcia, upwards of two thousand five
hundred miles from Krakatoa, the sounds were very
distinctly heard, and were supposed to be those of guns
fired by a vessel in distress. In Ceylon, and also in
Australia, the sounds were heard at many different places
far removed from each other ; while at Dorey, in New
Guinea, they were clearly heard, and their occurrence was
recorded at the time, long before it was known to what
cause they were due.^
» Eothen, pp. 274-5. Third edition.
"^ The Eruption of Krakatoa and Subsequent Phenomena^
pp. 79, 80.
PEOPINQUITY OF THE SPIEITUAL WORLD 191
See, again, how Our Lord's passage through
closed doors in His Spiritual Body is brought within
the realm of reason through the revelations of the
Rontgen rays. For if the luminiferous ether, which
is a material substance, can penetrate, as if they did
not exist, opaque and solid substances like flesh and
muscle and wood and aluminium, d fortiori may
the much subtler substance of a spiritual body do
so.
Perhaps I may here quote from a previous
volume of my own : —
But, in addition to all this, photography and spectrum
analysis have proved that there are worlds within worlds
close to us now and here of which our gross senses can
take no cognisance. Photography has shown that there
are multitudes of stars beyond the reach of the most
powerful telescopes, and that the light of these stars is
ever playing on our earth. So distant are they, and so
attenuated are their rays, that it takes countless billions of
these luminous vibrations to make an impression on the
photographer's plate. ' The waves beating from the
Atlantic in long course of time,* says one of our leading
astronomers,^ * have gradually altered the face of the
shore. But in one second of time there are as many
minute waves of light beating in on one plate as the
Atlantic has sent in during a million years — a whole
geological period. The human eye is colour-blind to a
vast proportion of the rays which come in from the stars.
But the photo-plate sees all these invisible rays a great
deal better than our eyes see the visible rays.'^
' Sir K. Ball, in a lecture at the Koyal Institution ; cf. The Story
of the Heavens, p. 463, by the same author.
' Life Here and Hereafter, p. 134. Second edition.
192 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
It bewilders the intellect and makes the imagi-
nation giddy to learn that within the petals of a
flower, even within a speck of blood dissolved in a
drop of water, the seven colours of the rainbow are
seen as distinctly as in the bow which sjans our
sky. Yet that is one of the marvels which chemical
analysis has revealed to us.
Thus we see that human science and Holy
Scripture unite their voices in teaching us that
beneath the world of sense, penetrating and vivifying
it, there is a world of spirit ; that what we see and
touch is but the crust and shell, the outward and
visible sign of unseen realities, truly present, though
sense cannot apprehend it.
Two worlds are ours, 'tis only sin
Forbids us to descry
The mystic heaven and earth within,
Clear as the sea and sky.
So sings the poet of the 'Christian Year.' And
Milton expressed the same thought before him : —
What if earth
Be but the shadow of heaven, and things therein-
Each to other like, more than on earth is thought ?
193
CHAPTEE VI
SACEEDOTALISM
It is a pity that those who denounce the doctrine
of Sacerdotalism do not ,take the trouble to explain
what it is precisely that they wish to condemn
under cover of that unpopular word. I take it,
however, that what the opponents of Sacerdotalism
wish to repudiate is that somewhat distorted aspect
of the Christian religion which has been condemned
in the following language by an able and revered
writer of our day, to whom, though himself dis-
owning the creed of Christendom, many Christians,
myself included, owe much : —
So long as its Sacramental principle remains, the
Established Church rests upon a theory of religion utterly
at variance with all the residuary varieties of Puritan
faith, and amounting, as many of us conceive, to a reversal
of the very essence of Christianity, for it reverses that
ivimediateness of relation between the human Spirit and
the Divine which is the distinctive boon of Jesus to the
world, and it reinstates that resort to mediation and
« channels of grace,' and magically endowed men, which
it w^as His special aim to sweep away and render im-
possible.^
' Why Dissent ? by James Martineau, p. 14.
O
i94 THE EEFOBMA'tiON SETTLJEMENT
It is therefore the Sacramental principle and the
doctrine of mediation which are in question. I do
not mean that all who declaim against Sacerdotalism
would go quite so far as Dr. Martineau ; but that is
only because they are not so clear-headed as he, and
do not perceive the conclusion necessarily involved
in their premisses. Dr. Martineau admits, as indeed
every candid and unprejudiced person must, that
* the Estabhshed Church rests upon ' the doctrine of
Sacerdotalism, which, however, he thinks it was the
' special aim ' of our Lord ' to sweep away and
render impossible.' Of that more anon. Meanwhile
let us see what the Old Testament has to say upon
the subject.
It seems to me quite impossible for any one, who
is not committed to the defence of a foregone con-
clusion, to read the Old Testament without acknow-
ledging that the principle of Sacerdotalism runs all
through it from Genesis to Malachi. A few instances
may suffice by way of illustration.
When Abimelech took Abraham's wife, thinking
her to be his sister, and pleaded afterwards that he
had done it * in the integrity of his heart and inno-
cency of his hands,' God is represented as saying,
' Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of
thy heart. . . . Now therefore restore the man his
wife ; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for
thee, and thou shalt live; and if thou restore her
not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, and all
that are thine.' ^ Abraham's intercession for the
' Gen. XX. 5-7.
SACEEDOTALISM 195
doomed' Cities of the Plain is another instance in
point.
In the Twelfth Chapter of the Book of Numbers
we have an account of an outburst of rebellion
against the authority of Moses on the part of
Miriam ; her consequent punishment by the inflic-
tion of leprosy ; and her subsequent cure at the
prayer of Moses.
In the last chapter of the Book of Job I read as
follows : —
And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these
words unto Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite,
My wrath is kindled against thee and against thy two
friends ; for ye have not spoken of Me the thing that is
right, as My servant Job hath. Therefore take unto you
now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant
Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering ; and My
servant Job shall pray for you ; for him will I accept, lest
I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not
spoken of Me the thing which is right, like My servant
Job.
Here, then, are a few typical illustrations, which
might be multiplied indefinitely, of the doctrine that
God usually bestows His benefits on man, not
immediately, but through the intervention of human
agents ordained for that end. And what is the
Mosaic dispensation but a development, through
rite and sacrifice, of the same idea ? One family is
set apart and endowed with the exclusive right to
act mediatorially between God and His people ; and
when Korah and his company, relying on the fact
that the whole congregation of Israel was holy, as
o 2
196 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
being, in some sort, ' a royal priesthood,' attempted
to usurp the office of the priesthood. Almighty God
is represented as vindicating by a terrible punishment
the exclusive priesthood of the family of Aaron.
To parry the force of this argument the opponents
of Sacerdotalism are wont to decry the Mosaic dis-
pensation not merely as a system of ordinances which
has been superseded by the Christian dispensation,
but as involving doctrines which are essentially
antagonistic to Christianity. Dr. Martineau says
distinctly that the sacramental principle and the
doctrine of mediation ' amount to a reversal of the
very essence of Christianity.' Dr. Martineau is a
Unitarian ; but on this question he is in full agree-
ment with the great mass of anti-Sacerdotalists.
What authority he would be willing to concede to
the Mosaic legislation, and whether he now con-
siders the Old Testament inspired in any special
sense, I know not. But the Evangelical party,^
who in this matter are in the same boat with Dr.
Martineau, hold very stringent views indeed as to
the unqualified Divine inspiration of all the Books
of the Old Testament. They ought, therefore, to
' Dr. Guinness Eogers, in an article in the Contemporary Review
of February 1899, asserts that ' there is a strong sacerdotal element
in the Prayer Book,' and declares that * while the formula [of the
ordination of priests] remains unchanged it will be impossible to
exclude priests and priestism from the Anglican Church. The
marvel is not that they are there, but that there has been found a
place for those who repudiate the idea of a "ministerial priesthood,"
to use Dr. Moberly's expressive phrase.' That is surely the language
of reason and common sense.
SACEEDOTALISM 197
consider seriously whither their attack on the
principle of Sacerdotalism leads them. They con-
demn it as something essentially wrong in itself. It
is certain, however, if the Old Testament is Divinely
inspired, that Sacerdotalism is a doctrine not only
sanctioned but peremptorily enjoined by Almighty
God Himself. But can God enjoin what is essen-
tially wrong ? And let it be considered, moreover
that our Lord has expressly declared that He came
* not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it.' The Law
was developed into the Gospel. But development
implies the conservation of the norm or radical
idea. Now the radical idea underlying the Sacri-
ficial system of the Old Testament was man's need
of expiation, combined with his personal unworthi-
ness to make an atonement for himself.
It is remarkable that the immediate occasion of
the appointment of the Aaronic priesthood seems
to have been the public acknowledgment of un-
worthiness made by the general congregation.
During the patriarchal period the head of the family
was also its priest ; and even when the law was
delivered to the Israelites from Mount Sinai there
was no regular priesthood to stand between God
and His people. They were all regarded as a nation
of priests until their own sense of unworthiness
caused them to shrink back aghast from the awful
privilege.
The circumstance is related by Moses as fol-
lows : —
And it came to pass when ye heard the voice out of
the midst of the darkness (for the mountain did burn
198 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
witli fire), that ye came near unto me, even all the heads
of your tribes, and your elders ; and ye said, Behold, the
Lord our God hath shown us His glory and His greatness,
and we have heard His voice out of the midst of the fire :
we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and
he liveth. Now therefore why should we die ? for this
great fire will consume us ; if we hear the voice of the
Lord our God any more, then we shall die. For who is
there of all flesh that hath heard the voice of the living
God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and
lived ? Go thou near, and hear all that the Lord our God
shall say : and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our
God shall speak unto thee ; and we will hear it and do
it. And the Lord heard the voice of your words, when
ye spake unto me ; and the Lord said unto me, I have
heard the voice of the words of this people, which they
have spoken unto thee : they have well said all that they
have spoken.
Accordingly Aaron and his sons were consecrated
to the office of the priesthood soon after this incident,
and they became the appointed mediators between
Jehovah and the general congregation. Still the
people were not suffered to rest in this as a final
and unchangeable arrangement. Their true ideal
was always kept before them. They were reminded
that, in spite of the Aaronic priesthood, they still
continued ideally ' a kingdom of priests, a holy
nation.' They were unworthy now to realise that
high ideal ; but they were not to lose sight of it, and
to keep them in perpetual remembrance of it there
were several rites of a sacerdotal character, such as
the sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb, in which the
people at large were allowed to participate.
SACERDOTALISM 199
So much as to the teaching of the Old Testament
on the subject of Sacerdotalism. Where is the evi-
dence that it was our Lord's ' special aim to sweep
away and render impossible ' such teaching ? On
the contrary, if we are to believe the Gospel narra-
tive, He ordained a certain order of men to occupy
in the Christian Church a position and to fulfil func-
tions analogous to those of the Aaronic priesthood.
Once before His death, and once after. He charged
them with the following commission : ' As My
Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. And when
He had said this He breathed on them and saith
unto them, Keceive ye the Holy Ghost : whosesoever
sins ye remit they are remitted unto them ; and
whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained.'
I cannot imagine a stronger sanction of the sacer-
dotal principle than these words' imply; and it is
clear that our Lord's xApostles understood them in a
sacerdotal sense. Why was Philip bidden to 'go
near ' the chariot of the Ethiopian eunuch and
instruct and baptise him ? Why was Ajianias sent
to Saul the persecutor, that he might ' put his hands
on him,' in order that he ' might receive his sight,
and be filled with the Holy Ghost ' ? Why was Cor-
nelius directed to * send men to Joppa ' to fetch
Peter that he might receive the pious centurion into
the Christian Church ? — Why all this, if it was one
of the special designs of Christianity to abolish the
sacerdotal principle and to forbid all 'resort to
mediation, and '' channels of grace," and " magically
endowed men " ' ? It is undeniabJe that the Acts of
200 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the Apostles and the Epistles supply abundant evi-
dence of a public ministry during the period which
they embrace. And that ministry is represented, not
as a human institution, but as of Divine appointment.
Candidates are set apart with solemn rites, by means
of which spiritual powers are supposed to be con-
ferred upon them for the discharge of their new
duties. And with this agrees the language by which
the ministerial office is designated. St. Paul speaks
of himself and his colleagues as ' ministers and
stewards of Divine mysteries,' and as * ambassadors '
accredited from God to men. Surely the sacerdotal
principle could not be asserted in stronger language
than this ; and, therefore, for the Church of England
to repudiate the sacerdotal principle would be to
repudiate all connection with the Christian ministry
of the Apostolic age.
And yet it must be admitted, on the other hand,
that there is a sense in which it is as true now as it
was under the Mosaic dispensation, that all Chris-
tians are in some way priests, and are charged with
sacerdotal functions. St. Peter addresses the whole
congregation of Christians in his day in the language
in which Moses described the priestly character of
ancient Israel. He calls them ' a royal priesthood ; '
an ideal of Christian perfection which St. John saw
realised when he heard the saints in bliss giving
thanks for having been made * kings and priests unto
God.' A layman can validly baptise, and he has his
share in the offering up of the Eucharistic Sacrifice —
a fact which was symbolised in ancient times, and
SACEEDOTALISM 201
now through Oriental Christendom, by the custom
of the faithful laity formally offering their oblation
of the Sacramental elements to their representative,
the officiating priest, who then consecrated them to
God, in order that Christ, the true Priest, might
make them, according to His own promise, the
Sacrament of His Body and Blood.
We are all intended, laity as well as clergy, to be
* kings and priests unto God.* If man had never
fallen there would have been no need of a special
priesthood. All would have been alike worthy to
offer God an acceptable service, as all will be here-
after in heaven. This is the ideal towards which we
are to strive ; and in order to keep our unworthiness
always before us, and thus help us to fulfil our
Christian calling, it has pleased God to ordain an
order of men, personally as unworthy as the rest, to
be His * ambassadors ' on earth, and the ' ministers
and stewards of His mysteries.' To characterise
such a doctrine as implying a caste of ' magically
endowed men' is to substitute offensive caricature for
serious argument. Dr. Martineau may, indeed, be
excused for not understanding a doctrine which it
has probably never fallen to his lot to study
seriously.
Those who repudiate the sacerdotal idea as
characteristic of the Christian ministry regard
personal fitness as the essential qualification of a
valid ministry.^ But that is a view which the
' In the Catechism lately published by ' the National Council of
Evangelical Free Churches in England and Wales ' I find the follow-
202 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Church of England rejects explicitly in the twenty-
sixth Article, where the line is drawn distinctly
between moral fitness and official commission :
validity of Sacraments depending on the former, not
on the latter. And most reasonably and justly. It
would indeed be a cruel injustice to the people if
their loyal obedience to God's commands were
rendered nugatory by the personal un worthiness of
His ministers. Most justly therefore does the Article
declare : ' Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance
taken away by their [ministers'] wickedness, nor the
grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by
faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments minis-
tered unto them ; which be effectual because of
ing questions and answers : * What is a Christian minister ? A
Christian minister is one who is called of God and the Church to be
a teacher of the Word and a pastor of the flock of Christ. How may
the validity of such a ministry be proved ? The decisive proof of
a valid ministry is the sanction of the Divine Head of the Church,
manifested in the conversion of sinners and the edification of the
Body of Christ.'
The second answer reads to me like a contradiction of the first.
We are told, first, that * a Christian minister is one who is called of
God and the Church ; ' and next, that ' the decisive proof of a valid
ministry ' is the visible success of the minister. Visible it must be,
else it can be no proof to others. Yet Elijah's ministry seemed to
himself and to others a failure. Moreover, this ' decisive proof '
would seem to make the call of the Church a superfluity. Why call,
why ordain, if * the decisive proof ' is in the fruits of the ministry ?
And is every man — nay, every woman also— who exhibits this deci-
sive proof a valid minister ? A minister of God undoubtedly every
man and woman is who brings forth the fruits of faith and love. But
what is the value of so comprehensive a definition ? If there is a
special ministry, it does not define it. If there is not, it were better
to say so..
SACEEDOTALISM 203
God's institution and promise, although they be
ministered by evil men.'
In truth, the objection which I am considering
implies a confusion between two things which are
totally distinct : individual merit and of&cial com-
mission. To affirm that every man who shows
eminent capacity for the ministerial office is in fact
a minister is as reasonable as it would be to argue
that every good strategist is ipso facto a general,
or every good financier ipso facto Chancellor of the
Exchequer. Of course it would be much better if
the men best fitted for the office were appointed
ministers, just as it would be much better if the
best men were appointed Commanders-in-Chief,
Ambassadors, and Prime Ministers. To be qualified
for an office, however, is one thing : to be appointed
to it is quite another. Men see this well enough
in secular matters. How is it that so obvious a
truth offends them when the sphere of its operation
is spiritual ? I believe the reason is to be. found in
man's natural reluctance to believe in the reality of
powers whose source and mode of action are in-
visible. Unless he sees signs and wonders he finds
it hard to believe that God has founded in the midst
of men a spiritual polity, the administration of
whose laws and powers He has committed to a
hierarchy of mortal men, the validity of whose
credentials can be tested by the methods of ordinary
evidence. Assuming that the Christian Church is a
Divine and not a human creation — I am not arguing
here against those who deny that assumption — I do
204 THE EBFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
not see anything more unreasonable in supposing
that He should transmit spiritual life through the
instrumentality of a sacramental agency than in
believing that He propagates natural life through the
process of natural generation. No antecedent objec-
tion can be urged against the one which is not
equally valid against the other.
But let us consider this question of Sacerdotalism
a little more in detail. The ordinary objection to
the doctrine of absolution — v^hich is taught, be it
remembered, in all the Eeformation formularies, and
not merely in those of the Church of England — v^^as
anticipated long ago by the Pharisees v^hen they
murmured against our Lord : ' Who is this v^^hich
speaketh blasphemies ? Who can forgive sins but
God alone ? ' The objection is valid in one sense ;
invalid in another. It is true of course that God
alone can forgive sin as an originating cause. But
it is equally true that in this sense God alone can
give health, knowledge, fruitful harvests. Yet we
consult a physician when the body is out of order ;
we send our children to school to imbibe knowledge
from the lips of human teachers ; we sow, plant, and
reap, though we also pray God to ' give us day by
day our daily bread.' And the physician, or teacher,
or husbandman, who should arrogate as his own
the skill and energy which thus enable him to
benefit others, would ' speak blasphemies ' as truly
as the priest who should impiously claim in his own
right and person the power to forgive sins. The
physician of the soul acts ministerially ; and so does
SACEEDOTALISM 205
the physician of the body, whether he acknowledges
it or not. The latter examines his patient, sketches
the diagnosis of his complaint, prescribes a regimen,
and bestows his medicine. But if the patient has
not told the truth, or disregards the treatment, the
medicine may become a poison to him. Ajid so in
spiritual matters the absolution becomes a curse, and
not a blessing, to him who has not received it in the
spirit of true penitence.
The truth is, the usual cavils against the doctrine
of Sacerdotalism are founded on a very shallow con-
ception of God's ordinary government of mankind.
As a matter of fact, He has committed the ever-
lasting destiny of men to the custody of one another.
Any one of us may ruin for ever souls for whom
Christ died. We have all received some talent of
one kind or another from God ; external talents of
wealth, of social rank, of official position, and the
like ; or personal gifts, like beauty of person or
charm of manner, an eloquent tongue or musical
voice. No one is so humble as not to have some
means or other of influencing those who come within
his reach. And, indeed, it is very terrible to think
how unceasing is this reciprocal influence of human
beings upon each other, and how unconsciously it is
generally exercised.
Now these various gifts of personal influence,
which God has given to all, in great measure or in
small, every one of us may use to the ruin of his
neighbour. The Almighty Father wills us to be
each his brother's keeper ; but we may act the part
206 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of the first murderer, and kill the life committed to
our trust. I cannot imagine any torment of hell
more awful than the horror of those who shall meet,
face to face, before the judgment-seat of Christ, the
souls whom they have ruined. It seems incredible
that there ever can be a heaven for a soul through
whose evil influence another soul has perished.
Surely the very splendours of the Beatific Vision
would but increase his remorse on remembrance of
the never-ending mischief he had wrought on earth.
The reader will remember that of all the horrors
which the poet, with true instinct, makes Uhe
Ancient Mariner' endure in his awful solitude on
the lonely sea the climax was the dying curse in the
eyes of the two hundred corpses which lay, with
upturned faces on the deck, slain by his thoughtless
act.
An orphan's curse would drag to hell
A spirit from on high :
But O ! more horrible than that
Is the curse in a dead man's eye !
Seven days, seven nights, I saw that curse ;
And yet I could not die.
But what a faint image that is of the horror
caused by a moral ruin which can never be undone !
What is there in the doctrine of Sacerdotalism that
approaches in point of mystery to this fearful power
which God has given to every one of us? When a
priest absolves a penitent he knows full well that the
efficacy of his absolution depends, after all, on the
state of the heart which receives it ; and he knows
SACEEDOTALISM 207
also that he cannot use the gift against the will and
intention of the Almighty Giver. He who reads the
heart will ratify or annul, in virtue of His perfect
knowledge, the words of pardon uttered by His
minister on earth. But personal influence, in what-
ever form, may be used against the will of the Divine
Giver. So that, in matter of fact, God has given
to each of us, laic and cleric, a power of the keys, a
power of opening or closing heaven, of a far more
awful kind than that which He has bestowed upon
the 'ministers and stewards of His mysteries.' I
wish that those who cry out against Sacerdotalism,
as an encroachment on the liberties of the laity,
would consider the very awful sacerdotal power which
the laity themselves are discharging day by day,
whether they think of it or not. It is not in the
Christian ministry that we have ' magically endowed
men,' but in ordinary society : men, and women too,
endowed with personal, not official, gifts of magnetic
influence on those who come in contact with them.
Personal influence is indeed the most awful of all
gifts. And we all possess it in measure and degree,
and are using it continually, and probably oftenest
when we think least about it. Virtue or vice is un-
ceasingly going out of us, and we are thus scattering
in the air around us germs of moral good or evil to
breed spiritual health or malady in those who inhale
them.
In truth, the argument against Sacerdotalism
cuts deeper and wider than those who use it appear
to perceive. If Christ is the only Mediator, to the
208 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
absolute exclusion of all other mediators, this is
fatal not only to every kind of public ministry, but
to all acts of intercession whatsoever, and indeed to
any kind of personal influence. If *the fervent
prayer of a righteous man availeth much,' what is
that but an instance of successful mediation ? The
mother who pleads for a sick or erring child is surely
a mediator ; and so is the eloquent preacher or writer
who turns men from sin to righteousness. In one
sense of course it is true that there is but * One
Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ
Jesus ; ' since it is from His Atonement alone that all
human mediation derives its worth. But in another
sense all Christians are bound to be mediators, for it
is their duty to intercede for each other. In short,
what is the Gospel dispensation but a paramount
example of Sacerdotalism ? Christianity has now
been in the world for upwards of eighteen centuries,
and yet the vast majority of mankind are still outside
its pale. In the first ages of its career the Faith of
Christ carried all before it. The philosophy of
Greece and the statecraft and legions of Imperial
Eome were alike powerless to arrest its progress.
It penetrated into the hut of the savage and into the
palace of the Caesars, and led captive Jew and
Gentile, Greek and Barbarian, bond and free.
What has the Christian Church done in comparison
with this during the last few centuries? On balan-
cing its gains and its losses, must it not be sorrow-
fully admitted that it has done little more than hold
its own? And what explanation can be given,
SACEEDOTALISM 209
except the humiliating fact that Christians have
turned against each other the arms which they ought
to have employed in extending the frontiers of their
Master's kingdom ? In other words, the purposes
of God are so far bafHed, because He has entrusted
the execution of them to the ministry of a fallible
and selfish race.
And yet, mysterious as all this seems, I think we
may see a reason for it. There is an inborn tendency
in human nature towards selfishness ; and to counter-
act this tendency, to which even the best of men are
more or less liable, God has made us necessary to
each other. On the right hand and on the left, from
the cradle to the grave, we need the help of others.
Neither in sickness nor in health, in joy nor in
sorrow, in temporal nor in spiritual matters, can we
afford to stand alone.
Ajid thus our very selfishness is turned into an
antidote against itself. If we could go through this
mortal life to our eternal home as isolated units,
there would be nothing to check our innate selfish-
ness. But human beings are no mere aggregate of
independent units, each complete in itself and striv-
ing after its own perfection alone. They are members
of one family — * the whole family in heaven and in
earth ' — and their mutual interdependence radiates
from the centre of the family to the circumference
of the race. Even the geographical arrangements
of the globe, its varieties of climates and productions,
are made to minister to the same end ; and the dic-
tates of enlightened selfishness are slowly teaching
P
210 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the nations of the earth that they have need of one
another ; that if one member suffers, the rest will in
the long run suffer with it ; that exclusiveness is,
therefore, a suicidal policy, the true secret of a
nation's prosperity lying, not in jealous hugging
of its peculiar treasures, but in freely exchanging
them for those of its neighbours.
Thus does God contrive, in the domain of things
temporal, to make our very selfishness the instru-
ment of its own destruction. And His mode of treat-
ment is the same in things spiritual. Through all
the ordinances of the Christian Church He alone is
the Giver and the Source of all spiritual blessings.
' Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above,
and cometh down from the Father of lights ; ' but
these gifts reach us, as a rule, through the ministry
of human mediators.
The power is from God ; but He imparts it
through human agents and material channels. This
is the essence of Sacerdotalism ; and it is the advo-
cates of the doctrine and not its impugners w^ho
magnify the power of God and emphasise the feeble-
ness of man. For the objection to Sacerdotalism is
in reality, though not consciously, rooted in the
belief that man has any power apart from God.
The truth, however, is that I should be guilty of just
as much blasphemy in claiming to hold with any
strength of my own the pen which writes these
words as I should be if I claimed in my own right
to forgive a fellow creature his sins. Sacerdotalism
is, in fact nothing else than an example in one
SACEEDOTALISM 211
department of God's providential government of a
principle which runs through the whole of it ; namely,
that it is His rule to work by the use of means.
It is remarkable how emphatically not only the
Church of the first centuries, but the mediaeval
Church also, claimed for the laity a quasi-sacerdotal
power even in respect to sacramental confession. I
need not remind the reader that private confession
came into vogue by way of relaxation on the
original discipline, which enjoined on penitents a
public confession in the sight of the congregation.
And the absolution pronounced was the absolution
of the Church through her authorised minister.
This share of the faithful laity even in the power
of the keys is fully recognised by the leading
men among the schoolmen. St. Thomas Aquinas,
for exardple, discusses the question, ' Utrum in aliquo
casu liceat aliis quam Sacerdotibus confiteri,' and
decides that a layman may hear a penitent's con-
fession, just as he may administer baptism, in case
of necessity, and that a penitent is in such a case
bound to confess. The layman cannot, indeed, com-
plete on his part the sacrament of penance, since he
does not possess the power of granting absolution.
But this defect 'the High Priest supplies.' And
therefore ' confession made to a layman in the ab-
sence of the priest is in a manner Sacramental.' ^
' ' Sed quando necessitas imminet, debet facere poenitens quod ex
parte sua est, scilicet conteri et confiteri cui potest ; qui quamvis
Sacramentum perficere non possit, ut faciat id quod ex parte sacer-
dotis est, absolutionem scilicet, defectum tamen sacerdotis Summus
V 2
212 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Peter Lombard decides in the same manner the
question, * An sufficiat confiteri laico ? ' * If a priest
cannot be had,' he says, ' confession must be made
to one's neighbour or companion.' A priest must,
in the first place, be diligently sought after ; but ' so
great is the virtue of confession that, if a priest can-
not be found, confession should be made to one's
neighbour (tanta itaque vis confessionis est, ut si
deest sacerdos, confiteatur proximo). . . . For al-
though he to whom the confession is made has not
the power of giving absolution, nevertheless he who
confesses to his neighbour is worthy of pardon from
his desire for a priest. For the lepers were cleansed
on their way to show themselves to the priests, before
they reached them.' ^
Albertus Magnus, another great name, goes
beyond this ; for he affirms that a layman possesses,
in case of necessity, the power of absolving.^
Indeed, we find the duty of confessing to a layman
in case of necessity not only defended by theologians
in their studies, but commanded by synodical canons
and provincial constitutions. The synod of Treves,
Sacerdos supplet. Nihilominus confessio laico ex defectu sacerdotis
facta sacramentalis est quodammodo, quamvis non sit sacramentum
perfectum, quia deest ei quod est ex parte sacerdotis.' — Summ. Theol.
Supplem. pt. iii. Quosst. viii. Art. 2. Migne's edition, p. 944.
' De Sacram. Lib. iv. Distinct. 17.
2 He distinguishes five kinds of potestas absolvendi. The fourth
is ' ex officio ministrorum concessa sacerdotibus. Et ultima ex
unitate fidei et caritatis, et hasc pro necessitatis articulo descendit
in omnem homine7n ad proximo subveniendum : et hanc potestatem
habet laicus in articulo necessitatis.'' — Albertus Magnus in Sent,
Lib. iv, Dist 17, Art. 58, 59.
SACEEDOTALISM 213
A.D. 1310 (Can. 116), directed that confession should
be made to a Catholic layman when there was danger
of death, and no priest was at hand. The twelfth of
Archbishop Edmund's Constitutions allows a deacon
to hear confessions and give penances in cases of
necessity; as 'when no priest could be had, or he
was away from home, or stupidly or indiscreetly un-
willing ; and death was imminent.' And Lyndwood
says that not only may a deacon do this, but also a
layman, or even a woman. ^
Two remarkable instances of confessions to lay-
men have come down to us from the middle ages.
It is related in ' Le Loyal Serviteur ' that when
Bayard, the Chevalier sans peur et sans reproche,
received his death-wound on the field of Eomagnano,
and was carried to his tent, he clasped his sword in
his hand, and, fixing his eye on the hilt for a cross,
bade his faithful esquire hear his confession.
The other example is related in Joinville's
' Histoire de St. Louis.' When Joinville and his
companions were taken prisoners by the Saracens,
and were waiting in hourly expectation of death, the
Constable of Cyprus knelt down and made his con-
fession to Joinville ; ' and I gave him,' says Joinville,
* such absolution as God enabled me to give.' ^
Even the standard modern theologian of the
Eoman Church, the Jesuit Father Perrone, of the
' See Johnson's Canons, vol. ii. year 1236 ; and Maskell's Mon.
Bit. iii. p. cix.
* 'Encouste moy se agenoilla Guy d'Ebelin, connestable de
Chippre, et se confessa a moy : et je lui donnay telle absoliicion
comme Dieu in'en donnoit le povoir,' — Hist, de St. Louis, p. 298.
214 THE EEFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
Collegio Romano, admits that sometimes deacons,
men in minor orders, and even laymen, have been
allowed to hear confessions and grant ' ceremonial
absolution,' representing the ancient absolution
given by the congregation through the minister, but
not quite equivalent to * Sacramental absolution.' ^
To sum up. The truth is that the impugners of
Sacerdotalism, little as they know it, are really un-
dermining the very foundations of revealed religion,
including the doctrine of prayer and of the whole
Sacramental system. That system is based on this
fundamental principle of religion : that all good
things come from God, but indirectly and condi-
tionally. I look abroad and find two revelations of
God's will : one in the material creation, the other in
the inspired record of His dealings with mankind.
And I see both characterised by one common feature,
teaching this one lesson ; that it is God's pleasure to
bestow His blessings, not directly from on high, but
indirectly and mediately — through material, through
animal, through human and spiritual agencies. He
arrays the lilies of the field with glory more than
Solomon's : yet not immediately, but through the
kindly influence of dews, and showers, and sunshine.
' ' Interdum vero in sacerdotis absentia diaconi, clerici inferiores,
aut laici etiam excipiebant confessiones illas spontaneas et caere-
moniales, quas passim subsequentibus seculis faciebant animam
agentes coram ipsis ad majorem peccatorum dolorem concipiendum,
et ut adjuti EcclesiaB precibus veniam a Deo facilius impetrarent.
Hanc confessionem S. Thomas vocat quodammodo Sacramentalem,
quae juxta scholasticos una cum contritione virtutem sacramenti
habebat.' — Prcelec. Theol. Tract, de Pamit. cap. v. Prop. II. vol. ii.
p. 378.
SACEEDOTALISM ' 215
It is He who gives the increase in the harvest season,
yet not without the co-operation of the husbandman.
The health of the body is from Him ; nevertheless the
sick man consults the physician and submits to his
treatment. He is the Source and Giver of all wisdom,
but He imparts it through the lips and pens of
human teachers. And when I raise my eyes from
the physical to the spiritual creation, I behold the
same law in operation. Under the Jewish economy
I observe an elaborate ritual prescribed — if we are
to believe the Bible — by God Himself as the condi-
tion on which man was to approach his Maker and
appropriate His gifts. I see Naaman cleansed by
the intervention of a prophet of Israel and the water
of the Jordan ; Job's friends pardoned by means
of Job's intercession ; Jeroboam's withered hand
restored by the prayer of the man of God from
Judah ; Elijah fed by the wild birds of the desert.
Then in the fulness of time, when Christ
appeared as the Head of the New Creation, I hear
Him declare that He ' came not to destroy the Law,
but to fulfil it' — not to abolish the old order of
things, but to give it a deeper meaning, and breathe
into it a higher hfe. Thus He fulfilled in His own
person the requirements of the Law. And when He
began to lay the foundation of that new dispensation,
into which the life of the old w^as to pass by an
orderly evolution, the rule of dispensing His gifts
through the ministry of secondary agencies is still
observed. He instituted a Sacramental system as
216 THE REFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
the channel through which men were to be brought
into spiritual relations with Himself, and founded a
society for the purpose of preaching His Gospel and
administering His Sacraments to the human race
till the end of the Christian dispensation.
217
CHAPTEE VII
AUEIGULAB CONFESSION
I COME now to the thorny subject of Auricular Con-
fession, on which I beHeve the hatred and passion
of militant Protestantism is so concentrated that, if
that stumblingblock could be removed, the opposi-
tion even to advanced Eitualism would be half
disarmed. Now I believe, for my part, that the
confessional is, under certain circumstances, liable
to abuse and danger, and ought, under all circum-
stances, to be hedged round by judicious precautions.
I shall indicate some of these further on. But I
must begin with some preliminary observations for
the sake of clearing the ground and getting rid of
some fallacies.
It is popularly supposed that the clergy have a
craving for hearing confessions. There are upwards
of twenty-three thousand clergy in the Church of
England, and that there should be a few morbidly
constituted men among so many is possible. But
that the mass of the clergy, or even a fraction of the
High Church party, should desire to hear confes-
sions, or would consent to hear them except from
a stern sense of painful duty, is to me incredible.
218 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Even if a man were so abnormally constituted, and
had so little sense of the responsibility and sacred-
ness of his office, as to wish to hear confessions from
a motive of curiosity, he would surely soon have a
surfeit of it. I am inclined to think that most men
would, as a mere matter of choice, as soon be surgeons
to a leprous hospital as habitual confessors. Human
nature is, in some aspects of it, a weird mystery.
* The corruption of the best ' is proverbially ' the
worst ' kind of corruption. The brutes live accord-
ing to their nature, and in their free wild state
enjoy life. Man violates the laws of his nature and
is capable of falling far below the brutes. And this
tendency increases and takes new shapes under a
highly developed civilisation, and among all classes.
To many a clergyman, I doubt not, the confessional
has been a frightful revelation of the cancerous
ramifications of sin, sometimes under a fair exterior.
That any considerable number of men would
volunteer in such work except from an imperative
feeling of duty I do not believe. I believe, moreover,
that the increase of confession in the Church of
England has come from the laity rather than from
the clergy. Perhaps I may, without impertinence,
give my own experience. I have never invited
any one to confess to me except in the ordinary
course of reading the exhortation in the Communion
Service, and I have, in the whole course of my
ministerial career, received the confessions of just
three persons. These I received reluctantly and
unavoidably. But many persons have asked me to
AUEICULAR CONFESSION 219
receive their confessions. It is a task from which I
have always shrunk ; and as nearly the whole of my
ministerial life has been spent in London, I have
been able to avail myself of the alternative offered
in the Prayer Book by sending those who came to
me ' to some other discreet and learned minister of
God's Word.' But if I had been an incumbent
where this alternative was not possible, I should
certainly feel bound to hear the confessions of all
who came to me, much as I should dislike it. I do
not think that an incumbent has any choice in such
cases. I read some time ago a speech made at a
Protestant meeting by the Vicar of a parish in a
large town in the North. He denounced confession
and illustrated his own practice by a story. A man
called upon him one day, he said, and astonished him
by asking him to hear his confession. As soon as
he recovered his self-possession he said to his visitor,
* Get thee behind me, Satan,' and dismissed him.
And that Vicar was cheered. Now it does seem to
me a little hard that God's minister should on
Sunday invite to confession any one whose conscience
is troubled, and then on Monday tell him to go to
the Devil for being such a fool as to accept the
invitation.
How did the Vicar know that the parishioner
whom he repulsed so rudely had not then arrived at
a critical point in the development of his character,
when the unburdening of his conscience and the
counsel and advice of his spiritual pastor might have
made all the difference between ruin and salvation ?
220 THE EEFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
Is it not a frightful responsibility to turn away any
one who comes to seek comfort in the way which
the Church has provided ?
Another common fallacy is that the confessor
worms out family secrets, and thus sows the seeds of
dissension between husbands and wives, parents and
children. The fact, I believe, is that no names are
allowed to be mentioned in confession. I find this
rule laid down in manuals for confessors both in the
Eoman and Anglican Churches, and I believe the
rule is universal. In his speech in the House of
Commons at the opening of Parliament this session,
Mr. Samuel Smith denounced a book (' The Priest's
Prayer Book ') which he evidently had not read, for
he made a ridiculous quotation which is not in the
book, and which must have been supplied to him by
some one on whom he relied too implicitly. In that
book there are ' Notes on Confession ' for the
guidance of such clergy as hear confessions. I
quote the following : —
He [the confessor] is to interrupt in any of the
following cases : (1) if the penitent import the name of
any person into his confession — he is there to confess his
own sins, not another's ; (2) if he begins making excuses
for himself ; (3) if he be prolix, or wandering from the
point; (4) if he be coarse.
Again : —
As a general rule he is to avoid questioning the
penitent (except in case of absolute necessity), and
especially as to kinds of sin to which he has made no
reference in his confession.
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 221
Again : —
The priest should take most especial care not to suggest
any new sinful idea to the mind of the penitent, nor teach
him any evil formerly unknown to him. This is unspeak-
ably important in the case of very young persons, since
for them ignorance of evil is often better even than
knowledge of good.
Another popular fallacy is the opinion that
manuals written for the exclusive use of confessors,
and going into details, are samples of what passes
between confessors and penitents. It would be as
reasonable to suggest that manuals of anatomy and
pathology furnish a fair specimen of the conversa-
tions between a doctor and his patients. If a clergy-
man hears confessions at all, he ought to be instructed
in a number of things of which he is likely to be
ignorant, and manuals are necessary for that purpose.
I have never read that much abused book, * Tlie
Priest in Absolution.' But I know that it was
written by the incumbent of one of the most
wretched parishes in London ; a man of singularly
pure and holy life, who worked himself to death
among the poor. The book was doubtless largely
based on his own experience, and probably dealt
with gross sins and abnormal forms of vice. These,
alas ! exist in rank abundance, but happily unknown
and undreamt of in certain strata of society ; and
also unknown to many of the clergy. And yet,
unless they know them, they are as helpless in
dealing with considerable sections of the community
as a doctor would be who should start a practice
222 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
without any previous training in the anatomy and
maladies of the human frame. *The Priest in
Absolution ' was intended for clergy only. It was
not sold to the public ; but a gentleman of strong
Protestant opinions, calling one day on a clerical
friend, found the book on his table, and during the
momentary absence of his friend from the room,
pocketed the volume, and gave it to one of the
officials of a Protestant society, which scattered
extracts from it broadcast as specimens of what
passed in the confessional. Some years previously
the police confiscated a pamphlet called ' The Con-
fessional Unmasked,' which consisted of excerpts
from a Eoman Catholic manual for confessors. The
great hero of the recent Albert Hall meeting was
Mr. John Kensit, of whom I read for the first time
in ' Truth ' of August 15, 1889, as follows : —
Where is the Vigilance Committee ? During the last
two or three weeks hawkers have been parading London
with truckloads of an abominable publication called * The
High Church Confessional.' From a cursory view of one
of the numerous copies with which I have been favoured
I should say that a more obscene work was never publicly
offered for sale, and this filthy poison is being sold up and
down the streets, under the very noses of the police, at
the price of twopence. The publisher is one Kensit, of
the * City Protestant Book Depot,' 18 Paternoster Eow,
who boasts that he has sold 225,000 copies. It is nothing
less than a public scandal that this Kensit and his
associates should be at large, while Mr. Vizetelly is in
gaol ; for if what the latter has done be a crime, the
crime is certainly infinitely worse when committed under
the cloak of religion and morality.
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 223
Mr. Labouchere, who has been pubhcly thanked
by several judges for his exposure of sundry impos-
tures, renewed his attack on Mr. Kensit a year ago
in a series of scathing articles, taking the paragraph
which I have just quoted for his text. The follow-
ing quotation will serve as a specimen : ^ —
On the appearance of this paragraph Mr. Kensit sent
me a letter, in which he referred to a ' most unwarranted
attack made on him as a publisher,' dropped dark hints
of the advice which he was seeking from his 'legal
adviser,' and called upon me, pending this advice, for an
explanation or apology. Having nothing to apologise for,
I adopted the other alternative, and gave Mr. Kensit an
explanation. I reminded him that a well-known publisher
had just been sent to prison for publishing translations
of the works of an eminent French novelist, which, in the
opinion of a magistrate or jury — I forget which — were
held to trangress the bounds of decency ; and I pointed
out that * The High Church Confessional ' contained page
after page of the most loathsome indecency and obscenity,
that is to say, the detailed discussion, not merely of
subjects which conventional delicacy enjoins silence about,
but of vice and depravity in their foulest and most dis-
gusting phases. Mr. Kensit having boasted that 225,000
copies of this work had been sold, and it being notorious
that the publication was being hawked about the streets
for the delectation of the prurient-minded, young and old,
I urged that Mr. Kensit was as deserving of imprisonment
as Mr. Vizetelly, the publisher of Zola's novels, and that
it behoved the National Vigilance Association, who had
prosecuted in the one case, to take the same course in the
other.
> Truth, September 22, 1898.
224 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Whether or not Kensit took the opinion of his * legal
adviser ' upon these remarks I do not know ; but the only
response he vouchsafed to them was a further letter com-
pounded of abuse and religious cant, in which among
other things he boasted that my denunciation of him as
a purveyor of the foulest and most pernicious literary
garbage had produced a widespread inquiry for his publi-
cations, and given a gratifying stimulus to his trade. This
led me to look a little more closely into his trade, and I
found the work which had been denounced in ' Truth '
was only one of a whole library of obscene publications,
one at least of them far more revolting in tone and corrupt
in tendency than ' The High Church Confessional.' There-
upon I appealed further to the Vigilance Association,
among the members of which were many eminent and
respected men, both in Church and State, to put the law
in force against Kensit without delay. A new and un-
expected turn was then given to the controversy by the
discovery that Kensit himself occupied the position of
ofi&cial publisher to the Vigilance Association, so that the
publications of that body were stored upon his shelves, in
all their virgin purity, side by side with the Protestant
obscenities of Kensit, like the antidote and the poison
upon the shelves of a chemist's shop. It was obvious
from this that the National Vigilance Association were in
a somewhat difficult position in undertaking the prosecu-
tion of Kensit, but they appeared to recognise that it
behoved them to take action of some kind, and after
having made some inquiry into the nature of Kensit'a
trade, they eventually relieved him of his position as their
publisher.
Mr. Labouchere has lately stated, in ' Truth '
that Mr. Kensit is using the district post-office over
which he presides as a receptacle for the regular
AUEICULAR CONFESSION 225
sale of these pamphlets. Mr. Kensit has, no doubt,
persuaded himself that he is thereby doing God
service. That question I leave to the judgment of
the public.
But the truth is that a certain class of minds
appear incapable of reasoning dispassionately on
this subject*. Men who do give their reason fair
play find no difficulty in perceiving that there are
two sides to the question. It would be difficult to
name a man of calmer and more judicial mind than
the late Sir George Cornewall Lewis. No one will
suspect him of Romanism, and he was certainly no
advocate of clerical supremacy, either in domestic
or political affairs. But he could see both sides of a
disputed question, and could deal fairly with things
which by no means appealed to his sympathies.
His opinion on the subject under discussion is there-
fore of some value. This is what he says : —
It may be here remarked that an unjust prejudice has not
unhequently been raised in Protestant countries against
the treatises which are prepared for the use of confessors
in the Church of Rome. . . . The more difficult and
doubtful of the cases likely to come before the confessor
have been discussed separately, and have given rise to the
))ranch of practical divinity called casuistry. Casuistry is
the jurisprudence of theology ; it is a digest of the moral
and religious maxims to be observed by the priest, in
advising or deciding upon questions which come before
him in confession, and in adjudging the amount " oi
penance due to each sin. As confession discloses the
most secret thoughts and acts of the penitent, and as
QOthing, however impure, is concealed from the confessor,
Q
226 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
it is necessary that he should be furnished with a manual
in which these subjects are discussed. Now such a
manual, if properly considered, is not more justly ob-
noxious to the charge of gratuitous indecency than a legal
or medical treatise, in which similar subjects are ex-
pounded without any reserve of language.^
And as regards the general system he says : —
The system of Auricular Confession and the direction
of consciences, as practised in the Church of Eome, is
founded on a theory similar to that on which the custom
of professional consultations rests. The confessor may be
considered as a vicarious conscience, in like manner as
professional advice is vicarious prudence. If the penitent
makes a full and true confession, the confessor or spiritual
director pronounces or advises with a complete knowledge
of the circumstances of the case, probably with a know-
ledge of the peaitent's character and position, and
always with the impartiality of a judge — free from per-
sonal concern in the matter, and unbiased by passion or
interest. Seeing how blind and partial a judge each man
is in his own case, and how unconsciously the moral
judgment with respect to our own actions is perverted by
the inclinations, it cannot be doubted that such a coun-
sellor, in ambiguous cases of conduct, such a ductor duhi-
tantiurti, would be generally beneficial, if the moral code
which he administers was well framed, and if his opinion
or advice was always honest and enlightened. Unfor-
tunately, however, it happens that the system of moral
rules which guides the discretion of the Catholic con-
fessor is founded on a narrow-minded and somewhat
superstitious theology, so far as it proceeds upon the
distinctive tenets of the Church of Eome ; and that the
' On the Influence of Authority in Matters of Opinion, p. 120.
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 227
desire of domestic dictation, and of regulating the affairs
of families, so natural in an unmarried clergy, gives too
often an improper bias to the influence of the spiritual
director.^
De Quincey, too, while condemning the abuse of
casuistr}^, maintains that ' without casuistry of some
sort or other, no practical decision could be made in,
the accidents of daily life. Of this, on a fitter
occasion,' he adds, ' I could give a cumulative proof.' ^
And Hallam, a critic who will not be suspected
of partiality towards the Boman system, and who
disapproved of confession, though praising 'the
judicious temperament ' which at the Keformation
'left it to each man's discretion,' writes as
follows : —
It is very difficult, or perhaps beyond the reach of any
human being, to determine absolutely how far these
benefits, which cannot be reasonably denied to result from
the rite of confession, outweigh the mischiefs connected
with it. There seems to be something in the Eoman
Catholic discipline (and I know nothing else so likely)
which keeps the balance, as it were, of moral influence
pretty even between the two religions, and compensates
for the ignorance and superstition which the elder
preserves : for I am not sure that the Protestant system
in the present age has any very feasible advantage in this
respect ; or that in countries where the comparison can
fairly be made, as in Germany and Switzerland, there is
more honesty in one sex, or chastity in the other, when
they belong to the Eeformed Churches.^
' On the Influence of Authority in Matters of Opinion, pp. 124,
125.
'^ Works, vol. xiij. p. 34. * Constitutional History, i. 120.
Q 2
228 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
The second passage which I have quoted from
Sir George Cornewall Lewis undoubtedly hits the
chief sources of danger in the system of the Confes-
sional as practised in the Church of Eome. And it
is to be observed that the distinguished author
himself confines his strictures to the Koman system.
A great deal of the moral theology now in vogue in the
Church of Rome appears to me, so far as my reading
enables me to judge, to be exceedingly w^ell calculated
to enslave the conscience of the penitent and place his
will very much at the mercy of his director. The
system is elaborated out into such a complicated
network of details, and is withal so full of pitfalls,
that those who cojiscientiously resort to it must soon
feel the necessity of leaning on the arm of the con-
fessor in everything — even in the petty trivialities
of daily life. The Jesuits, in particular, have so
developed the system of direction as to imperil the
sense of personal responsibihty in those who come
under its control. This, indeed, is no more than
might have been expected, for the long and severe
discipline of a Jesuit's novitiate has for its prime
object the complete extinction of the slightest quiver-
ings of independence in the human will. When,
therefore, the Jesuit novice becomes himself the
director of other consciences, he will naturally aim at
reducing them to the same condition of unquestion-
ing dependence which his own training must have
taught him to regard as the very ideal of Christian
perfection. The penitent is therefore advised to
confess frequently, and to confide to his director every
AURICULAR CONFESSION 229
wayward fancy and every evanescent peccadillo that
may chance to flit across his mind.
With a certain class of minds this sort of
discipline becomes at once a necessity and a luxury,
and the effect of it is to diminish the sense both of
personal responsibility and of the heinousness of sin.
That is an opinion which I am confident I share
with a large number of Roman Catholics ; so at least
I have been told by thoughtful and devout members
of the Church of Eome, ecclesiastics as well as lay-
men, both in England and on the Continent, I have
no doubt that the school of Loyola has produced
some of the noblest types of self-sacrifice and saint-
liness ; but is it unfair to say of it as a religious
system that it seems admirably calculated to impress
upon the mind the wisdom of endeavouring to make
the best of both worlds ? It is coeval with the
Renaissance, and owes, no doubt, to that semi-pagan
reaction against the religion, of the Cross much of its
original impulse and of its rapid success. It caught
the sentiment of the age on the bound, and adroitly
adapted itself to the new phase of Christianity which
the Revival of Letters had made popular in Western
Europe. The ascetic side of religion was now odious
and out of fashion, and the Jesuit sought to guide the
new fashion by swimming with it. The world had
learnt to love a less strict and less austere religion,
and a less strict and less austere religion it should
have. One sees the contrast in everything on w^hich
the Jesuit has left his mark. His very architecture
is of the earth, and is redolent of the boudoir.
230 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Go into any old cathedral — it need not be Gothic —
which was reared under the influence of the sad, yet
triumphant, feelings inspired by the Sacrifice of
Calvary, and then enter a Jesuit church — I care not
where — and you cannot fail to see that you have
virtually visited the shrines of two different kinds of
■ religion. The former suggests sublime and melan-
choly reveries, a sentiment of human misery, the
va,gue divination of ' a city which hath foundations '
somewhere beyond the shifting sands of time, and in
which the weary heart shall at last find peace, and
be enabled to solve many a dark riddle that now per-
plexes and distresses it.
A Jesuit church awakes sentiments of quite
another kind. You feel that this world is not
so bad after all. "Wealth and comfort and prettiness
surround you. Smiling angels beam upon you from
every cornice, and the Madonna is no longer the
Mater Dolorosa with sad pale face, but a drawing-
room helle who has an eye for the last fashion.
Religion, in short, has laid aside her grave and
sombre aspect, and has become gay and coquettish.
' Our business,' says Addison, ' is to be easy here,
and happy hereafter.' The Jesuit has reduced the
maxim to a system, and works it through the con-
fessional. Trust him, submit your will to his, and
you will find that the yoke of Christ is indeed easy
and His burthen light. He is provided with a com-
prehensive and most accommodating code of casuistry
that knows how to evade obligations which it may
be inconvenient to fulfil.
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 231
No wonder that the Jesuits became, and still are,
the most popular of confessors.. No wonder that
wealth flowed rapidly into their coffers, and that
their churches and colleges glittered with marble
and precious stones. But the result has been unfor-
tunate. The popularity of the Jesuits in the
confessional and the hold which they obtained over
the education of a great part of Europe had the effect
of creating a school of casuistical divinity which has
been prejudicial to morality, and which is mainly
responsible for the popular odium to which the en-
tire system of confession is exposed.
Sir George Lewis may be right in thinking that
it is ' natural ' for ' an unmarried clergy ' to have
' the desire of domestic dictation and of regulating
the affairs of famihes ' when the clergy are made
into a separate caste by a system of compulsory
celibacy. Blanco White — a most sincere and
honest man through all his mental aberrations —
attributed much of the evils of the Boman Church
to compulsory celibacy — ' that most wicked and
mischievous part of the Boman system,' as he calls
it. ' The Church of Bome,' he adds, ' her clergy,
high and low, are fully aware of the dvils which the
law of celibacy produces. Their support of that
odious law is not a sin of ignorance.' ^ Our Lord
Himself declared that the gift of continence was
an exceptional one, demanding great force of will.
How can multitudes of men know at the age of
twenty-one or twenty-four whether they have a
• Life of Blanco White, vol. i. p. 108.
232 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
vocation for a celibate life ? The Russian and
Oriental Churches go to the opposite extreme and
insist on the parochial clergy being married. Our
own Church takes the middle course and leaves her
clergy free to marry or remain single. I am not
sure that it v^ould not have been wiser to restrict"
marriage to such clergy as had means to support a
wife and family.
It can hardly be doubted that the universal
enforcement of celibacy must have the effect, among
other evils, of raising the barrier of caste between
the clergy and the laity. The clergy come to regard
themselves as a separate body, with separate
interests and separate duties, and are apt to resent
any claim on the part of the laity to a share in the
management of ecclesiastical affairs. The laity of
the Boman Communion have now no voice what-
ever in the counsels of their Church. Bishops and
priests are set over them without their consent,
and they must receive, with implicit obedience,
whatever rules of discipline, or articles of faith, or
system of education, their spiritual rulers may
choose to impose upon them.
To this kind of Sacerdotalism no one can object
more strongly than I do. But what Hkelihood is
there of its ever taking root in the Church of
England? The pulse of the English clergy re-
sponds to all the movements of the national life
just as freely as that of the laity. Their politics,
indeed, may preponderate in one direction, though
certainly not so much as formerly ; but, at all
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 233
events, it is not in the direction of a spiritual
supremacy. They can have no temptation what-
ever, that I can imagine, to interest themselves in
' family affairs,' and we may therefore dismiss that
objection to the confessional, so far at least as it
concerns the clergy of the Established Church of
England. And, indeed, even in the Church of Kome
the objection lies more against the system of direction
than against that of confession. The two may
generally go together ; but they need not, and the
ofhce of director has frequently been exercised by a
layman. I frankly think that the practice of direc-
tion is becoming more prevalent than is wholesome
in our own communion. I am not disposed to deny
that it may be useful occasionally in some cases ;
but its tendency is to generate a morbid scrupulosity
and to blunt the sense of personal responsibility.
And I think that frequent confessions are, as a rule,
liable to the same objection.
But the remedy for these and other dangers is
not an indiscriminate denunciation of confession,
but a frank recognition of it, by the rulers of the
Church, to the extent and within the limits which
the Church herself has plainly prescribed. Nothing
can be worse than the present state of things, and it
says much for the purity and discretion of our clergy
that no scandal has arisen from it. There is not the
slightest check upon the youngest and most inex-
perienced curate except his own sense of what is
right. By the common law of the Church, recognised
in our Prayer Book, every incumbent is entitled to
234 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
hear the confessions of those who come to him.
But no other priest has a right to hear confessions
without the Bishop's licence. Would it not be
better to recognise facts and regularise what the
Church permits ? Voluntary confessions cannot be
prevented, but they may be and ought to be put
under proper restrictions, so that all danger may be
reduced to a minimum. If this were done, I believe
that much of the prejudice against confession would
vanish, and people would see that under judicious
safeguards it may be useful as medicine, if not as
food. Let us glance at some of the reasons which
may be urged in favour of its use under proper
conditions. And I begin with the opinion of the
judicious Hooker : —
Because the knowledge how to handle our own sores
is no vulgar or common art, but we either carry towards
ourselves, for the most part, an over-soft and gentle
hand, fearful of touching too near the quick ; or else,
endeavouring not to be partial, we fall into timorous
scrupulosities, and sometimes into those extreme dis-
comforts of mind from which we hardly do ever lift up
our heads again; men thought it the safest way to
disclose their secret faults, and to crave imposition of
penance from them whom our Lord Jesus Christ hath
left in His Church to be spiritual and ghostly physicians,
the guides and pastors of redeemed souls, whose office
doth not only consist in general persuasions unto amend-
ment of life, but also in the private particular cure of
diseased minds. ^
Self-knowledge is proverbially the hardest of all
^ Eccles. Pol. Bk. vi. c. iv. [7.] Ed. Keble.
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 235
to master,^ and no progress at all can be made to-
wards it without the practice of strict periodical
self-examination. But how many practise this ?
Now one of the uses of confession is that it neces-
sitates a habit of self-examination. Moreover,
persons commit sins frequently from ignorance of
what they are doing. And this is true especially of
young people. We are apt to give the youth, of
both sexes, credit for more innocence than many
of them are entitled to. The tree of the knowledge
of good and evil is as alluring now as it was of old,
and young minds often pluck the forbidden fruit,
and have their minds ' opened ' to an extent which
would astonish parents and teachers if they knew
it. If the hidden life of our public, and still more
of our private schools, whether for boys or girls,
could be written, it would throw a lurid light on the
records of many a crime and premature death. I
am persuaded that if the dispassionate opinion of
medical men could be got they would say that their
art, sometimes unavailing, would in many cases
have been unnecessary if some of their patients had
in time ' opened their grief ' to some ' discreet and
learned minister of God's Word.'
Probably no man of our time had so large and
varied an experience in this matter as the late Sir
Andrew Clark. He often talked to me on the
* ' E coelo descendit TvSoQi creavrdv.^ Juvenal, Sat. xi. 27. Juvenal's
allusion is to the legend that this command, which was written in
golden characters on the porch of the temple of Delphi, had Apollo
for its author.
236 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
subject, and I believe that many parents received
invaluable aid from him in the management of their
children. One thing he felt very strongly, namely,
the dire need of v^arning young people, of both
sexes, v^hen they reach the critical age of transition
from puberty to adolescence. It v^ould be most
salutary, he thought, that there should then be
a full confession to some discreet person — parent,
doctor, or clergyman. An entirely frank confidence
on the one hand, and timely warning on the other,
at the parting of the ways, would prevent many a
sad wreck in after life. For the young are then
commonly launched upon a world of unwonted
temptations, with new emotions, new passions,
physical changes, all stirring them, and no one to
enlighten them about the mysteries of their own
nature and the perils that await them. And thus,
in sheer ignorance, habits are often contracted in
early youth which undermine the constitution,
make large contributions to our lunatic asylums,
and consign many lives of fair promise to a pre-
mature grave. That was the opinion of perhaps
the most competent authority of our generation.
I shall never forget a conversation which I once
had with the most attractive youth, in mind and
body, whom I have ever known — bright, cheerful,
generous, handsome, full of noble impulses, with a
soul as pure as crystal, and withal most manly, and
devoted to manly sports. After leaving Eton, and
while preparing for the army, he came one day to talk
to me about the sore need of establishing a public
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 237
opinion in support of purity in our public schools, such
as now exists in support of truthfulness. ' A boy
loses caste,' he said, ' and is disgraced, who has been
found out lying. Is it not possible to create a public
opinion among schoolboys in favour of purity, so
that a boy should lose caste and be disgraced among
his fellows who should be known to be guilty of
impurity ? ' His idea was that guilds of purity
might be formed at public schools for the purpose
of creating such public opinion as he desired.
Mysterious are the ways of Providence. After
joining a cavalry regiment this charming young
fellow was stationed at York, and used sometimes
to stay with me at Eipon from Friday to Monday.
During one of these visits he asked me if I would
agree to be his almoner. He had been accustomed
since he had received an allowance to give away the
tithe of it as belonging to God and not to himself,
and distributing his little charities out bf what
remained. ' My tithe,' he said, ' might at present
help some deserving youth through the university.
When I come of age it will come to a nice sum.'
He would then have come into possession of a fine
property. The matter was to be settled between us
on his next visit a fortnight afterwards. But that
visit was never paid. His horse slipped on a tramway
rail, and a noble life was removed to another sphere
when on the threshold, as it seemed, of great useful-
ness in this. He was full of sympathy for the
sufferings of the poor, and intended to devote some
part of his future hfe to their service.
238 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
From motives of modesty and humility he made
me promise to keep his plans secret even from his
nearest relations. I should have done so had his
life been spared. But I considered that his death
relieved me from my promise, and I told the story
in a monthly magazine. And I have repeated it
here to show the need of instilling seeds of purity
into the minds of the young, as it presented itself
to a fine youth who had passed through the ordeal
unscathed. Though opposed, therefore, to the en-
forcement of confession on young people as a con-
dition of confirmation or first communion, I think
there is much to be said for Sir Andrew Clark's
opinion that at that most critical period the young
should be warned, and in some cases invited to
make a confession to one whom they can trust.
If parents should shrink from that duty themselves,
they should certainly confide it to some one else ;
and I do not know that any one would be better
equipped for the task than a minister of religion,
who would combine the solemnity of religion with
the warnings of a friend. We are all impressed,
more or less, by the visible emblems of religion.
And confession to a man in surplice and stole is apt
to impress the mind — of the young especially — more
than to the same man sitting in an armchair in his
study. But the consent of parents should ordinarily
be obtained. I say * ordinarily ' because many
cases occur in our large towns where parents are
the last persons to advise their children aright.
Sermons are all very well ; but even the best of
AURICULAE CONFESSION 239
sermons must deal in generalities, and must avoid
some subjects altogether. It may be thought by
some that this is an advantage. I doubt it. Many
a moral sore goes on festering unto death because
there is no skilful hand to probe the wound. But
this can only be done in private confession.
Again, why are so many of the sermons one hears
jejune and pointless when they deal with the interior
life ? Is it not because our clergy have, for the most
part, so little practical acquaintance with the anatomy
of the human soul ? Their sermons want directness
and are apt to evaporate in platitudes. Who would
trust himself to a physician who derived all his know-
ledge from books, having never walked a hospital or
studied the anatomy of the human frame ?
Dissenting preachers often excel the English
clergy in point of directness and force, chiefly, I
believe, because confession, though not under that
name, is largely practised an^ong the Dissenters,
especially the Wesleyans, but without the safeguards
of the Church system.
In truth, all persons of any pretence to earnest
religion make their confessions some time or other,
and that into mortal ears or through material media :
one class to the friend of their soul or the wife of
their bosom ; another in their poems ; another in
their sermons ; another in what are technically called
' confessions.' It is a natural craving of the human
heart for sympathy and help, coupled with a desire
to disclose its sins.
But may we not confess to God and obtain for-
240 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT'
giveness without the intervention of human agents ?
Unquestionably. But let this be considered. In
the first place, why should we confess to God at all ?
Certainly not with the view of telling Him anything
of which He is ignorant, but because words react
upon impressions, and fix and deepen them in the
mind. It is very hard to realise the omnipresence
of God — that He hears every word we utter and
knows our most secret thoughts ; and the conse-
quence is that in confessing our sins to God alone
it is not easy to have that sense of shame, which is
of the essence of true contrition, and which is such
a powerful preservative against temptation. Private
confessions to God are therefore too commonly
couched in those general terms in which, according
to the adage, * deception lurks.'
But why not confess to some friend or relation ?
Why go to a priest ? Far be it from me to say that
this would not be useful. But such confession is
subject to two defects, and is exposed to at least one
danger. It cannot give the sense of relief conse-
quent on a confession followed by absolution, and
it lacks that combination of authority with sympathy
which is characteristic of what is called ' Sacramental
Confession.' ^ And, after all, it is easier to ' make a
clean breast of it ' to an authorised minister of God
1 I cannot understand why tliis term should be exposed to so
much opprobrium, for it has virtually the sanction of the Book of
Homilies. 'Absolution is no such Sacrament as Baptism and
Communion are ; . . • but in a general acceptation the name of a
Sacrament may be attributed to anything whereby an holy thing is
signified.'— Sermon on Common Prayer and Sacrainents, part i.
AUErCULAE CONFESSION 241
than to the most tender of friends or relatives. The
knowledge that he acts ministerially, and that the
secret will be religiously kept, gives the necessary
courage, which would otherwise, in most cases, be
lacking. The very strength of our love is apt to
forbid a full disclosure of our inner self to an object
of ordinary human attachment, for fear lest the
discovery might alienate his love. For, as the poet
sings : —
Each in his hidden sphere of joy or woe,
Our hermit spirits range and dwell apart ;
Our eyes see all around in gloom or glow
Hues of their own, fresh borrowed from the heart.
And it is well
For what, if heaven for once its searching light
Lent to some partial eye, disclosing all
The rude bad thoughts that in our bosom's night
Wander at large, nor heed love's gentle thrall?
Who would not shun the dreary uncouth place ?
As if, fond leaning where her infant slept,
A mother's arm a serpent should embrace ;
So might we friendless live, and die unwept.
And there is also the risk, in private confession
to a friend, of ostentation. So subtle are the devices
of self-love that egotism may lurk in the very con-
fession of our sins unless there be some special
guarantee for that element of shame to which I have
referred above. The Wesley an relations of ' experi-
ences ' are admitted, I believe, to minister largely to
spiritual pride. But when the confession is invested
B
242 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
with a religious sanction, and is made on bended
knees and to Almighty God (for every auricular
confession is addressed primarily to God, and to the
Priest only as His Minister), there is a solemnity and
reality about it which is fatal to pride and self-
conceit. Confession to a Minister of religion im-
presses, I believe, upon the mind a consciousness of
guilt which does not ordinarily come of confession
to a friend, or even to God. ' The flesh is weak ' in
the best of us, and they are very few to whom
religious ordinances are not a help in realising their
relation to the unseen, but omnipresent, God.
I have admitted that the practice of confession is
by no means free from danger ; but the dangers are
not generally those which are commonly supposed.
Persons, who know nothing about the subject prac-
tically, imagine that because manuals written for the
guidance of confessors go into a number of details,
confessors are therefore in the habit of examining
their penitents on these details. This, of course, is
quite a mistake. Mr. Capes, ^ in a letter on this
subject to the ' Guardian,' declared that all the time
he was a Eoman Catholic, though he was in the
habit of confessing regularly, no question was ever
asked him which he would object to see published in
the newspapers ; and I believe that this is the
' The late Eev. J. M. Capes was an Anglican vicar who joined
the Church of Eome in 1845, and returned to the Church of England
on the proclamation of Papal Infallibility in 1870. He became then
for some time assistant to Mr. Stopford Brooke when that able and
admirable man was still in the service of the Church of England.
AUEICTJLAE CONFESSION 243
experience of almost every one who makes a habit
of confession. There may be cases in which ques-
tions of a certain kind may be necessary ; but they
are cases in which there is no danger of suggesting
the sin to the penitent, for it has already left its
stain. Besides, our Catechism bids us examine our-
selves in preparation for the Holy Communion ; and
the Exhortation in the Communion Office directs that
this examination should be ' by the rule of God's
commandments,' which is also the usual rule in
auricular confession. Now a real self-scrutiny as to
our transgressions against the Ten Commandments,
to be effectual, must involve self-examination in
details ; and this seems to me far more hazardous
than enumeration in confession, just in proportion
as the security for shame is less complete, and the
accompaniments of place and circumstances are less
solemn. Self-examination, if it be really searching,
is one of the most difficult of mental processes. Its
real value is in the degree of its minuteness, and
even persons who are used to it, and really do know
something of themselves, can hardly dispense with
the use of manuals.
In a remarkable passage in his Autobiography
Goethe attributes his own defection from Christianity
to the inefficiency of the Lutheran system of auri-
cular confession, which now commonly deals in
generalities and avoids all details. The passage is
really a beautiful exposition of the Sacramental
system, ' the Protestant worship,' in his opinion,
' lacking fulness in general,' and having ' too few
244 THE KEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
Sacraments.' The passage is too long to quote; the
following extract will suffice for my purpose : —
In my time I had been confided to the religious in-
struction of a good old infirm clergyman, who had been
confessor to the family for many years. The Catechism,
a Parajjhrase of it, and the Scheme of Salvation, I had at
my fingers' ends. I lacked not one of the strongly proving
biblical texts, but from all this I reaped no fruit ; for as
they assured me that the honest old man arranged his
chief examination according to an old set form, I lost all
pleasure and inclination for the business, spent the last
week in all sorts of diversions, laid in my hat the loose
leaves borrowed from an older friend, who had gotten
them from the clergyman, and unfeelingly and senselessly
read aloud all that I should have known how to utter
with feeling and conviction.
But I found my good will and my aspirations in this
important matter still more paralysed by a dry, spiritless
routine, when I was now to approach the confessional.
I was indeed conscious to myself of many failings, but of
no great faults ; and that very consciousness diminished
them, since it directed me to the moral strength which lay
within me, and which, with resolution and perseverance,
was at last to become master over the Old Adam. We
were taught that we were much better than the Catholics
for this very reason : that we were not obliged to acknow-
ledge anything in particular in the confessional, nay, that
this would not be at all proper even if we wished to do
it. This last did not seem right to me ; for I had the
strangest religious doubts, which I would readily have had
cleared up on such an occasion. Now, as this Was not
to be done, I composed a confession for myself, which,
while it well expressed my state of mind, was to confess
to an intelligent man, in general terms, that which I was
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 245
forbidden to tell him in detail. But when I entered the
old choir of the Barefoot Friars, when I approached the
strange latticed closets in which the reverend gentlemen
used to be found for that purpose, when the sexton opened
the door for me, when I now saw myself shut up in the
narrow place, face to face with my spiritual grandsire,
and he bade me welcome with his weak nasal voice, all the
light of my mind and heart was extinguished at once, the
well-conned confession-Speech would not cross my lips ;
I opened, in my embarrassment, the book which I had in
hand, and read from it the first short form I saw, which
was so general that anybody might have spoken it with
quite a safe conscience. I received absolution and with-
drew, neither warm nor cold ; went the next day with my
parents to the Table of the Lord, and, for a few days,
behaved myself as was becoming after so holy an act.
In the sequel, however, there came over me that evil,
which from the fact of our religion being complicated by
various dogmas, and founded on texts of Scripture, which
admit of several interpretations, attacks scrupulous men
in such a manner, that it brings on a hypochondriacal
condition, and raises this to its highest point, to fixed
ideas. I have known several men who, though their
manner of thinking and living was perfectly rational,
could not free themselves from thinking about the sin
against the Holy Ghost, and from the fear that they had
committed it. A similar trouble threatened me on the
subject of the communion, for the text, that one who un-
worthily partakes of the Sacrament, eateth and drinketh
damnation to himself, had very early already made a
monstrous impression upon me. Every fearful thing
that I had read in the histories of the middle ages, of the
judgments of God, of those most strange ordeals, by red-
hot iron, flaming-fire, swelling water, and even what the
Bible tells us of the draught which agrees well with the
216 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
innocent, but puffs up and bursts the guilty, — all this
pictured itself to my imagination ; and formed itself into
the most frightful combinations, since false vows, hy-
pocrisy, perjury, blasphemy, all seemed to weigh down
the unworthy person at this most holy act, which was so
mach the more horrible, as no one could dare to pro-
nounce himself worthy, and the forgiveness of sins, by
which everything was to be at last done away, was found
limited by so many conditions, that one could not with
certainty dare appropriate it to oneself.
This gloomy scruple troubled me to such a degree, and
the expedient which they would represent to me as
sufficient seemed so bald and feeble, that it gave the bug-
bear only a more fearful aspect, and as soon as I had
reached Leipsic, I tried to free myself altogether from
my connection with the Church.^
I am pleading, however, for nothing more than
liberty in this matter, and for a rational treatment
of a most important and delicate subject. I wish
people to see that there are tv^o sides to the question,
and that it cannot be cavalierly dismissed by rhetorical
platitudes about ' the principles of the Eeformation.'
Let the Bishops grapple v^ith it openly and courage-
ously. Let them see that only competent persons
are allov^ed to hear confessions ; and by competent
persons I mean persons who are ' discreet and
learned,' that is, trained in moral divinity and certi-
fied to be otherwise fit for the office. This is what
the words * discreet and learned ' mean in the Ex-
hortation in our Communion Office. It is a technical
expression, and occurs frequently in, for example,
' Autobiography, vol. i. pp. 248, 250. Engl. Transl.
AURICULAE CONFESSION 247
Peter Lombard, Aquinas, and Bonaventura, in the
sense of an authorised confessor.^ Let the Bishops
inquire into the facts before they hastily condemn a
' It may be well to give some evidence of this. The compilers of
the Prayer Book were trained in the usual text-books of moral theology,
and scholastic language came natural to them. By canon law every
parish priest was entitled to hear confessions in his own parish, but
not other«priests, unless they had a special faculty from the bishop
of the diocese. Aquinas says : ' Dicendum est quod electio discreti
sacerdotis non est nobis commissa, ut ex nostro arbitrio facienda,
sed de licentia superioris, si forte proprius sacerdos esset minus
idoneus ad apponendum peccatis salutare remedium.' — Suinvm,
Suppl. pt. iii. qusest. viii. art. iv. 6.
Again : ' Praeterea, potestatem quam habet sacerdos in populo
habet ab episcopo. Sed ex ilia potestate potest confessionem audita.
Ergo et eadem ratione alius, cui episcopus potestatem concedet.'
Ibid. Art. v.
Peter Lombard says : ' Quaerendus est sacerdos sapiens et discretus,
qui cum potestate simul habeat judicium, qui si forte defuerit, con-
Uteri debet socio.' In the same chapter he says : ' Si tamen defuerit
sacerdos, proximo vel socio est facienda confessio.' — Lib. iv. De Sacr.
List. xvii. 5.
Here, as in Aquinas, we note two points on which those old
theologians and experts in moral pathology laid remarkable em-
phasis : (1) that not every priest had a right to hear confessions, but
only those who had the episcopal licence to certify that they were
' discreti et sapientes,' or ' prudentes ; ' (2) the salutary influence of
confession even to a layman when a priest was not available. The
Venerable Bede also insists on this in his Commentary on the
Epistle of St. James.
I will now give some Anglican examples. In a Provincial Con-
stitution of Archbishop Edmund it is said : ' De popnitentia preeci-
pimus : quod diaconi poenitentias daro non praesumant, nisi in his
casibus : cum sacerdos non potest, vel absens est ; vel stulte, vel
indiscrete [i.e. through lack of licence] non vult ; et mors imminet
ffigroto.' Lyndwood says on the word ' aegroto ' in the above : * Qui
desiderat confiteri. Tali namque casu potest non solum diaconus,
sed etiara laicus confessionem ffigroti audire ; immo et mulier hoc
potest. Et hoc verum, ad ostendendum fidem sacra menti ; sacra-
248 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
discipline of whose practical working many of them
are entirely ignorant. The public mind is saturated
with gromidless prejudices and misapprehensions
which none could so effectually dissipate as the
Bishops. The fear, for instance, that the privacy of
family life is likely to be invaded in the confessional
is, I believe, quite unfounded. Penitents go to con-
fess their own sins, not those of others, and the
mention of names is emphatically forbidden.
Would it not be well to inquire, too, whether
English clergymen are ever in the habit of re-
ceiving the confessions of any against the wishes of
their natural guardians ? But if children go to
confession with the full approbation of their parents,
and wives with the consent of their husbands, what
right have irresponsible outsiders to interfere in the
matter ? It is these meddlers who, in fact, invade
the sanctity of private houses. ' The heart knoweth
its own bitterness, and a stranger ' has surely no
right to dictate the method of its treatment.
All that I have said so far goes to support the
wise and cautious observations of the Primate on this
subject. It is really a layman's question. It is for
the laity to say whether they will go to confession or
abstain. If they choose to go, parish priests are
bound by the law of the Church to hear their conf es-
mentum tamen deficit, quia nuUus potest vere absolvere nisi sacerdos.'
Lib. iii., Tit. 24.
In Eeynold's Constitutions frequent mention is made of priests
'provident and discreet,' and 'prudent and discreet men,' always
with the meaning of licensed confessors.— See Johnson's Canons,
vol. ii., Nos. 1222, 9 ; 1281, 8 ; 1322, 10; 1378, 4.
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 249
sions. Let that be recognised, and let the Bishops
forbid others without special licence to certify that
they are, in the language of the Prayer Book, * dis-
creet and learned ministers of God's Word.' And
let it also be laid down absolutely that all confessions
must be heard in church, with open door. The old
English canons are urgent on this point. For ex-
ample, it is said in one of Keynold's Constitutions :
' And let the priest choose such a place in the Church
for hearing confessions as is open to the view of all ;
and never take the confession of any, especially of a
woman, in secret, unless in case of necessity, or on
account of the sickness of the penitent.' ^ If we are
to have confession at all — and I do not see how it is
to be prevented — let it be put under strict rules and
safeguards. At present we have the choice of two
systems of confession. According to one system, a
person — man or woman, young or old, married or
single — who has any scruples, goes to the parson's
house and is closeted with him in his study or vestry,
without any of the formal solemnities of religion ;
and they talk together perhaps on the most delicate
subjects in strict privacy. By the other system it is
arranged that the parson is in his church in surplice
and stole at a stated time. The penitent — if a
woman, veiled from recognition by the priest or any
one else— kneels and makes confession in thepresence,
though out of hearing, of all but the priest. Women
may always confess incognito.
Now I put it to any man of the world to say
' Johnson's Canons, ii., 1322, 8.
•250 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
which he thinks the safer of these two systems. Yet
we are such creatures of prejudice that while no
objection is made to the former system — which is
surrounded wath peril — the mere mention of the
latter is enough to drive a number of otherwise
sensible persons clean off their mental balance.
I quote another strict rule from one of our old
English canons : —
And let priests beware that they do not inquire of
their penitents concerning the sins of other persons, or
the names of the persons with whom they themselves
have sinned, but only the circumstances and quality of
the sin. Confession ought to be of what belongs to them-
selves, not to others.^
Sir William Harcourt, Mr. Samuel Smith, and
others have pointed to Spain, Italy, and France as
examples of the evil effects of the confessional, and I
have in this chapter quoted Blanco White's testi-
mony as to its demoralising influence in Spain,
attributable, in his opinion, to the compulsory celi-
bacy of the clergy, combined with compulsory con-
fession. It would be illogical to conclude that the
same effects would follow when confession is entirely
voluntary and the clergy are allowed to marry. But
I am disposed to distrust these rhetorical generalisa-
tions altogether. Hallam, as we have seen, questions
the common allegation that sexual immorality dis-
tinguishes, in any marked way and as cause and
effect, Eoman Catholic from Protestant population s»
' Johnson, ibid.
s
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 251
and appeals to the Protestant and Eoman Catholic
cantons of Switzerland by way of example. No one
would venture to say that the Boman Catholics of
Great Britain are more immoral than the Protestant
population ; and the sexual morality of Ireland is
conspicuously higher than that of England, Scotland,
and Wales. Indeed, as it happens, the sexual im-
morality of Wales and Scotland, where the confes-
sional hardly exists, is lower than that of England,
where confessions are less uncommon. Would a
Protestant think it fair if one were to argue from
this that the higher rate of immorality in Wales
and Scotland is due to the comparative absence of
the confessional ? To argue that things which
happen to be coincident must be related as cause and
effect is to reason like the rustic who attributed
Goodwin Sands to Tenterden Steeple.
It must be admitted, I think, that compulsory
confession and compulsory celibacy together have a
natural tendency towards sexual immorality, although
the case of Ireland proves that the tendency can be
counteracted by national characteristics, and perhaps
by the purifying effect of a long discipline of suffer-
ing. What we may say with truth is that where
the national standard of morality is low, confession,
especially if it be compulsory and celibacy be en-
forced on the clergy, is very likely to work injuriously.
It certainly did so in the Kingdom of the Two
Sicilies under the Bourbon regime. To this I can
bear some personal testimony. I received some part
of my early education in Southern Italy, and mixed
252 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
a good deal with all classes of the population in the
Kingdom of Naples, urban and rural, some time after
the collapse, of the Bourbon dynasty, while the old
state of things was still fresh in the memory of the
population. I found the priesthood in the worst
possible odour. They were popularly accused, not
only of gross immorality, but of betraying the secrets
of the confessional in addition. It was commonly
believed that the Government used the confessional
for discovering political opinions and secrets. Men
were often flung into prison immediately after con-
fession, which was compulsory under that terrible
despotism in a manner not dreamt of in this country.
All adults were obliged, under pain of civil penalties,
to receive the Holy Communion at stated intervals,
to be preceded in every case by confession. To
ensure that they had been to confession and received
absolution, the priest supplied each penitent, after
absolution, with a metal medal, ^ which was presented
at the altar as a condition of communion. But
when the secrecy of the confessional became generally
discredited, while resort to it periodically was never-
theless compulsory, a way was found by which the
law was evaded while seemingly obeyed. The priests
sold the * tokens ' for a trifle without insisting on
confession, and the apocryphal ' penitents ' received
' This custom of certifying fitness for communion by means of
vouchers used to prevail in Scotland, perhaps does still, among the
Presbyterians, and also among some Episcopal congregations. The
metal vouchers were called ' tokens,' and were collected in church
before communion, in proof that intending communicants had been
examined and pronounced fit by the minister.
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 253
the Sacrament unsuspected. Can anything be
imagined better calculated to degrade and discredit
religion and sap the foundations of morality ? And
yet it is not so very long ago since the Sacramental
test, though under a less odious form, prevailed among
ourselves — a sacrilege to which must be largely
credited the low views about the Sacrament, together
with its infrequent and slovenly administration. It
is almost impossible to exaggerate the debased con-
dition of the priesthood in Southern Italy after the
liberation of the Neapolitan Kingdom. The mass of
the laity rebounded from the yoke of an intolerable
tyranny to utter irreligion, and the corrupt priests
lost their livelihood. I have myself been more than
once accosted in the streets of Naples by needy
priests offering for a franc to say a mass for the soul
of any of my friends or relations. These are the
' mass-priests ' of whom we read so much in the
literature of the English Keformation ; and these are
' the sacrifices of masses ' denounced in the Thirty-
first Article as 'blasphemous fables and" dangerous
deceits.'
I was so shocked by the state of the Church in
Southern Italy that on my return to England I took
the liberty of writing a full account of my experiences
to Dr. Newman (he was not then Cardinal). With
his characteristic kindness he sent me, young as I
was, and a stranger, a most friendly reply ; and that
was the commencement of a highly prized friendship
with which he honoured me till his death. The
following extract from his letter is interesting, and as
254 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
I know that it contains nothing which he regarded
as private, I may quote it : —
I am afraid I cannot doubt matters are very bad in
Italy, as you say. No one makes more ruinous con-
fessions of the state of the Itahan priesthood than St.
Alfonso Liguori. And I do not know how one can wish
for the continuance of a state of things which seems
hopelessly bad. Everything I have heard of the regirne
of the Bourbons makes me rejoice in their overthrow,
and I trust they will never be restored. A distinguished
Eoman prelate, who was here last year, said that the
new generation will be brought up without any religion
at all. He did not see any hope for Italy ; and he said the
Pope had very few supporters. I suppose things must
be worse before they are better. And this reconciles me
to what else would be insupportable — the sacrilege and
blasphemy which prevail there. It is difficult to, balance
crimes, but there is something more revplting in ' holding
the truth in unrighteousness ' than in persecuting it.
No part of Mr. Walsh's romance about the
Oxford Movement excited my indignation more
than his gratuitous impeachment of the honour and
veracity of men like Newman and Keble and
Church. It would be possible to destroy any man's
reputation by Mr. Walsh's methods of controversy ;
garbled quotations, insinuations, unproved asser-
tions, suppressiones veri equivalent to suggestiones
falsi. Even the four Evangelists would fare badly
under such treatment. Nothing impressed me more
in my long intercourse with Cardinal Newman than
his transparent honesty. With true wisdom — un-
like Cardinal Manning in that respect — he was not
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 255
blind to the faults and corruptions of the Church of
Kome, while his loyalty to, and his belief in, her
never, I believe, wavered after he joined her com-
munion. While himself a believer in Papal infalli-
bility under certain conditions, he nevertheless
strongly disapproved of the manner and precipitancy
of Dr. Dollinger's excommunication. And surely
every unprejudiced reader of his ' Apologia ' will
acquit him of the dishonesty which Mr. Walsh
imputes to him as one of the leaders of the Oxford
Movement. It is not Eoman Catholics alone, or
Anglican churchmen alone, or those alone who have
been purified and braced by his unrivalled Parochial
Sermons, who are concerned in the reputation of
Newman. The whole English-speaking race is
entitled to resent an attempt to besmirch the good
name of a man who sacrificed for conscience' sake
all that the world holds dear, and who has enriched
the English tongue with some of the noblest master-
pieces in its literature.
But to return to the subject of confession. I
was much struck by a letter from a Fellow of the
Koyal College of Surgeons which appeared in the
' Times ' in the first week of September, 1898. He
complained that ' many persons in isolated positions '
are, to his knowledge, ' put to the inconvenience and
expense of a long journey ' because their own parish
priests will not hear their confessions. And then he
bears the following testimony : —
I should like to make a further remark on the state-
ment that habitual confession results in mental en-
256 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
feeblement. This has been so repeatedly stated that no
doubt a vast number of people believe it to be a fact.
But I may fairly ask for some evidence. I have never
seen it so stated by any one who has been in the habit
of hearing confessions or by any one who habitually goes to
confession. And I hold that only those who have the ex-
perience are fit judges in the matter. I take my own case,
if you will for the moment permit me to be an egoist. I am
oversixtyyearsof age. For the last thirty years I have been
going to confession, sometimes at long intervals, more fre-
quently at shorter ones. I am "a member of the medical
profession, a Fellow of my college, a hospital surgeon, and
have attained some repute. I judge myself to be about the
last man to be infected with morbid influences. My
wife and my grown-up children go to confession. They
none of them seem to be affected with mental feebleness.
A vast number of my friends, some in my own profession,
others lawyers, others hard-headed men of business, go
to confession, and I fail to see the dreadful deterioration
which is set forth. I am an Alpine climber, and have
the personal acquaintance of numbers of the finest race
of men, the Swiss guides. They are the most devout
men I know, and they all * go to their duties.' The whole
thing is a figment of the brain unsupported by a single
shred of evidence. One other thing I should like to state.
In all my long experience of confession, made to many
priests, I can never remember having one single ques-
tion put to me. This statement as to examination of
penitents is a pure fiction.
I really do not know what answer is to be made
to a statement of that sort. I have never heard or
read that the English soldiers who fought at Agin-
court or Crecy, or Irish regiments at Waterloo or
in the Crimea, were made less brave and manly than
AUKICULAR CONFESSION 257
other men by going to confession. Let abuses of
confession be guarded against by all means, and let
no one practise it who prefers to do without it. But
when that is said it seems to me that the question is
exhausted. Indiscriminate denunciation of confes-
sion within these limits is not only unreasonable ; it
is misleading in addition, for it diverts the attention
of the public from the premonitory symptoms of the
dangers which invariably lead to the decay of national
life. The Koman satirist complained bitterly that
' Syrian Orontes had flowed into the Tiber,' and
flooded the city on the Seven Hills with the effemi-
nate luxury and pollutions of the East ; so that it
had ceased to be any advantage to the Koman youth
to have in infancy inhaled the air of the Aventine
and been nourished on the Sabine olive.* He reverts
to the theme in another place, and contrasts the old
Roman virtue, when Eome was poor, with the
degeneracy which the spoils of a conquered world
had bred. ' In days of yore their humble fortune
preserved the Latin women chaste, and their lowly
roofs were kept from the contamination of vice by
toil, by short slumbers, by hands galled and hardened
with the Tuscan fleece, and Hannibal close to the
city, and their husbands standing guard on the
Jam pridem Syfus in Tiberim defluxit Orontes,
Et linguam, et mores, et cum tibicine chordas
Obliquas, nee non gentilia tympana secum
Vexit, et ad circum jussas prostare puellas ;
Ite quibus grata est picta lupa barbara mitra !
Kusticus ills tuus sumit trediedipna, Quirine,
Et ceromatico fert niceteria colic ! — Juv. Sat. iii. 62-67.
S
258 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
Colline tower. Now we suffer the evils of long
peace ; luxury, more cruel than war, broods over us
and avenges a conquered world. No crime is want-
ing, or deed of lust, from the time that Eoman
poverty came to an end. Henceforth the Sybaris
flowed to these hills, and Ehodes, and Miletus, and
garlanded, saucy, drunken Tarentum.' ^
Does not London now present to the eye of him
who penetrates below the fair surface of its gilded
exterior many of the symptoms which fired the
indignation of Juvenal, and revealed to his prescient
eye the inevitable Decline and Fall which Gibbon
has described in detail ? But, to pass by the loath-
some side of the picture, let us glance at what lies
open to the observation of all. London attracts not
only the wealth of the world and the luxury which
wealth carries in its wake ; it also robs the provinces,
as old Kome robbed hers, of much wealth and intel-
ligence and enterprise on which they have a fair
claim, and without which they are so much the
poorer. In the early part of this century most of
the nobility and gentry of Scotland never dreamt of
having a house in London for ' the season.' Many
of them did not visit London for an interval of
years ; and not a few thought it unnecessary to take
their families even as far as Edinburgh, except for
- an occasional ball or visit. Their ' town houses '
meant their houses in the county town. They lived
simple, frugal, and many of them cultivated and re-
fined, lives among their people. A feeling of mutual
' Juvenal, Sat. vi. 287-298.
AUEIGULAE CONFESSION 259
esteem and confidence thus grew up between the
lord and laird on the one hand, and the people on
the estate on the other. Now all who are ' in
society ' feel bound to spend a portion of each year
in London, and are insensibly drawn into the vortex
of its dissipation and its ruinous competition in
luxury. What is the consequence ? Impoverished
landlords ; mortgaged estates ; the old mansions
occupied by strangers, who have no interest in the
country, or sympathy with its people ; and a feeling
of dangerous alienation spreading and deepening be>
tween the owners of the soil and its tillers ; in a word,
the precise condition of things which was so largely
instrumental in producing the French Revolution.
Our police courts have lately lifted some corners
of the veil that hides a state of social corruption in
our midst which it is impossible to describe in
detail, but which Juvenal describes in his sixth
Satire as precipitating the fall of Eome. Noble
Eomans — like Tacitus, for example — who were
capable of looking above and beyond the follies and
frivolities of the hour, were oppressed with a pro-
found sentiment of sadness and foreboding. Recog-
nising the futility of resistance to the tide of
corruption, and the impotence of mere law to stay
the plague, they despaired of national regeneration,
and were driven to the conclusion that human life
had become empty and void, and the world a huge
imposture.^ Only a few weeks ago the police found,
' ' Ludibria lerum humanarum cunctis in negotiis.' — Tacitus,
A7in. iii. IS.
260 THE EBFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
on the premises of a blackmailing quack, letters —
covering only a period of three months — from sixteen
thousand women, of all classes, enclosing hush
money to conceal their having bought a drug to
procure abortion. Will the most prejudiced de-
nouncer of confession venture to affirm that a
judicious use of confession might not help to arrest
this secret sapping of our national life? The
clergy and medical men know more about these
things than the general public. I have already said
that I have never received the confessions of more
than three persons, circumstances enabling me to
send those who came to me to some more experi-
enced clergyman. But I have at different times
received letters from total strangers, asking my
advice on the most delicate subjects, and dealing
with matters which, from inexperience, I did not at
the time fully understand. In such cases I have
asked permission to erase name and address, and
anything likely to identify the writers, and consult
the late Sir Andrew Clark. In every case permission
was granted, and in giving my advice to my corre-
spondents I have always insisted on my letter or
letters being shown to the husband, when my cor-
respondent was a wife, and always with the happiest
results. These were not confessions in the technical
sense of the word, and I mention them to show how
impossible it is, even for the clergy themselves, to
put a stop to these confidential communications. I
do not suppose that my experience is at all excep-
tional. One preaches a sermon or publishes a book,
AUEICULAE CONFESSION 261
and a hearer or reader finds something that pricks
the conscience or throws a flash of Hght on some
hidden and perhaps unsuspected sin ; and the
preacher or author is consulted personally or by-
letter. What is he to do ? Is he to turn a deaf ear
to the cry of a soul in distress ? Suppose he does,
and then hears that the person whom he repulsed
has committed suicide or gone to the bad ; will not
the remorseful thought that he might have saved
that soul, and refused, haunt him to his dying day ?
The clergy are, indeed, in an intolerable position if
they are bidden by the Church, on the one hand, to
invite all who ' cannot quiet their own consciences *
to resort to them for help, and are then denounced
as ' perjured priests ' and reprobates for fulfilling the
duty imposed upon them by the Church.
And how slow people are to realise the folly of
trying to fight against nature !
Naturam expellas furc£i ; tamen usque recurret,
Et mala perrumpet furtim fastidia victrix.
It is not ' murder ' only that ' will out.' Just as
the human body struggles to expel an invading
poison, and it is the healthiest body that struggles
hardest, so the human soul strives, and the purest
strives most, to cast out sin of every kind. It is no
use answering that this can be done by confessing
to God alone. We must take human nature as we
find it, and the simple fact is that there are human
beings who crave for human sympathy, and realise
the Divine forgiveness more easily if it reaches them
262 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
through the sound of a human voice. Consolation
in sorrow comes really from God just as truly as the
forgiveness of sins. Is there, then, no virtue in the
touch of a sympathising hand, in the sob of a
sympathising voice, in the glance of a sympathising
eye? What is the meaning of the Incarnation if
' the high and lofty One who inhabiteth Eternity '
was as accessible when ' dwelling in the unapproach-
able light ' as He was when He appeared in human
form among men, feeding the hungry, cleansing the
lepers, comforting mourners, weeping over graves,
raising the dead, casting out devils, pardoning
sinners, taking up squalid children in His arms and
blessing them ? It is not a question of God forgiv-
ing any one who confesses to Him from a contrite
heart without human intervention, but of man's
realising the Divine forgiveness more when it reaches
him through the ministry of his fellows. And I re-
peat that the objection is equally valid against inter-
cessory prayer — indeed against any intervening
media. Why kneel in confession and prayer to
God ? Why confess and pray at all to the Omni-
scient One who knows our thoughts and needs before
we utter them ? It is we who need these aids, not
God, who bestows His gifts through the ministry of
men and angels and innumerable material channels
for our benefit, not from His necessity.
I am persuaded that a great deal of the prejudice
against voluntary confession, under proper safe-
guards, arises from ignorance of the facts and from
want of reflection. Of course, if a clergyman is dis-
AUEICULAR CONFESSION 263
honourable, he can abuse the confidence reposed in
him ; but he can more easily abuse confidential
intercourse of another kind, such as private inter-
views in his study or vestry. The fact that there
may be some dishonourable doctors in the medical
profession does not prevent men from trusting their
family doctors and allowing them to have private
interviews with their wives and daughters. The
business of life could not go on except on the prin-
ciple of mutual confidence ; and if the clergy are not
to be trusted to hear the spontaneous confessions of
such of their people as voluntarily resort to them,
that means that all private intercourse between
them and any of their parishioners ought to be
made penal. Short of that, the agita^ a against
confession is futile. But if, on the i aer hand,
drastic measures are to be adopted, they )ught to be
applied all round — to Nonconformist ministers and
Koman Catholic priests as rigorously as to'^.^he clergy
of the Established Church. For the plainX truth is
that confession, under whatever name, ^^pre vails
among all Christian denominations. Mr.' Moody
was in the habit of inviting private confessions at
all his meetings ; and if intercourse of a private kind
is to be allowed between'a pastor and the individual
members of his flock, does it not stand to reason
that the more such intercourse is surrounded with
the solemnities of religion, and the more open it is,
the better ? It is safer in a surplice and stole on the
part of the pastor than in a frock coat ; and safer in^
a confessional box in open church — where the pastor
264 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
need not know who is confessing to him — than in
the secrecy of a locked vestry or study. It is odd
how so practical a people as the English lose their
usual common sense when their prejudices are
violently excited. The sight of a confessional box
in church, which reduces all risk of scandal or
mischief to a minimum, is enough to drive people
crazy who see no harm in a secluded tete-a-tete
interview between pastor and penitent. The fact is,
they don't stop to think or reason ; they merely give
vent to their alarmed feelings ; like a charming old
lady whom I once knew. ' Dick,' said she one day
to a favourite grandson, ' I wish you would put
away that pistol. It is most dangerous.' * But,
dear Granny,' pleaded the boy, ' it is not loaded.'
' Never mind, my dear,' said she, ' loaded or not, it
may go off.'
But it is time to consider what the Church of
England says upon this subject. For neither in
this nor in other matters do I desire to go beyond
her teaching.
265
CHAPTEE VIII
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION
One of the commonplaces of the current controversy
on the so-called * Church Crisis ' is the assertion that
the Reformers condemned and repudiated the
doctrine and practice of auricular confession, and
that such confession has remained ever since under
the ban of the Church of England. Let us examine
that assertion in the light of history ; and let us
begin with the Book of Common Prayer.
In the year 1548 there was an ' Order for Com-
munion ' set forth containing an exhortation, in
which auricular confession was recommended in the
following language : —
' And if there be any of you whose conscience is
troubled or grieved in anything, lacking comfort or
counsel, let him come to me, or to some other dis-
creet and learned priest, taught in the law of God,
and confess and open his sin and grief secretly, that
he may receive such ghostly counsel, advice, and
comfort that his conscience may be relieved, and that
of us (as of the Ministers of God and of the Church)
he may receive comfort and absolution, to the
satisfaction of his mind, and avoiding of all scruple
266 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and doubtfulness ; requiring such as shall be satisfied
with a general confession not to be offended with
them that do use, to their further satisfying, the
auricular and secret confession to the priest ; nor
those also which think needful or convenient, for the
quietness of their own consciences, particularly to
open their sins to the priest, to be offended with
them that are satisfied with their humble confession
to God, and the general confession to the Church.
But in all things to follow and keep the rule of
charity ; and every man to be satisfied with his own
conscience, nor judging other men's minds or con-
sciences ; whereas he hath no warrant of God's
Word to the same.'
In the subsequent editions of the Prayer Book
the intending communicant, ' who cannot quiet his
own conscience,' is bidden to go to his parish priest,
' or to some other discreet and learned Minister of
God's Word, and open his grief ; that by the ministry
of God's Holy Word he may receive the benefit of
absolution, together with ghostly counsel and advice,
to the quieting of his conscience and avoiding of all
scruples and doubtfulness.'
In the Office for the Visitation of the Sick,
through all the editions of the Prayer Book, the sick
person is directed to make a special confession of
sins preparatory to absolution ; but in the last re-
vision .the priest is ordered to ' move ' him to such
confession ; after which he is to absolve him in the
following words : —
* Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who hath left power to
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 267
His Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent
and believe in Him, of His great mercy forgive thee
thine offences. And by His authority committed to
me I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the Name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Amen.'
Dr. Newman delivered a challenge on this
question which is worth quoting, and which, as
far as I know, has never been answered. It is as
follows : —
Let candid men consider the form of Absolution
contained in the Prayer Book, of which all clergymen.
Evangelical and Liberal, as well as High Church, and
(I think) all persons in University offices declare, that
'it containeth nothing contrary to the Word of God.'
I challenge, in the sight of all England, Evangelical
clergymen generally to put on paper an interpretation
of this form of words, consistent with their sentiments,
which shall be less forced than the most objectionable
interpretations which Tract XC. puts upon any passage in
the Articles.^
Dr. Newman then quotes the form of Absolution
in the Prayer Book, and contrasts it with the Koman,
which, of the two, is certainly the milder form.
The right of pronouncing this absolution is by
the Church of England strictly confined to an
ordained priesthood. On the head of every priest in
the Church of England, be he High, or Low, or
Broad, a bishop laid his hands and pronounced these
words : —
• Ajpologia, p. 171. First Edition.
268 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
* Keceive the Holy Ghost for the office and work
of a priest in the Church of God. Whose sins thou
dost forgive, they are forgiven ; and whose sins thou
dost retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful
dispenser of the Word of God and of His Holy
Sacraments : in the Name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.' ^
Thus much for the direct evidence of the Prayer
Book. Let us now turn to another class of evidence.
In one of the Injunctions set forth in the first
year of Edward YI. there is an inquiry whether
' parsons, vicars, curates, chantry priests, and other
stipendiaries,' ' have every Lent required their
parishioners in their confession to recite their Pater
Noster, the Articles of our faith, and the Ten Com-
mandments in English ; ' and this inquiry is repeated
in the Visitation Articles of Archbishop Cranmer in
the second year of Edward.^ The regular practice of
confession is here assumed.
Queen Elizabeth, soon after her accession, put
forth Injunctions, of which Archbishop Parker and
other bishops afterwards compiled '•Interpretations
and further Considerations.' Among them is the
following : ' Ecclesia Christi est, in qua purum Dei
Verbum prsedicatur, et Sacramenta juxta Christi ordi-
nationem administrantur ; et in qua clavium autJio-
ritas retinetur.' ^
' Mr. Frederick Verney, with the manly honesty which belongs
to his nature, declared lately in the Times that these words deterred
him, while a deacon, from proceeding to the order of priesthood.
^ Cardwell's Doc. Ann. vol. i. pp. 26, 51. » Ibid. p. 240.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 269
Among * Certain Articles of Beligion, set forth by
the order of both Archbishops, MetropoHtans, and
the rest of the Bishops, for the "aniformity of Doc-
trine .... to be read by all parsons, vicars, and
curates at their possession-taking, or first entry into
their cure,' is the following : * I do acknowledge
also that Church to be the spouse of Christ, wherein
the Word of God is truly taught, the Sacraments
orderly administered according to Christ's institution,
and the authority of the Keys duly used.' ^
In the 113th Canon of 1603, the regular practice
of confession is taken for granted, as follows : —
* If any man confess his secret and hidden sins to
the Minister, for the unburdening of his conscience
and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind
from him, we do straitly charge and admonish
him, that he do not reveal and make known to any
person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed
to his trust and secrecy, under pain of irregularity.'
In the year 1696 Sir John Friend and Sir William
Parkins were executed at Tyburn for conspiracy
against the life of William III. Three English
clergymen, Messrs. Cooke, Snatt, and Collier, at-
tended them on the scaffold, and, with imposition of
hands, gave them absolution in the sight of the
assembled multitude. This was considered a grave
scandal, and the two Primates of the day (Tenison
and Sharp), together with twelve other Bishops then
'in and about London,' immediately put forth a
' Declaration ' against this irregular proceeding. But
• Card well's Doc. Ann. vol. i. p. 261.
270 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the ground which they take is not that the system
of private confession has been disallowed in our
Eeformed Church ; on the contrary, they quote
with approbation the Kubric which enjoins the
Minister to ' move ' the penitent * to make a special
confession of his sins,' and censure the offending
Ministers for not obeying it. ' If those Ministers,'
they say, ' knew not the state of these men's souls,
how could they, without manifest transgression of the
Church's order, as well as the profane abuse of the
power Christ has left with His Ministers, absolve
them from all their sins ? ' ^
I do not know whether the office of Confessor of
the Koyal Household has ever been formally abo-
lished. It certainly existed in the early part of this
century, and long after the Great Bebellion at least
it was no sinecure.
In the 19th Canon of the Irish Church, passed
when Ussher was Primate and Bramhall Bishop of
Derry, it is ordered that ' The Minister of every
parish shall, tbe afternoon before the said adminis-
tration (of the Lord's Supper), give warning by the
tolling of the bell, or otherwise, to the intent that
if any have any scruple of conscience, or desire the
special ministry of reconciliation, he may afford it
to those that need it. And to this end the people
are often to be exhorted to enter into a special
examination of the state of their own souls ; and
finding themselves either extremely dull, or much
troubled in mind, they do resort to God's Ministers
• Cardwell's Doc. Ann. pp. 392-6.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 271
to receive from them as well advice and counsel for
the quickening of their dead hearts and the subduing
of those corruptions whereunto they have been
subject, as the benefit of absolution likewise for the
quieting their conscience by the power of the keys,
which Christ hath committed to His Ministers for
that purpose.' ^
Let this suffice as to the law of ' our Eeformed
Church ' on the subject of Confession, as embodied
in the Prayer Book and other formal and authori-
tative documents. And that auricular confession
was commonly practised in our Communion, at least
down to the religious catalepsy of the eighteenth
century, and even after by devout members of the
Church, is a fact which admits of abundant demon-
stration, as a few examples will show.
Hooker, as we learn from Izaak Walton in his life
of him, was absolved on his death-bed by Saravia,
'they being supposed to be confessors to each other.'
Bishop Andrewes, too, not only taught but practised
confession. In his ' Devotions ' he thanks God
' qui aperuisti mihi portam spei confitenti et roganti
ex my ste riorum et clavium potestate^' ^ And it is re-
lated of him that when he was Prebendary of St.
Paul's it was his custom during Lent to be in the
Cathedral daily at certain hours to hear confessions.
Bishop Bull also, the great defender of the Nicene
Creed, who died in 1710, confessed and received
* Phillimore's Ecclesiastical Law, vol. i. p. 698.
' Preces Quotidia.ncB, p. 266.
272 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
absolution more than once during his last illness.^
No one at all familiar with the diaries and chronicles
of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries will need
to be told that they afford abundant evidence that
the practice of auricular confession and absolution
was then recognised as one of the ordinary means
of grace. Let me quote two extracts from Kennet's
' Register and Chronicle ' by way of example : —
I was chosen by the Duchess of York, as soon as she
was known to be so (saith Bishop Morley), to be her
spiritual director and guide in those things that con-
cerned her spiritual and everlasting condition ; and the
reason why she made choice of me to be so, rather
than any other of my order, was because she knew me
better, and because I had been her first instructor in
matters of religion many years before. In this relation
of mine to the Duchess I continued until after her
father's banishment, and all that time I must bear her
witness that she was not only a zealous Protestant
herself, according as it is by law established in the
Church of England, but zealous to make Protestants,
as appears by what she did for that counterfeit pre-
tended convert Macedo (whom the foresaid libeller
Maimbourg magnifies so much, though he knows he
proved himself to be an arrant impostor and profligated
wretch), and in her own deportment as devout and
charitable as ever I knew any of her age and sex : inso-
much as that besides her private prayers, morning and
evening, which she never omitted, she daily and hourly
observed the Canonical Hours of the Public Service of
God in her Chapel with those of her family. Neither
did she ever (as long as I was with her) omit the re-
' Last Hours of Eminent Christians, p. 182.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 273
ceiving of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper once
every month at least, besides that of solemn Festivals
which she always received with the King in the Eoyal
Chapel. And akuays the day before she received she
made a voluntary confession of what she thought she had
offended God in, either by omission or commission, profess-
ing her sorrow for it, and promising amendment of it, and
then kneeling down she desired and received absolution
IN THE FORM AND WOEDS PRESCRIBED BY OUR ChURCH.*
Mr. Lenthall, Speaker of the Long Parliament,
who died on September 3, 1662, was attended in
his last illness by Dr. Bredock (also spelt Bride-
oake), Kector of Witney, and afterwards Bishop of
Chichester, who gives, in a letter preserved by
Kennet,^ an interesting account of his conversation
with the penitent Puritan. ' When I came to his
presence,' says Bredock, ' he told me " he was very
glad to see me ; for he had two great works to do,
and I must assist him in both ; to fit his body for
' Rennet's Register and Chronicle, p. 385. Edition of 1728.
Those who object to the practice of confession are sometimes put to
hard shifts in explaining the language of the Prayer Book. To the
mind of any one not blinded by prejudice or ignorance, the Exhorta-
tion in the Communion Office plainly advises private confession, to
be followed by the only form of private absolution prescribed by the
Church, to all who have any scruples about their fitness for partaking
of the Sacrament. It would never occur to him that all that was
meant was that the penitent should have a private conversation with
his pastor, and listen to some passages of Holy Scripture, that he
might thereby ' receive the benefit of absolution ' I Yet this explana-
tion has been gravely offered by persons in authority. We see the
traditioral, as it is indeed the only legitimate, interpretation of the
passage in the place marked by capitals in the quotation in the
text. >
•' P. 762.
274 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
the earth and his soul for heaven : " to which
purpose he desired me to pray with him. I told
him the Church had appointed an Office of the
Visitation of the Sick, and I must use that. He
said " Yes, he chiefly desired the prayers of the
Church;" wherein he joyned with great fervency
and devotion. After prayers he desired absolution ;
I told him I was very ready and willing to pronounce
it ; but he must first come to a Christian confession
and contrition for the sins and failings of his life :
"Well, sir," said he, "then instruct me to my
duty." I desired him to examine his life by the
Ten Commandments, and wherein he found his
failings, to fly to the Gospel for mercy. Then I read
the Ten Commandments in order to him, mentioning
the principal sins against each commandment.' Dr.
Bredock then goes on to say that of course he omits
what the penitent told him ' under the seal of this
Office,' and only states what Mr. Lenthall autho-
rised him to publish. 'After this Office,' he adds,
* wherein, indeed, he showed himself a very hearty
penitent, he again desired the absolution of the
Church, which I then pronounced, and which he
received with much content and satisfaction : " For,"
says he, " now, now indeed do I find the joy and
benefit of that Office which Christ hath left in His
Church ; " . . . The next day he received the
Sacrament, and after that work I desired him to
express himself to Dr. Dickenson (a learned physi-
cian, , Fellow of Merton College, who received the
Sacrament with him) concerning the King's death,
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 275
because he had only done it to me in confession ;
which he did to the same effect as he had to me.'
So much as to the doctrine of the Church of
England on this subject, as prescribed in her autho-
rised formularies, and illustrated in her practice.
It would be easy to show that the same doctrine is
taught and enforced by all her great divines ; but I
must again content myself with fairly representative
specimens.
The Catechism of Justus Jonas, which was trans-
lated, adopted, and authoritatively recommended by
Cranmer, contains the following passage : —
Now God doth not speak to us with a Voice sounding
out of heaven ; but He hath given the Keys of the King-
dom of Heaven, and the authority to forgive sin, to the
ministers of the Church. Wherefore let him that is a
sinner go to one of them. Let him acknoioledge and con-
fess his sin, and pray him that, according to God's Com-
mandments, he will give him absolution, and comfort him
with the word of grace and forgiveness of his sins. And
when the minister doth so, then I ought steadfastly to
believe that my sins are truly forgiven me in heaven. . . .
Wherefore, good children, give good ear to this doctrine ;
and when your sins do make you afraid and sad, then seek
and desire absolution and forgiveness of your sins of the
ministers tvhich have received a commission and command-
ment from Christ Himself to forgive men their sins; and
then your consciences shall have peace, tranquillity, and
quietness. But he that doth not obey this counsel, but
being either blind or proud, doth despise the same, he shall
not find forgiveness of his sins, neither in his own good
works, not yet in painful chastisements of his body, or any
other things whereto God hath not promised remission of
276 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
sins, wherefore despise not absolution, for it is the com-
mandment and ordinance of God}
Bishop Latimer says : —
But to speak of right and true confession, I would to
God it were kept in England ; for it is a good thing. And
those which find themselves grieved in conscience might
go to a learned man and there fetch of him comfort of the
Word of God, and so come to a quiet conscience. . . .
And it grieveth me much that such confessions are not
kept in England. ^
Bishop Eidley says : —
You have known me long indeed, in the w4iich time
it has chanced me, as you say, to mislike some things.
It is true, I grant ; for sudden changes without substantial
and necessary cause, and the heady setting forth of ex-
tremities, I never did love. Confession unto the minister,
which is able to instruct, correct, comfort, inform the weak,
wounded, and ignorant conscience, indeed I ever thought
might do much good to Christ's congregation, and so, I
assure you, I think even at this day.^
Tn the Sixth of Archbishop Parker's Articles of
Visitation, in 1567, those are condemned who teach
'that mortal or voluntary sins, committed after
baptism, be not remissible by penance.' *
The following will shov^ Hooker's opinion : —
But concerning confession in private, the Churches of
Germany, as well the rest as Lutherans, agree all, that
all men should at certain times confess their offences to
God in the hearing of God's ministers, thereby to show
how their sins displease them ; to receive instruction for
' Catechism, p. 202. "^ Sermons, ii. 399. Edit. 1824.
3 • Letter to one Martin West.' Wordsworth's Eccl. Biog. iii. 67.
* Cardwell's Doc. Ann. i. 341.
THE EEFOKMATION AND CONFESSION 277
the warier carriage of themselves hereafter ; to be soundly
resolved, if any scruple or snare of conscience do entangle
their minds ; and, v^hich is most material, to the end that
men may at God's hand seek every 07ie his own particular
pardon, through the power of those keys, which the minister
of God using according to our blessed Saviour's institution
in that case, it is their part to accept the benefit thereof
as God's most merciful ordinance for their good, and,
without any distrust or doubt, to embrace joyfully His
grace so given them according to the word of our Lord,
which hath said, ' Whose sins ye remit, they are remitted.'
So that grounding on this assured belief, they are to rest
with minds encouraged and persuaded concerning the
forgiveness of all their sins, as of Christ's own word and
power, by the ministry of the keys.^
Dr. Donne, Dean of St. Paul's, whom De
Quincey calls 'one of the subtlest intellects that
England has produced,' ^ is severe upon ' that torture
of the conscience, that usurpation of God's pov^er,
that spying into the counsel of princes, with which
the Church of Eome hath been deeply charged ; '
but he is equally clear in favour of the system of
confession sanctioned by the Church of England.
For example : —
Confitebor Domino (says David), I will confess my
sins to the Lord : sins are not confessed if they be not
confessed to Him ; and if they be confessed to Him, in
case of necessity it ivill suffice, though they be confessed
to no other. Indeed, a confession is directed upon God,
though it be made to His minister : if God had appointed
» Eccl. Pol. Bk. vi. ch. iv. 14.
■' Works, vii. 276.
278 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT ^
His angels or His saints to absolve me, as He hath His
ministers, I would confess to them. . . . Men come not
willingly to this manifestation of themselves, nor are they
to be brought in chains, as they do in the Eoman Church,
by a necessity of an exact enumeration of all their sins,
but to be led with that sweetness with which our Church
proceeds, in appointing sick persons, if they feel their
conscience troubled ivith any weighty matters, to make a
sjjecial confession, and to receive absolution at the hands
of the priest ; ' and then we are to remember that * every
coming to Hhe Communion is as serious a thing as our
oion transmigration out of the world, and we should do as
much here for the settling of our conscience as upon our
death-bed.' ^
Bishop Hall can hardly be called a High Church-
man, yet here is a specimen of his teaching on the sub-
ject of auricular confession : —
If after all these penitent endeavours you find your
soul still unquiet, and not sufficiently apprehensive of a
free and full forgiveness, betake yourself to God's faithful
agent for peace : run to your ghostly physician ; lay your
bosom open before him ; flatter not your own condition ;
let neither fear nor shame stay his hand from probing and
searching the wound to the bottom ; and that being done,
make careful use of such spiritual applications as shall be
by him administered to you. This, this is the way to a
perfect recovery and fulness of comfort.
And again : —
Although therefore you may perhaps, through God's
goodness, attain to such a measure of knowledge and
resolution as to be able to give yourself satisfaction con-
cerning the state of your soul ; yet it cannot be amiss, out
' Sermons, Ivi.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 279
of an abundant caution, to take God's minister, along with
you, and making him of your spiritual counsel, to unbosom
yourself to him freely, for his fa>therly advice and con-
currence : the neglect whereof, through a kind of either
strangeness. or misconceit, is certainly not a little disad-
vantageous to the souls of many good Christians. The
Eomish laity make either oracles or idols of their ghostly
fathers : if we make ciphers of ours, I know not whether
we be more injurious to them or ourselves. They go
about to rack your consciences to a forced and exquisite
confession under the pain of no remission; but we
persuade you, for your own good, to be more intimate
with and less reserved from those whom God hath set
over you, for your direction, comfort, and salvation.^
Bishop Overall, the author of the latter part of the
Church Catechism, makes the follov^ing inquiry in
the 21st Article of his Visitation in 1619 :—
Whether doth your minister, before the several times
of the administration of the Lord's Supper, admonish and
exhort his parishioners, if they have their consciences
troubled and disquieted, to resort unto him, or some other
learned minister, and open his grief, that he may receive
such ghostly counsel and comfort as his conscience may be
relieved, and by the minister he may receive the benefit of
absolution, to the quiet of his conscience and avoiding of
scruple. And if any man confess his secret and hidden sins,
be he sick or whole, to the minister, for the unburthening
of his conscience, and receiving such spiritual consolation,
doth or hath the said minister at any time revealed and
made known to any person whomsoever any crime or offence
so committed to his trust, contrary to the 113th Canon ?
Similar inquiries are to be found in abundance in
' Works, vii. 453-5.
280 THE EEFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
the Visitation Articles of other bishops. I give
Overall's as a specimen of the general rule.
Bishop Cosin, v^ho v^as alv^ays proud to appeal
to the authority of ' My Lord and Master Overall,'
writes as follov^s : —
The Church of England, howsoever it holdeth not
Confession and Ahsolutio7i Sacramental, that is, made unto
and received from a priest, to he so absolutely necessary,
as that without it there can be no remission of sins ; yet
by this place it is manifest v^hat she teacheth. . . . Our
' if he feel his conscience troubled ' is no more than his
' if he find out his sins ' (' si inveniat peccata ') ; for if he
be not troubled with sin, what needs either Confession or
Absolution ? Venial sins that separate not from the grace
of God need not so much to trouble a man's conscience.
If he hath committed any mortal sin, then we require
confession of it to a priest, who may give him, upon his
true contrition and repentance, the benefit of absolution,
which takes effect according to his disposition that is
absolved. . . . The truth is, that in the priest's absolution
there is the tfue power and virtue of forgiveness, which
will most certainly take effect, 'unless an obstacle is
imposed,' as in Baptism.'
Jeremy Taylor says : —
It is a very pious preparation to the Holy Sacrament
that we confess our sins to the minister of religion : for
since it is necessary that a mah be examined, and a self-
examination was prescribed to the Corinthians in the
time of their lapsed discipline, that though there were
divisions amongst them, and no established governors,
yet from this duty they were not to be excused, and they
must in destitution of a public minister do it themselves,
but this is in case of such necessity : the other is better :
tliat is, it is of better order and more advantage that this
* Notes on Common Prayer, First Series, p. 163.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 281
part of repentance and holy preparation be performed
under the conduct of a spiritual ' guide. And the reason
is pressing. For since it is life or death that is there
administered, and the great dispensation of the keys is in
that ministry, it were well if he that ministers did know
whether the person presented were fit to communicate or
no ; and if he be not, it is charity to reject him, and
charity to assist him that he may be fitted. There are
many sad contingencies in the constitution of ecclesiastical
affairs, in which every man that needs this help, and
would fain make use of it, cannot ; hut ivhen he can meet
loith the blessing, it loere luell it were more frequently used
and more readily entertained.
Again : —
But the priest's proper power of absolving, that is, of
pardoning (which is in no case communicable to any
man who is not consecrated to the ministry), is a giving
the penitent the means of eternal pardon, the admitting
him to the Sacraments of the Church and the peace and
communion of the faithful ; because that is the only way
really to obtain pardon of God ; there being in ordinary
no way to heaven but by serving God in the way which
He hath commanded us by His Son, that is, in the way
of the Church, which is His body, whereof He is Prince
and Head.^
Chillingworth is a name to conjure with among
Protestants. His favourite maxim, ' The Bible and
the Bible only the religion of Protestants,' has become
a proverb. His name would evoke the plaudits even
of the Albert Hall demonstrators. Let us see then
what Chillingworth says : —
Since Christ, for your benafit and comfort, hath given
* Jeremy Taylor's Works, vii. 452, 484. Eden's Edition.
282 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
such authority to His ministers, upon your unfeigned
repentance and contrition, to absolve and release you
from your sins, . . . therefore, in obedience to His
gracious will, and as I am warranted, and even enjoined,
by my holy mother the Church of England expressly, in
the Book of Common Prayer, in the rubric of visiting the
sick (which doctrine this Church hath likewise embraced
so far), I beseech you that by your practice and use you
will not suffer that commission which Christ hath given
to His ministers to be a vain form of words without any
sense under them ; to be an antiquated, expired commis-
sion, of no use nor validity in these days ; but whenso-
ever you find yourselves charged and oppressed, especially
with such crimes as they call ' Peccata vastantia con-
scientiam,' such as do lay waste and depopulate the con-
science, that you have recourse to your spiritual physician
and freely disclose the nature and mahgnancy of your
disease, that he may be able, as the cause shall require,
to proportion a remedy either to search it with corrosives,
or comfort and temper it with oil. And come not to him
only with such a mind as you would go to a learned man
experienced in the Scripture, as one that can speak com-
fortable, quieting words to you, but as one that hath
authority delegated to him from God Himself to absolve
and acquit you of your sins.^
I do not know whether Bishop Ken's Manual,
composed for the use of Winchester scholars, is still
used in that illustrious school. A copy of it, which
I still possess, was given to me by the clergyman
who prepared me for my first communion, a very
moderate man, and it contains the following direc-
tion : —
In case, good Philotheus, you do find this examination
' Works (Serm. vii.), pp. «3-4.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 285
too difficult for you, or you are afraid you shall not rightly
perform it, or meet with any scruples or troubles of con-
science in the practice of it, I then advise you, as the
Church does, to go to one of your superiors in this place
to be your spiritual guide, and be not ashamed to un-
burthen your soul freely to him ; that, besides his ghostly
counsel, you may receive the benefit of absolution ; for
though confession of our sins to God is only matter of
duty, and absolutely necessary, yet confession to our
spiritual guide also is by many devout souls found to be
very advantageous to true repentance.^
Archbishop Wake says : —
The Church of England refuses no sort of confession,
either public or private, which may be any way necessary
to the quieting of men's consciences, or to the exercise of
that power of binding and loosing which our Saviour
Christ has left to His Church. We have our penitential
canon for public offenders ; we exhort men, if they have
any the least doubt or scruple, nay, sometimes though they
have none, hut specially before they receive the Holy
Sacrament, to confess their sins. We propose to them the
benefit not only of ghostly advice hoio to manage their re-
pentance, but the great comfort of absolution too, as soon
as they have completed it. . . . When we visit our sick,
we iiever fail to exhort them to make a special confession
of their sins to him that ministers to them ; and when they
have done it, their absolution is so full that the Church of
Eome itself could not desire to add anything to it.^
' A Manual of Prayers for the use of the Scholars of Winchester
College, and all other devout Christians. To which are added Three
Hymns ; for Morning, Evening, and Midnight. By the Eight
Keverend Father in God, Thomas Ken, D.D., late Lord Bishop of
Bath and Wells. The thirty-fifth edition. P. 24.
^ An Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England, p. 31.
284 THE EEFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
Dr. South asks :
Does the Church of England hold auricular or private
confession to the priest as an integral part of repentance
and necessary condition of absolution ? No : the Church
of England denies such confessions to be necessary,
either necessitate prcecepti, as enjoined by any law or
command of God ; or necessitate medii, as a necessary
part of pardon or remission of sins; and consequently
rejects it as a snare and a burden, groundlessly and
tyrannically imposed upon the Church. But so much of
private confession as may be of spiritual use for the dis-
burthening of a troubled conscience, unable of itself to
master or grapple with its own doubts, by imparting them
to some knowing, discreet, spiritual person, for his advice
and resolution about them; so much, I confess, the
Church of England does approve, advise, and allow of.
Bishop Short, who was more of an Evangelical
than a High Churchman, says : —
The evils and abuses arising from this custom had so
alienated the minds of most men from it, that it was
readily dispensed with ; but it has proved a misfortune to
our Church that the tide of opinion has carried us too far
towards the opposite extreme. The Scriptures never
speak of confession as obligatory in such a sense as the
injunctions of the Church of Eome had ordained. Con-
fession to a priest is nowhere mentioned as absolutely
necessary ; but reason, as well as the Word of God,
strongly points out, that to acknowledge our faults, espe-
cially to one vested with spiritual authority over us, must
be a most effectual means of restraining us from the com-
mission of sin.
... In the Church of England the confession of
particular sins is recommended in the Exhortation to the
Sacrament, and the Visitation of the Sick ; but so little are
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 285
we accustomed to this most Scriptural duty, that these
recommendations are frequently unknown and generally
neglected, while scarcely a vestige remains of ecclesiastical
law for the restraint of vice.^
Bishop Tomline, no High Churchman, while
condemning * the Popish Sacrament of Penance,' is
careful to add : —
Confession of sin to God is an indispensable duty,
and confession to priests may sometimes be useful by
leading to effectual repentance ; and therefore our Church
encourages its members to use confidential confession to
their priests, or to any other minister of God's Word.^
The latitudinarian Bishop Burnet, while con-
demning compulsory confession, and recognising
dangers lurking even in voluntary confession, allows
that ' in the use of confession, when proposed as our
Church does, as matter of advice and not of obliga-
tion, we are very sensible many good ends may be
obtained.' ^ And not only so, but he was in the habit
of hearing confessions. A brother bishop having
asked him ' what absolution he used when people
came to confess to him,' adding that himself ' was
in the habit of using that in the Office for the Sick,
but wished to know what was Burnet's practice,' the
latter replied that ' in his opinion either was proper,
but that he himself used that in the Office for Holy
Communion.' '*
' History of the Church of England, p. 170.
2 Scriptural Expos, of the XXXIX Articles, Art. XXV.
3 An Expos, of the XXXIX Art. p. 311.
* See Church and the World, 2nd series, p. 393.
286 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Dr. Barrow, the great writer against Papal
Supremacy, says : —
If Christian men, having fallen into sin, or failed of
duty towards God, do seriously confess their faults, and
heartily repent thereof, when the ministers of the Church,
in God's name and for Christ's sake, do declare (or pro-
nounce) to them, so doing or so qualified, the pardon of
their sin and absolve them from it ; we need not doubt
that their sins are verily forgiven, and the pardon expressed
in words is effectually dispensed unto them.^
One of the best accredited and most popular of
Anglican Vademecums is ' The Country Parson ' of the
saintly George Herbert, and here is his picture of ' the
parson comforting : ' —
In his visiting the sick or otherwise afflicted he fol-
loweth the Church's counsel, viz. in persuading them to
particular confession ; labouring to make them under-
stand the great good use of this ancient and pious
ordinance, and how necessary it is in some cases.
Wheatley's ' Eational Illustration of the Book of
Common Prayer ' is a work of great moderation, and
is commonly on the list of books recommended
by our bishops to candidates for ordination. Admit-
ting the existence of abuses in times past, Wheatley
says : ^ —
But no argument, sure, can be drawn, that because a
practice has been abused, it should therefore cease to be.
The abuses of it should be reformed, but not the practice
discontinued.
He then adopts as his own the charitable rule
' ' An Exposition of the Creed,' Works, vii. 379.
2 Pp. 375, 37G.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 287
laid down in the Order of Communion of 1548,
quoted on a previous page, and goes on : —
What could have been added more judicious than this,
to temper, on the one hand, the rigours of those who
were too apt at that time to insist upon confession as
absolutely necessary to salvation ; and to prevent, on the
other, a carelessness in those who, being prejudiced against
the abuse, were apt indiscriminately to reject the thing, as
at no time needful or useful in a penitent ? So that we
may still, I presume, wish, very consistently with the de-
termination of our Church, that our people would apply
themselves oftener than they do to their spiritual physi-
cians, even in the time of their health ; since it is much
to be feared they are wounded oftener than they complain,
and yet, through aversion of disclosing their sore, suffer it
to gangrene for want of their help who should work the
cure.
The philosophic Bishop Berkeley writes : —
I had forgot to say a word of confession, which you
mention as an advantage in the Church of Eome which is
not to be had in ours. But it may be had in our com-
munion by any who please to have it; and I admit it
may be very usefully practised.*
I possess two volumes entitled 'Enchiridion
Theologicum, or a Manual for the use of Students
in Divinity. By John Lord Bishop of London.'
Mine is the third edition, and was published in
1825. It is a compilation, and the author says : —
My choice has been principally directed to such works
as had the sanction of public authority, and which may
' Letter to Sir John James. Berkeley's Works, iv. 278.
288 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
therefore be relied on as containing the final and decided
opinions of our Eeformers approved of in the general by
the Church at large.
Among the documents in this collection is 'A
Short Catechisme or Playne Instruction, conteyning
the sum of Christian learning, set forth by the
King's Majesties Authoritie for all Scholemasters to
teach, 1553.' The Catechism has a distinctly
Evangelical flavour. But it teaches plainly enough
the doctrines of the Eeal Presence in the Eucharist,
and the power of the keys in the Church. Of the
former it says : —
Even as by bread and v^ine our natural bodies are
sustained and nourished, so by the body, that is the
flesh and blonde of Christ, the soule is fedde through
fayth, and quickened to the heavenlye and godly lyfe.
Of the latter : —
To this Church belong the keies whearwyth heaven is
locked and unlocked : for that is done by the ministration
of the worde; whereunto properly appertayneth the
power to bynde and louse ; to holde for gylty, and forgive
synnes.
Another document is ' Eules and Advices to the
Clergy of the Diocese of Down and Connor, by
Jeremy Taylor, Bishop of that Diocese.' Among the
Eules is the following (No. Ixviii.) : —
Let every minister exhort his people to a frequent
confession of their sins, and a declaration of the state of
their souls ; to a conversation with their minister in spiritual
things, to an inquiry concerning all the parts of their
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 289
duty; for by preaching, and catechising, and private
intercourse, all the needs of the soul can best be served ;
but by preaching alone they cannot.
Again, Kule Ixxii. says : —
A minister must not stay till he be sent for, but of his
own accord and care go to them, to examine them, to
exhort them to perfect their repentance, to strengthen
their faith, to encourage their patience, to persuade them
to resignation, to the renewing of their holy vows, to the
love of God, to be reconciled to their neighbours, to make
restitution and amends, to confess their sins, to settle their
estate, to provide for their charges, to do acts of piety and
charity, and above all things, that they take care they do
not sin towards the end of their lives. For if repentance
on our death-bed seems so very late for the sins of our
life, what time shall be left to repent us of the sins we
commit on our death-bed ?
Again (Kule xliii.) : —
Let not the humours and inclinations of the people
be the measures of your doctrines, but let your doctrine
be the measure of their persuasions. Let them know
from you what they ought to do ; but if you learn from
them what you ought to teach, you will give but a very
ill account at the day of judgment of the souls committed
to you. He that receives from the people what he shall
teach them is like a nurse that asks of her child what
physic she shall give him.
These are specimens of the teaching inculcated
as a matter of course by Bishop Jeremy Taylor in
an Irish Protestant diocese. And the Bishop of
London in the year 1825 recommends it, equally as a
matter of course, ' for the use of students in divinity *
u
290 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT?
in England. A similar recommendation from the
present Bishop of London would probably provoke
from Sir William Harcourt a scathing denunciation
in the columns of the ' Times.' But let us come
down to our own time.
I suppose the late Dr. Vaughan would be
accurately described as an Evangelical Broad Church-
man. I enjoyed the great privilege of his friendship,
and I know that he held decided views as to the
expediency of private confession in certain cases.
But there is no need to draw on one's memory, for
his views are public property. In a volume of
'Addresses to Young Clergymen,' published in 1875,
he says : ' —
Most clergymen, whatever their Church views, find
themselves compelled sometimes to receive confessions.
In other words, they are the natural referees in cases of
conscience ; and cannot, if they would, evade the necessity
of ministering privately to spiritual disease. It may be
in the form of difficulties of believing. It may be in the
form of perplexities in acting. It may be in the form of
distresses about sin, the forgiveness of the past, or
strength against the present. In some form or other, the
study must sometimes be a confessional ; and one of the
most anxious, most trying, most exhausting parts of
the clergyman's day is given of necessity to this office.
The late Mr. Frederick Denison Maurice would
be generally recognised as the most distinguished
leader of the Broad Church party. I knew him well
enough to be able to say that nobody would be more
' P. 34.
THE EEFOKMATION AND CONFESSION 291
shocked than he by such demonstrations as the
recent Albert Hall meeting. The view of Sacerdo-
talism which I have endeavoured to explain in
previous chapters pervades his writings. Let one
specimen suffice : —
Now these facts are indisputable. 1. The whole
sacerdotal caste in Christendom has the name of ministers
or servants. From the Bishop of Eome down to the
founder of the last new sect in the United States of
America, every one who deals with the Gospel at all, or
pretends in any sense to have a Divine commission,
assumes this name as the description of his office. 2. The
most remarkable powder which these ministers have
claimed, and that on account of which the greatest
homage has been paid to them, is the power of absolving
or setting free. This claim has in a manner been
universal. - Luther believed that he was to absolve as
much as Tetzel. Every person who says that the sole
office of a minister is to preach the Gospel says so because
he believes that is the way to absolve. There are most
serious differences about the nature of the power and the
mode in which it is to be exercised, none at all about the
existence of it, and about its connection in some way or
other with the Christian ministry. ... It has been
believed, as a necessary consequence of the importance
attached to the Eucharist, that an order of men must
exist in the Christian Church corresponding to the priests
of the old dispensation, with the difference that the
sacrifice in the one case was anticipatory, in the other
commemorative. This office has been associated with the
absolving power of which I spoke just now.'
' The Kingdom of Christ, vol. ii. pp. 109-111. The italics in
this passage are Maurice's.
u 2
292 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Thus we see that this distinguished and revered
Broad Churchman gives as the tv^o notes of Christian
ministers, that they are an absolving and a sacrificing
priesthood in the sense expounded by Bramhall and
the representative school of Anglican divines in
general. And he emphasises v^hat I have been
insisting on, namely, that it is impossible to get
away from Sacerdotalism. It underlies and pene-
trates the whole system of the Providential Govern-
ment of the world. It argues a very loose and
shallow habit of thinking on theological subjects
not to see this.
So much, then, as to the doctrine of the Church
of England on the subject of auricular confession
and absolution. The popular notion that the repu-
diation of these formed a fundamental tenet of * the
Eeformation Settlement ' is one of the most curious
myths of history. The fact is that it was not a
burning question at all, or even a debatable question,
among the Eeformers. The Puritans who clamoured
against vestments and other ' relics of Popery ' said
nothing against confession. How indeed could they,
when not only Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, and other
leading Peformers were advocates of it, but foreign
Protestants, Lutherans and Calvinists alike, upheld
the system, abolishing only its compulsory character ?
The Saxon, the Bohemian, and the Augsburg Con-
fessions of Faith insist on the duty of private
confession with a view to absolution through the
ministerial exercise of the power of the keys.
Luther's ' Shorter Catechism ' was accepted by the
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 293
Lutheran body as one of their dogmatic books.
One chapter is entitled ' On Confession : how those
of the simpler sort are to be instructed in it ; ' and it
opens thus : —
Confession compriseth two things : one, to con-
fess sins ; the other, to receive absolution or remission of
sins from the confessor or preacher of the Gospel, as if
from God Himself, and not to doubt, but firmly to believe
that through absolution the sins are remitted before God
in heaven.
The preface to the ' Formula of Concord ' says
that ' all the Churches of the Confession of Augsburg
approved and received this Catechism,' with others
that are named. ' So that they were propounded
publicly in churches and schools and some private
houses.'
It is not necessary to adduce further evidence of
the views of foreign Eef ormers ; but I may conclude
with the testimony of two eminent Lutherans.
The first is the illustrious Leibnitz, who says : —
I regard a pious, grave, and prudent confessor as a
great instrument of God for the salvation of souls ; for his
counsel assists us in governing our passions, in discover-
ing our vices, in avoiding occasions of sin, in making
restitution, in repairing injuries, in dissipating doubts, in
overcoming despondency, and, in fine, in removing or mi-
tigating all the ills of the soul. And if, in the ordinary
concerns of life, there is scarce anything more precious
than a faithful friend, what must it be to have a friend
who is bound, even by the inviolable obligation of a
Divine Sacrament, to hold faith with us and assist us in
our need ? ^
» A System of Theology, p. 136* Engl. Transl.
294 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
My other authority is the distinguished Danish
theologian, Martensen, whose able and learned
* Christian Dogmatics ' was one of the special books
which the late Dr. Vaughan used to recommend to
the large body of the younger clergy who looked
to him for guidance. There are many passages on
the subject in Martensen, who died only a few years
ago, but one will suffice : —
It cannot easily be denied that confession meets a
deep need of human nature. There is a great psycholo-
gical truth in the saying of Pascal, that a man often
attains for the first time a true sense of sin, and a true
stayedness in his good purpose, when he confesses his
sins to his fellow-man as well as to God.^
I have now given a fair summary of the evidence
in favour of auricular confession presented by the
formularies of the Church of England and by
her representative divines — High Church, Broad
Church, and Low — down to our own time ; and I
ask all dispassionate men to compare it with the
violent denunciations of confession in Parliament,
in pamphlets, and on platforms. All who choose
have of course a right to denounce it, though it
baffles my wit to see how they are to stop it so long
as it is left voluntary. But what no one has a right
to do is to denounce as * lawless ' and ' disloyal ' any
of the English clergy who may think it their duty
to govern themselves by the explicit teaching of
the Church of England and the desires of such of
* Christian Dogmatics, p. 444. Engl. Transl.
THE EEFOEMATION AND CONFESSION 295
the laity as come to them to * open their grief,' as
the Book of Common Prayer recommends. The
plain truth is that the agitators in this controversy
are wofully ignorant of the history of the Refor-
mation, and are entirely out of sympathy with the
authorised teaching of the Church which they
volunteer to champion. The preceding pages have
supplied abundant evidence of this, and we shall
find more as we proceed. But considering the
great names, intellectually and morally— including
men who by study and experience had a profound
knowledge of human nature — who have borne
testimony to the salutary influence of voluntary con-
fession under proper safeguards, is it not somewhat
rash to indulge in indiscriminate condemnation at the
instance of persons who have no personal knowledge
on the subject ? At all events, let it be clearly
understood that what the agitators are really de-
manding, though they do not seem to know it, is a
revision of the Prayer Book and a new Reformation
in harmony with the opinions and aspirations of
Lord Grimthorpe and Mr. Kensit. I doubt whether
the English people are yet prepared for this religious
development.
296 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
CHAPTEK IX
THE II^TEEMEDIATE STATE
One of the points of attack in the present con-
troversy is the ancient custom of prayers for the
dead, which is assumed to be included in ' the
Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory ' condemned
in the Twenty-second Article. I am obliged to admit
that some of the younger clergy of the advanced
school among us do hold the Romish doctrine of
purgatory — though I believe without its worst
accompaniments — under the honest belief that it is
the doctrine of the primitive Church, and likewise of
the present Oriental Churches and of the Church of
England ; in fact, of Christendom, with the excep-
tion of the Tractarian party, whom it has become
the fashion among our neo-Catholics to regard as
theologians out of date. I made this amazing
discovery about three years ago ; and when I
challenged one of the representatives of this party
to the proof he referred me, as his prime authority,
to the ' Prselectiones ' of the Jesuit Father Perrone
of the Collegio Romano, the standard theologian of
modern Ultramontanism.
Some of our younger clergy, I fear, instead of
THE INTERMEDIATE STATE 297
reading the ancient Fathers and the great divines
of our own Church, with their massive learning,
have got into the habit of reading modern Roman
books, Hke Perrone's elaborate work, and are thus
led to the fallacious conclusion that the theology
they find there is the Catholic faith— * the faith of
Christendom ' — as one of them has said — barring some
out-of-date Anglicans. The simple fact is that
Perrone's doctrine of the Intermediate State is not
only directly contrary to the doctrine of the Church
of England, but equally so to the doctrine of the
ancient Church, of all Oriental Christendom at the
present day, and even of the Eoman Church before
the Council of Florence in the fifteenth century.
Ajid neither the Council of Florence, nor the subse-
quent Council of Trent, sanctions the more recent de-
velopments of the doctrine of purgatory in the Eoman
Church. The Council of Trent, indeed, commits itself
to very little. It merely says : * There is a purgatory,
and the souls there detained are helped by prayer, and
chiefly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar.' The
Catechism of the Council, however, is more definite.
It says : ' There is a purgatorial fire, where the
souls of the righteous are for a time purified by
torture {quo piorum animce ad definitum tempus
cruciate^ expiantur), that entrance may be opened
for them into the eternal home, into which nothing
that is defiled can enter.' And pastors are bidden
to be more diligent and frequent in the declaration
of this doctrine, ' because we are fallen on times in
which men w^ill not endure sound doctrine.'
298 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
This is a considerable innovation on the doctrine
of undivided Christendom ; but it is far short of the
teaching of Perrone, which is now the dominant
doctrine of the Church of Kome, as we shall see
presently. Meanwhile our first concern is with the
limits within which the doctrine of prayers for the
dead may be held and taught in the Church of
England.
The first formal exposition of doctrine put forth
by the Reformers was the Ten Articles of 1536,
which were expanded a few years later into 'The
Institution of a Christian Man.' This careful and
elaborate summary of Christian doctrine was, with a
few additions, published by authority of Convocation
in the year 1543, under the title of ' The Necessary
Doctrine and Erudition for any Christipn Man,' and
was the work of a commission consisting of all the
bishops of the English Church, eight archdeacons,
and seventeen doctors of divinity, making forty-six
in all. The head of the commission was, of course.
Archbishop Cranmer. Hugh Latimer, then Bishop
of Worcester, was one of the number. On the
subject of ■' Prayer for Souls Departed ' the ' Neces-
sary Doctrine and Erudition ' says : —
Forasmuch as due order of charity requireth, and the
Book of Maccabees and divers ancient doctors plainly show,
that it is a very good and charitable deed to pray for souls
departed ; and forasmuch as such usage hath continued in
the Church for so many years, even from the beginning,
men ought to judge and think the same to be well done.
And truly it standeth with the very order of charity, a
Christian man to pray for another, both quick and dead,
THE INTBEMEDIATE STATE 299
and to commend one another in their prayers to God's
mercy ; and to cause others to pray for them also, as well
in masses and exequies, as at other times, and to give alms
for them, according to the usage of the Church and ancient
opinion of old fathers ; trusting that these things do
not only profit and avail them, but also declare us to be
charitable 'folk, because we have mind and desire to profit
them which, notwithstanding they be departed this
present life, yet remain they still members of the same
mystical body of Christ whereunto we pertain.
And here is specially to be noted, that it is not in the
power or knowledge of any man to limit and dispense how
much, and in what space of time, or to what person par-
ticularly the said masses, exequies, and suffrages do profit
and avail ; therefore charity requireth that whosoever
causeth any such masses, exequies, or suffrages to be done
should yet (though their interest be more for one than for
another) cause them also to be done for the universal con-
gregation of Christian people, quick and dead ; for that
power and knowledge afore rehearsed pertaineth only unto
God, which alone knoweth the measures and times of His
own judgment and mercies.
Furthermore, because the place where the souls remain,
the name thereof, the state and condition which they be
in, be to us uncertain, therefore these, with all other such
things, must also be left to Almighty God, unto whose
mercy it is meet and convenient for us to commend them,
trusting that God accepteth our prayers for them ; reserv-
ing the rest wholly to God, unto whom is known their
estate and condition ; and not we to take upon us, neither
in the one part nor yet in the other, to give any fond and
temerarious judgment in so high things so far passing our
knowledge.
Finally, it is much necessary that all such abuses as
heretofore have been brought in by supporters and main-
300 THE EEFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
fainers of the Papacy of Eome, and their complices, con-
cerning this matter, be clearly put away ; and that we
therefore abstain from the name purgatory, and no more
dispute or reason thereof. Under colour of which have
been advanced many fond and great abuses, to make men
believe that through the Bishop of Eome's pardons souls
might clearly be delivered out of it, and released out of the
bondage of sin ; and the masses said at Scala Coeli and
other prescribed places, phantasied by men, did there in
those places more proj&t more souls than another ; and
also that a prescribed number of prayers sooner than other
(though as devoutly said) should further their petition
sooner, yea specially if they were said before one image
more than another which they phantasied. All these,
and such like abuses, be necessary utterly to be abolished
and extinguished.
This is a remarkable statement from a com-
mission including not only Cranmer (its President)
and Hugh Latimer, but all the rest of the bishops
on the bench as well as the most eminent of the clergy.
It was afterwards sanctioned by Convocation without
a dissentient voice. Thus we see that the whole clergy
of England in the reign of Henry VHI. condemned
' the Eomish doctrine of purgatory,' with its merce-
nary ' pardons,' and also the name on account of the
' abuses ' attached to it, but retained the doctrine in
so far as it was held by ' the ancient doctors ' and
' old fathers.' And let it be remembered that ' The
Necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian
-Man' has never been withdrawn or repudiated by
the Church of England, and that no formulary of
doctrine — as Palmer has reminded us in a passage
THE INTEEMEDIATBsJTATE^::V;>^ 301
already quoted — was put out between the reign of
Henry VIII. and that of EHzabeth. We may fairly
assume therefore that this statement on purgatory
is the key to the Twenty -second Article.
The next point that solicits our attention is the
First Prayer Book of Edward VI. In the Office for
the Burial of the Dead, when the priest throws
earth upon the corpse he says, ' I commend thy
soul to God the Father Almighty, and thy body to
the ground,' &c.
The next prayer begins thus : ' We commend
into Thy hands of mercy, most merciful Father, the
soul of this our brother departed, that when the
judgment shall come, which Thou hast committed
to Thy well-beloved Son, both this our brother and
we may be found acceptable in Thy sight, and we
may receive that blessing,' ^c.
The next prayer concludes thus : * Grant, we
beseech Thee, that at the day of judgment his soul,
and all the souls of Thy elect departed out of this
life, may with us, and we with them, fully receive
Thy promises, and be made perfect altogether,
through the glorious resurrection of Thy Son, Jesus
Christ our Lord.'
The Second Lesson is followed by some versicles,
of which the following are samples. The priest says,
with reference to the dead, * From the gates of hell,'
and the congregation reply, 'Deliver their souls,
Lord ! '
Then follows a prayer, in which occurs this
petition : ' Grant unto this Thy servant that the
302 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
sins which he committed in this world be not
imputed unto him, but that he, escaping the gates
of hell and pains of eternal darkness, may ever dwell
in the region of light, with Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, in the place where is no weeping, sorrow, nor
heaviness.'
This is almost a literal rendermg of a prayer in the
Apostolical Constitutions, which shows the practice
of the Christians orf the third century. The prayer
is as follows : ' Let us pray for our brethren
departed in the faith of Christ, that the most merciful
God, who has received the spirits of the deceased,
would forgive all their voluntary and involuntary
failings ; and that, being restored to the Divine
favour, they may have a place assigned them in the
region of the blessed ; in the bosom of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob ; in the company of those where
pain and sorrow and dissatisfaction have no place.'
But I may be told that the First. Prayer Book of
Edward VI. was superseded by the Second Prayer
Book, from which prayers for the dead were ex-
cluded. My answer to that objection, is this : The
very authority which published and sanctioned the
second book — ^.e. the Act of Uniformity —declared
explicitly and emphatically that it was not intended
as a condemnation or censure of anything contained
in the first book. The Act of ParHament, by which
the second book of King Edward was ratified, states
that there was nothing in the first book but what
was * agreeable to the Word of God and the primitive
Church, and very comfortable to all good people desir-
THE INTERMEDIATE STATE 303
ingto live in Christian conversation.' The Act then
goes on to explain ' that such doubts as had been
raised in the use and exercise thereof proceeded
rather from the curiosity of the minister and mis-
takers than from any other worthy cause.' This Act
of Uniformity bears still stronger testimony to the
excellence and orthodoxy of the first book, for it
declares that ' by the aid of the Holy Ghost it was
with one uniform agreement concluded.'
I think I am right, therefore, in asserting that in
substituting the Prayer Book of 1552 for that of
1549, the Church of England was as far as possible
from refusing her sanction to anything contained in
the latter. She expressly guarded against any such
inference in the passages which I have just quoted ;
and therefore the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI.
cannot be quoted as any argument in favour of the
view that the Church of England does not sanction
prayers for the dead. They were excluded under
pressure from Calvin, acting on the English Re-
formers through the boy-king and through Bucer
and Peter Martyr, who were then holding positions,
of considerable influence in England. Calvin's
objection to prayers for the dead was natural
enough ; for they were inconsistent with his doctrine
that the great mass of mankind are irrevocably fore-
ordained to eternal damnation, while the small flock
of the elect, whose fall was impossible, were privi-
leged to enter heaven as soon as they passed away
from earth. But the Church of England has ever
instinctively recoiled against the unchristian cruelty
304 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of the Calvinistic system, and has never without
protest accepted, even temporarily, any of its funda-
mental tenets.
The Second Prayer Book of Edward VI. was, of
course, abolished on the accession of Queen Mary in
1553. When Queen EHzabeth ascended the throne
in 1558 she took immediate steps to restore some of
the most important omissions in the Prayer Book
of 1552, and her Primer of 1559, published by
authority, contains prayers for the dead. The Marian
persecution, however, had caused such an anti-Koman
reaction that even the strong Tudor will of Queen
Elizabeth could do comparatively little against it.
Those who had fled to the Continent during the reign
of Mary now returned with soured, and in some
cases vengeful, feelings, and thought that it was
impossible to rush too far or too fast in a direction
opposite to that of Kome. Such a period of feverish
excitement was not very favourable to a policy of
moderation, and Queen Elizabeth, backed as she was
by the support of the old leaders of the Eeformation,
found it impossible to restore, as she wished to do,
the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. in its integrity.
But all the alterations made were in that direction.
The commemoration of the faithful departed was not,
however, restored to its old place in the prayer for
the Church militant till the last review in 1661.
The present state of the question, then, so far as
the Church of England is concerned, I take to be this.
In the years 1536, 1543, and 1549, she gave, freely,
deliberately, and publicly, her sanction to the doctrine
THE INTEKMEDIATE STATE 305
of prayers for the dead, and that sanction she has
never since withdrawn. On the only occasion on
which she seemed to do so (1552), she w^as careful to
put on record, through the mouths of the spiritual
and temporal organs of the nation, a distinct protest
that that was not her intention. And as a matter of
fact, prayer for the dead was not altogether excluded
even from the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI.,
though it was certainly reduced to very narrow
compass. * There was one clause,' says the very
inoderate Wheatley, * permitted to stand' in the
Prayer Book of 1552, ' viz. in the prayer that imme-
diately follows the Lord's Prayer, in which, till the
last review, we prayed that we with this our
BROTHER, and all others departed in the true faith
of God's holy name, may have our perfect consum-
mation and bliss' He goes on to say, what we all
know^ that the Puritans at the Savoy Conference
objected to the words, ' with this our brother,' not
because it implied, as it certainly did, prayers for the
dead, but because, in Wheatley' s language, ' they did
in general object against all that expressed any
assurance of the deceased party's happiness, which
they did not think proper to be said indifferently
over all that died.' The words were therefore, and
on that ground only, omitted in the last revision.
But Wheatley contends : —
That the sentence, as it is still left standing, may well
enough be understood to imply the dead as well as the
living. For we pray (as it is now) that ' we, witlv all
those that are departed in the true faith of God's holy
X
•306 THE EEFOEMATIOl^ S:BTTLEMENT
'name, may 'have our perfect consummation and bliss ' ;
which is not barely a supposition that all those who are
so departed will have their perfect consummation and
■bliss, but a prayer also that they may have it, viz. that
we with them, and they with us, may be made perfect
together, both in body and soul, in the diernail and ever-
lasting glory of God.
Wheatley then adds a passage (too long to quote)
'from Bishop Cosin, strongly supporting his own
\iew. Palmer, too — I mean the learned author of
the ' Origines ' and of the ' Treatise on the Church ' —
declares that 'the great divines of the English
Church ' are not opposed to the doctrine, and that
* the Church of England herself has never formally
condemned prayers for the dead, but only omitted
them in her Liturgy ' — an omission v^hich he con-
tends had been partially restored v^hen the reasons
which caused the omission were no longer in force.
I have restricted my quotations to Wheatley and.
Palmer because they are acknowledged as standard
authorities, and are generally recommended by our
bishops, I believe, to candidates for ordination. It
would be easy to produce a cloud of witnesses in
support of Sir W. Palmer's assertion that ' the great
divines of the English Church ' sanctioned prayers
for the dead both by precept and example. Jeremy
Taylor, Bishop Bull, Bishop Overall (the author of
the, sacramental part of our Church Catechism),
Thorndike, Collier, Field, Barrow, Andrewes, and
the saintly Wilson and Ken make up a catena which
might very easily be extended. Archbishop Sheldon
THE INTEEMEDIATE STATE 307
and Bishop Blandford, men of no extreme opinions,
confessed that it was their daily practice to pray for
the dead ; and Thorndike and Bishop Barrow beg
the prayers of the faithful for their souls in the
epitaphs which they left behind them.^
A few years ago the legality of prayers for the
dead came before an English court, and was ex-
pressly affirmed by the Dean of the Arches in the
case of Woolfrey v. Breeks.. ' Bpes mea Christus.
Pray for the soul of J. Woolfrey. It is a holy and
wholesome thought to pray for the dead.' This was
the inscription which originated the trial. The
Incumbent refused to admit it into the churchyard,
on the ground that the Church of England did not
sanction prayers for the dead. But the court over-
' Barrow's epitaph is as follows : —
' Exuviae Isaaci Asaphensis Episcopi, in manum Domini depositas,
in spem Isetae resurrectionis, per sola Christi merita. vos trans-
euntes in domum Domini, domum orationis, orate pro conservo vestro
ut inveniat misericordiam in die Domini.'
Wheatley, too, left the following epitaph for his own tomb : —
'Keader, join for him in the ejaculation of St. Paul : — The Lord
grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day.'
These epitaphs show not only that their authors believed that the
Church of England sanctioned prayers for the dead, but, further,
Wheatley's belief that Onesiphorus was dead when St. Paul prayed
for him, a belief of which a dispassionate consideration of the facts
hardly leaves a doubt.
Bishop Heber, a man of moderate opinions, was an advocate for
prayers for the departed on Scriptural and Patristic grounds. He
writes : ' The early Christians, most of them, believed that the con-
dition of such persons ' as were in Hades ' might be made better,
and a milder sentence be obtained for their errors and infirmities
from the Almighty Judge by whom the doom of all creatures shall
be finally settled.' (See his letter in the Diary of a Lady of
Quality, p. 255.)
X 2
308 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
ruled the objection, and sanctioned the inscription,
on the ground (I am quoting the language of the
judgment) that it ' was not illegal, as by no canon or
authority of the Church in these realms had the
practice of praying for the dead been expressly pro-
hibited.' The judge took his stand on the First
Prayer Book of Edward VI., on which the Act of
Uniformity which sanctioned the Second Book
stamped its approval. In strict law the Church of
England sanctioned, and still sanctions, all prayers
publicly offered within the precincts of her church-
yards. But when the question was put to the test
and an officer of the Church of England attempted
to forbid prayers for the dead, and it was decided
that he had no power to refuse his sanction, it seems
to me extraordinary that any persons, at all ac-
quainted with the facts of the case, should commit
themselves to the untenable position that prayers
for the dead are forbidden by the Church of England.
But it does not follow that because the Church
of England has never refused to sanction prayers for
the dead, such prayers are in themselves right and
proper. In order to come to a true conclusion on
this head it is necessary, of course, that we should
understand clearly what prayers for the dead mean
and imply.
Now the first observation that an impartial study
of the question will suggest to an unprejudiced
inquirer is that prayers for the dead are not only
coeval with Christianity, but anterior to it. That
they are coeval with Christianity it would be easy to
THE INTERMEDIATE STATE 309
prove by a chain of evidence which may be considered
demonstrative. This has never been disputed by
any writer of considerable eminence, whatever Jiis
own views may have been. Neander freely admits
it, and so, though somewhat grudgingly, does our
own latitudinarian Bishop Burnet. It may not,
however, be so well known that the lawfulness and
even duty of prayers for the dead has been always
allowed and acted on by the Jews. Among a host of
witnesses that might be cited in proof of that asser-
tion, I will content myself with the following
quotation from Jeremy Taylor : —
We find, he says, by the history of the Maccabees,^
that the Jews did pray and make offerings for the dead,
which also appears by other testimonies, and by their
form of prayers still extant, which they used in the
captivity. Now it is very considerable that, given our
Blessed Saviour did reprove all the evil doctrines and
traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees, and did argue,
concerning the dead and the Resurrection, against the
Sadducees, yet He spake no word against this public
practice, but left it as He found it ; w^hich He, who came
to declare to us all the will of the Father, would not
' ' For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have
risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead.
And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for
those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon
he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered
from sin ' (2 Maccabees xii. 44, 45). This attests the practice of the
Jews, of which, indeed, we have clear evidence in the ritual of the
Temple and Synagogue, in which our Lord must often have joined.
In a book of 'Daily, Sabbath, Festival, and occasional prayers,
according to the Ritual of the German and Polish Jews,' are several
beautiful prayers for the dead.
310 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
have done if it had not been innocent, pious, and full of
charity.
I will now assume that I have established these
three statements : — (1) That the Church of England
has nowhere refused her sanction to prayers for the
dead. (2) That such prayers have been sanctioned
by the Christian Church from the beginning. (3)
That the Christian Cliurch inherited them, with our
Lord's tacit sanction, from the Jewish Church. If
this be admitted, it follows, I think, that the doctrine
is founded on some truth or group of truths, which
have their roots in our nature. What are these
truths ? Let us think for a moment.
Consider the mass of mankind, and you will find
it impossible to accept the Calvinistic theory, which
divides the race by an invisible but impassable gulf,
even in this life, making it absolutely impossible for
those who are on opposite sides ever to exchange
positions. If the study of human nature teaches
anything certain, it is this — that man's eternal
happiness results from the development of his
nature to the fullest perfection of which it is capable,
and that such development is, with God's help, in
man's own power. But how few even approximate
to that perfection here ! Will not the facts of the
world around us force home on any thoughtful mind
the conviction that the vast majority of mankind
pass out of this life with undeveloped characters —
far indeed from that perfection of their powers
which would enable them to see and enjoy the vision
THE INTERMEDIATE STATE 311
of ' the King in His beauty ; ' but far also — blessed
be God ! — from that utter and hopeless demorahsa-
tion of character to which Aristotle gives the name
of uKoXaala, and which the writer of the Epistle to
the Hebrews characterises as past possibility of
repentance.
The question therefore arises, What happens to
this multitude of neutral characters when death
severs their connection with this life? Our sense
of natural justice revolts against the idea of their
being eternally lost. Our knowledge of human
nature, on the other hand, assures us that such
persons could no more enjoy the pure delights of the
heavenly life than an ignorant clown could enjoy
himself in a royal drawing-room ; and, since human
character does not develop per saltum, if these
persons are ever at all to be 'made meet for the
inheritance of the saints in light,' their growth in
grace will not cease with the last breath of this
earthly life ; their training must still go on till they
are able with unclouded eyes to behold the Sun of
Righteousness.
The reader's thoughts will, of course, have
anticipated my remark that this train of reasoning
leads logically to some doctrine of purgatory. It
does, and the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council, in the case of ' Essays and Eeviews,*"
decided that some kind of purgatory was an admis-
sible doctrine in the Church of England. Tha
purgatory which Mr. Wilson contended for success-
fully extended,, it is true„ indefinitely beyond what
312 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
he calls * the great adjudication ' ; but that fact makes
no difference to my argument. Now, surely, the
fact that the Court of Appeal admitted Mr. Wilson's
doctrine of purgatory as compatible with his position
as a beneficed clergyman is a legal confirmation of
the distinction which Dr. Newman drew, in Tract
Ninety, between * the Komish doctrine of purgatory,'
censured in the 22nd Article, and any other doctrine
of purgatory. And this distinction is still further
marked by the fact that in the original form of the
Article the doctrine was condemned as * the doctrine
of schoolmen.' As the controversy between the two
Churches proceeded, it naturally became more per-
sonal, and so for ' the doctrine of schoolmen ' was
substituted 'the Komish doctrine.' The Article
could hardly be aimed at -the Tridentine decree on
the subject, for that decree did not exist when the
Thirty-nine Articles were published. We have
already seen that the decree of Trent only says : —
* There is a purgatory, and the souls there detained
are helped by prayer, and chiefly by the acceptable
sacrifice of the altar.' Nothing beyond that state-
ment is de fide in the Church of Eome. A Eoman
Catholic is not committed to anything beyond the
bare statement that there is a place intermediate
between this hfe and perfect bliss, where imperfect
souls are trained for perfection and helped by the
prayers of the Church on earth. In a selection from
the writings of St. Catherine of Genoa, pubhshed by
Cardinal Manning, I find the pains of purgatory
explained to mean the flames of divine love con-
THE INTEEMEDTATE STATE 313
suming the soul with longings which cannot be
satisfied till it is sufficiently purified to be able to
enjoy the full fruition of • the Godhead. * When the
soul finds itself on its way back,' she says, 'to its
first state (of innocence), it is so kindled with the
desire of becoming one with God, that this desire
becomes its purgatory. . . . The instinct by which
it is kindled and the impediment by which it is
hindered constitute its purgatory.' That is the
thought which permeates and underlies all her views
on the subject of purgatory, and her writings have a
distinguished place in the Church of Eome.
Those who are acquainted with Dr. Newman's
beautiful 'Dream of Gerontius,' will remember the
subjective view which he takes of the pains of
purgatory. The guardian angel which bears the
soul of Gerontius into the presence-chamber of the
Eternal King thus describes what followed : —
The eager spirit has darted from my hold,
And with intemperate energy of love
Flies to the dear feet of Emmanuel ;
But, ere it reach them, the keen sanctity,
Which, with its effluence, like a glory, clothes
And circles round the Crucified, has seized,
And scorch'd, and shrivell'd it ; and now it lies
Passive and still before the awful throne.
O happy, suffering soul ; for it is safe,
Consumed, yet quicken'd, by the glance of God.
On coming to itself, the soul is represejited as
singing a plaintive prayer to be ' taken away ' from
314 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the ravishing vision of its God to a place of purifica-
tion : —
There, motionless and happy in my pain,
Lone, not forlorn, —
There will I sing my sad perpetual strain
Until the morn.
There will I sing, and soothe my stricken breast,
Which ne'er can cease
To throb, and pine, and languish, till possest
Of its Sole Peace.
Do not let us be frightened by mere words in
such way as to discard any truth. Purgatory means
a place of purification ; and which of the sons of
men, except the Son of Man, has ever left this earth
so pure as to need no purging before admission to
the presence of the all-pure God? Let us rescue
words, good in themselves, from any accretion of
error that may have gathered round them. This is
a wiser plan than to cast them away, with, perchance,
some precious truth clinging to them.
Another truth which underlies the doctrine of
prayers for the dead I believe to be this : that the
race of man, and pre-eminently the Christian portion
of it, is one family, and that death does not and can-
not destroy that network of natural interest and
sympathies which binds us together and make us
necessary to each other on earth. The great evil of
our nature, the cause of nearly all its woes, is selfish-
ness — the repudiation of our family relationship and
responsibilities. How does God contrive to cure us
of that selfishness? By making us necessjary to
THE INTEEMEDIATE STATE 315
each other. Hence the duty of intercessory prayer ;
and if the Church on earth and the Church in
Paradise be one, why should intercessory prayer
cease at death ? ' To forbid prayers for the dead,
Mr. Gladstone once said to me, ' is to undermine the
doctrine of prayer for the living.' This view is
strongly supported by the late E. H. Hutton, in one
of those thoughtful essays which he used to con-
tribute to the ' Spectator.' ^
One of the most difficult of mental exercises is to
realise the existence of the spiritual world as an
objective reality, inhabited by spiritual beings, in-
cluding the souls of the departed : not unconscious,
not idle, not unprogressive, but active, docile,
unlearning and learning, and thus going on to
perfection. The Twenty-second Article, indeed, so
far from condemning every doctrine of purgatory,
appears to sanction some doctrine of purgatory.
For to condemn a particular doctrine of purgatory is
to imply a permissible doctrine ; such, for instance,
as Mr. Gladstone, following Butler, expresses as fol-
lows : ' The Christian dead are in a progressive state,
and the appointed office of the interval between
death and resurrection is reasonably believed to be
the corroboration of every good and holy habit, and
the effacement of all remains of infirmity and vice.' ^
That is the doctrine of the great Anglican divines,
• The Essay on Prayers for the Dead has just been republished,
with others, by his niece. See Aspects of Religious and Scientific
Thought, No. xxxi.
2 Studies subsidiary to Btctler^s Works, pp. 153-4.
316 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and it is surely the doctrine of reason and charity.
Nor is behef in the purification and moral develop-
ment of souls in the intermediate state confined to
High Churchmen. The late Dean Stanley held it
strongly. Indeed, a good pari of this chapter was
in substance contributed by me, on the Dean's advice,
to the ' Contemporary Eeview,' in an article which
he had read in manuscript with entire approval.
Maurice also was a firm upholder of the doctrine ;
and so was Charles Kingsley, as any one can see for
himself by consulting his * Letters and Memoirs of
his Life,' by his widow.^ In one of his letters to
myself, after remarking on Puritan eschatology — 'i.e.
the doctrine which the Puritans (as far as I know)
first introduced, namely, that the fate of every man
is irrevocably fixed at the moment of death ' — he
proceeds : —
I need not tell you that this is not the Catholic
doctrine ; that the Church has held, from a very early age,
the belief in an intermediate state. That belief was
distorted and abused, in later times, as the Eomish
doctrine of purgatory. But the denunciation of that
doctrine in the Thirty-nine Articles (as Dr. Newman
pointed out in Tract Ninety) does not denounce any
primitive doctrine of purgatory ; nay, rather allows it by
the defining adjective * Eomish.' That this Puritan
eschatology is no part of the creed of the Church of
England is proved by her final rejection of the Article
affirming endless punishment. It is as well here to say
that I do not deny endless punishment.
The truth is that if we give our hearts fair play
' Vol. ii. pp. b95-6. . First Edition.
THE INTEEMEDIATE STATE 817
and free scope, prayer for the departed is a natural
impulse. The heart of man instinctively refuses to
believe in death as its natural and final portion. It
searches for its vanished kindred, and will not believe
that thej^ cease to be, or that its interest in them, or
theirs in it, is broken. It is a universal sentiment of
humanity, seen in various forms and under divers con-
ditions : in an Old Mortality going up and down the
country laboriously renewing the time-worn tomb-
stones of the Covenanters, and in the great orator of
Athens, who knew the spell that it held when he
put a moment's fire into the breasts of his degenerate
countrymen by invoking ' the dead at Marathon.'
It is also seen in those legends of many lands which
represent some hero or national benefactor as enjoy-
ing a happy immunity from the last debt of humanity :
our own Arthur still living in the vale of Avalon, or
the great Barbarossa sleeping in his mystic cave till
his country needs his trusty sword.
The fact is, we all pray for the dead — at least, all
loving hearts do. When our beloved pass away
from us we follow them with our longing thoughts,
we speculate on their condition in the world unseen,
we wish them well. And what is a wish but a
prayer inarticulate? ^ Every good and holy desire,'
says Hooker, * though it lack the form, hath notwith-
standing in itself the substance, and with Him the
force, of a prayer. Who regardeth the very moanings
and sighs of the heart of man.' And what is that
philosophic threnody ' In Memoriam ' — one of the
greatest poems in our language — but a passionate
318 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
protest against any admission that death can separate
hearts that have loved each other on earth ? See,
too, how prayer for the departed breaks out of the
heart instinctively in the poet's noble ode on the
death of the Duke of Wellington : —
God accept him ; Christ receive him.
I wonder if it has ever occurred to any of those
who denounce prayers for the dead as a flagrant
proof of disloyalty to the Church of England that
they include Her Majesty and the royal family in
that dishonouring accusation. For prayers for the
departed are said at the anniversary services held in
memory of the departed members of the royal family.
At Prince Henry of Battenberg's funeral, the offi-
ciating priest prayed : ' Give rest, Christ, to Thy
servant with Thy Saints,' which is substantially out
of the ancient liturgies.
Those who have read the very interesting * Life of
Princess Alice,' by her sister Princess Christian, will
remember some passages of exceeding pathos relating
to the tragic death of Princess Alice's boy. Her
second son, a bright child of two years, known in
her letters as 'Frittie,' fell out of a .'window while
her back was momentarily turned, atid was killed
before her very eyes. Born during his father's
absence in the war with France, and delicate from
his birth, he was endowed with the intellectual
brightness which often goes with feebleness of
bodily organisation, and was naturally a special pet
of his mother. The sudden quenching of his life by a
THE INTEKMEDIATE STATE 319
violent death was of course a terrible blow to her,
which she bore with heroic fortitude. There is a
wonderful pathos in some of her Teferences to her
lost treasure — a vivid vision of suppressed sorrow
which almost enables us to see her grief : —
He was such a bright child. It seems so quiet next
door. I miss the little feet, the coming to me, for we
lived so much together. . . . He loved flowers so much.
I can't see one along the roadside without wishing to
pick it for him. In my own house it seems to me as if I
never could play again on that piano where little hands
were nearly always thrust when I wanted to play. ... I
had played so often lately that splendid, touching funeral
march of Chopin's, and I remember it is the last thing I
played, and then the boys were running in the room.
Having so many girls, I was so proud of our two boys !
The pleasure did not last long, but he is mine more than
ever now. He seems near me always, and I carry his
precious image in my heart everywhere.
Who can read these moving sentences, these
chastened moanings of a bruised heart, without
feeling that the habitual attitude of the bereaved
mother's heart was one of prayer for her lost boy ?
How natural the habit is comes out incidentally in
one of Princess Alice's letters. * Ernie,' the elder
boy, ' always prays for Frittie ; and talks to me of
him when we walk together.'
I am persuaded that much of the unbelief and
agnosticism of the day is due to two causes : first, the
vague and unreal way in which the spiritual world
is regarded by the mass of professing Christians, and
330 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
preached about by a large number of the clergy ;
secondly, 'the Puritan eschatology,' which distressed
Charles Kingsley, and which teaches that all the
saved pass straight to heaven at the moment of
death. That is a view which reason, when it seriously
considers it, cannot accept. Very few are they who
are fit to enjoy the Beatific Vision when they pass
from earth into the spiritual realm. Newman says,
in one of the most striking of his Parochial Sermons,
that, 'if we could imagine a punishment for an
unholy, reprobate soul, we perhaps could not fancy
a greater than to summon it to heaven.' Indeed, it
must be so, for the key to happiness is correspon-
dence with our environment. But what concord
could there be between holiness and unholiness?
between a matured sinner and a glorified saint ?
between the diabolic and the angelic temper?
between Christ and Belial ? Here good and evil
are so mingled that we cannot realise their mutual
and irreconcilable antagonism. In heaven they
would face each other at opposite poles, mutually
repellent. To admit an unholy man to heaven
would therefore be no boon to him. Of all imagi-
nable places, he would find himself least at home
there. His whole nature would need transformation.
But that is not the work of a moment, of an hour,
of a day • it is a slow, gradual process, governed by
the law which tarns impressions into habits, and
habits into character. Heaven is intended for
certain characters, and none but they could ever
enjoy it.
THE INTEEMEDIATE STATE 321
But we are not, in this matter, dealing with full-
fledged wickedness, but with inchoate characters,
and characters that have been moulded awry from
no fault of their own — multitudes born and reared
in the midst of such surroundings as gave them no
chance of avoiding the evil and choosing the good.
These two classes doubtless form a large proportion
of Christians, to say nothing of the heathen. The
moral sense of any thinking man will rebel against
the notion that all those creatures of an almighty,
all-seeing, all-loving God are doomed to an eternity of
suffering. And it is because this is the doctrine
of much of our popular theology that so many have
rejected Christianity altogether, in mistake for a
spurious counterfeit.
The Catholic doctrine— by which I mean, as
our Church means, the doctrine of Christendom
while it was still one — is very different. Avoiding
the rashness of passing judgment on any individual,
let him be the greatest of heresiarchs — for the
Athanasian Creed condemns characters, not persons ;
Arians, not Arius — it teaches that there is an inter-
mediate state where the imperfect are made perfect,
the ignorant enlightened, the vacillating confirmed,
the crooked made straight. That this process of
amelioration will in many cases involve pain who
can doubt ? ' We have no right,' as Mr. Gladstone
says in one of his profound ' Studies subsidiary to
Butler's Works,' ^ * to assert that " the redeeming
and consummating process will be accomplished
' P. 254.
Y
322 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
without an admixture of salutary and accepted
pain." ' Multitudes pass out of this life with crooked
characters, from no fault of their own, like limbs
badly set, and requiring to be unset or broken before
they can be made straight. For these and for the
crowds of Christians who pass out of life neither very
bad nor very good, unformed in religious habits
either for heaven or for hell, Puritan eschatology
makes no provision. They are not fit for heaven :
who will dare to say that they are lost? The
Church, supported by Holy Scripture, provides for
them in the Intermediate State.
Dr. Welldon, now Metropolitan of India, a
broad-minded Evangelical, insists on the Christian
doctrine of prayers for the departed, and on the fact
of retributive discipline going on in the Intermediate
State : ^ —
But if a variety of destinies in the unseen world,
whether of happiness or of suffering, is reserved for man-
kind, and yet more if the principle of that world is not
inactivity but energy or character or life, it is reasonable
to believe that the souls, which enter upon the future
state with the taint of sin clinging to them in whatever
form or degree, will be slowly cleansed by a disciplinary
or purificatory process from whatever it is that, being
evil in itself, necessarily obstructs or obscures the vision
of God. The parable of Dives and Lazarus seems clearly
to indicate a certain moral progress as the effect of retric
butive discipline.^
This is the class of religious questions which
' The Hope of Immortality, chap. vi.
2 See a striking passage on the need of purgatorial discipline, in
the late Mr. W, R. Greg's Enigmas of Life, chap, vii,
THE INTEEMEDIATE STATE 323
interest working men and women much more than
those which are supposed to constitute a ' crisis in
the Church ; ' and Members of ParHament who think
otherwise ' are up in a balloon,' to quote a celebrated
phrase of Mr. Gladstone. I had some experience of
this five years ago while delivering a course of
sermons on the Intermediate State in Ripon Cathe-
dral. The sermons were reported in full in some
Yorkshire papers and in one London paper. This
brought upon me a mass of letters from all parts
of the kingdom, chiefly from working men. The
following may serve as a specimen : —
Thank God for the new energy to persevere your
sermon on ' The Many Mansions ' has put into a person,
of * weak and wavering will.' To such natures — and their
name is legion — sermons are too often simply 'dampers.*
They don't give us hope, and it is hopelessness, more than
anything else, that drives us to despair, and to giving up
persevering. We hard-working people have little time or
inclination to read religious books, and such of us as care
for religion look to sermons for instruction by the way.
Too often we get on the one side, ' The Church, the
Church,' and, on the other, ' Conversion ' and ' Only believe.'
If only we could get such a Christ-like Gospel as yoii
preach, there would not be so many unbelievers and ones
quite indifferent to religion amongst us. I know several
who say, 'What's the good of trying? I always break
down. I'm sick and weary of it all.' I've felt so myself,
but. never will again after that sermon. Hope will make
me persevere.
I quote this, italics and all, as an illustration of
the kind of teaching for which the working classes
Y 2
324 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
are hungering. They will go, and do go, to the
churches where they get it, and lights, and coloured
vestments, and incense, will not repel, but rather
attract them. Ceremonial is nothing in itself ; but
it may be made a useful auxiliary of religious as of
civil life.
I will now quit this part of the subject with a
beautiful passage from Tennyson's * Mqrte d' Arthur,'
where the duty of praying for the dead is argumenta-
tively enjoined in the person of the poet's hero.
Pray for my soul. More things are wrought by prayer
Than this world dreams of. Wherefore let thy voice
Eise like a fountain for me night and day.
For what are men better than sheep or goats
That nourish a blind life within the brain,
If, knowing God, they lift not hands of prayer
Both for themselves and those who call them friend ?
For so the whole world round is every way
Bound by gold chains about the feet of God.
Now I come to the modern Eoman doctrine of
Purgatory, which some of our younger clergy
strangely mistake for the doctrine of the Catholic
Church — that is, of the Church of ' the ancient
fathers and doctors ' to which our own Church
refers us. That doctrine is based on two articles of
belief : first, that purgatory is a place of torment,
differing only from the torments of hell in point of
duration ; secondly, that souls are constantly passing
from purgatory to heaven, with more or less delay
according to their moral condition and the interest
taken in them, and the masses said for them by
THE INTEEMEDIATE STATE 325
friends on earth. The late Kev. W. Palmer, who
had an intimate knowledge of the Greek Church,
states the difference between the Latin and Oriental
Churches with general accuracy as follows : ^ —
The doctrine of Purgatory is taught by the Latins, and
is rejected by the Greeks. The doctrine of the Fathers
and of the early Church, of the present Greek or
* Orthodox ' Church, and of all the other separated
Eastern Churches, is this, that generally speaking, and
upon the whole, the state of the faithful departed is a
state of light, and rest, and peace, and refreshment ; of
happiness far greater than any belonging to this life, yet
inferior to that which shall be enjoyed after the resurrec-
tion and the final Judgment. The doctrine of the Latins, on
' Dissertations on the Orthodox Communion, pp. 124-5. — This
Palmer was a brother of the late Lord Selborne : a most
learned and able man, who spent several years in Eussia, studying
the history and doctrines of that Church and kindred Churches.
Eventually he joined the Church of Kome. He must be distin-
guished from the Kev. Sir William Palmer (previously quoted), also
a most learned man, and author of the well-known Treatise on the
Church of Christ, of the Origines Liturgicce, and other works. He
lived and died an English Churchman.
Of the purgatorial fire Bellarmine says : • It is the common mind
of theologians that it is true and proper fire, and of the same kind
as our element.' And he gives the volcanic fire of iEtna as an
illustration [De Purg. ii. 11). The late Father Faber says of his
Church : ' It loves to represent purgatory simply as a hell which is
not eternal. Violence, confusion, wailing, horror, preside over its
description. It dwells, and truly, on the terribleness of the pain of
sense which the soul is mysteriously permitted to endure. The fire
is the same fire as that of hell, created for the single and express
purpose of giving torture' {All for Jesus, pp. 335-7).
It is hardly an exaggeration to say that this sort of teaching
represents a different religion from that of which we read in the
early centuries of Christianity.
326 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
the other hand, is this, that generally speaking, and upon
the whole, the state of the faithful departed is a state of
penal torment, differing from that of hell only in the
certainty of future deliverance.
Palmer admits, however, that, although the
Greeks reject the word * purgatory ' on account of its
evil associations, they nevertheless believe that
many of the departed are in an imperfect condition,
with stains of sin cleaving to them ; and ' of such
they think as needing the prayers and oblations of
the Church on earth to procure their refreshment,
and to lighten them tcov Kars^ovrcov avrous dvtapSv.
On the other hand, the Latins think of the higher
souls that they either go straight through purgatory,
or are speedily released from it.'
The doctrine of the Eastern Church, in all its
branches, is thus seen to be identical with that of
the ancient Church and of the Church of England.
It believes that no disembodied spirit has ever
entered, or ever will enter, heaven, till after the
general resurrection. And this is the unanimous
doctrine of the primitive Church. By ' heaven ' I
mean the realm of the Beatific Vision, the ' kingdom '
into which our Lord says that He will invite the
saints — evidently for the first time — after the final
Judgment. This explanation is necessary because
the Bible almost always speaks of heaven in the
plural — 'the heavens.' The spiritual world, He
tells us in another place, is a sphere of ' many
mansions,' abodes suited to the ethical condition,
and needs of each of the diversified multitudes who
, THE INTEKMEDIATE STATE 321
constantly pass from earth into the unseen home.
And as progress, in one direction or another, is a
law of intellectual and moral life, we may assume
that souls in the Intermediate State, while waiting
for the Judgment, rise from sphere to sphere in the
altitude of being in proportion to the purification of
their characters and the expansion of their faculties.
The present Pope, a few years ago, invited all
the Eastern Churches and the people of England to
acknowledge his supremacy and prerogatives, and
restore the unity of Christendom by submission to
him. The Patriarch of the Orthodox Eastern
Church sent a powerful answer, signed by himself
and his suffragans, declaring that there could be
no union till the Church of Eome abandoned her
innovations and heterodox doctrines, and returned
to the faith of the ancient fathers and councils — the
ground always taken by the Church of EnglsCnd.
This is what the Eastern bishops say on the subject
of the Intermediate State : ' The one Holy CathoHc
and Apostolic Church of the seven (Ecumenical
Councils, in accordance with the inspired teaching
of Holy Scripture and with the Apostolic tradition
of old, in praying invokes the mercy of God for
pardon and repose of those who are asleep in the
Lord. But the Papal Church, from the twelfth
century onward, invented and accumulated in the
person of the Pope — as if he enjoyed exclusively
some special privilege — a multitude of innovations
respecting purgatory, the superfluity of grace in
saints, and its distribution among those deficient
328 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
in it, and such like ; and she has further propounded
the belief in a complete recompense of the just
before the general Kesurrection and Judgment/
That sums up clearly and tersely the complete
subversion of the ancient doctrine by the Church
of Eome. The two cardinal errors of that sub-
version are (1) the doctrine that purgatory is, if I
may use the expression with reverence, a sort of
clearing-house for souls, under the jurisdiction and
control of the Pope and his delegates the clergy ;
and (2), growing out of this doctrine, a traffic in
souls, culminating in the shameless abuses associated
with the name of Tetzel, and which did more to
bring about the Eef ormation, especially in Germany,
than any other cause.
I have discussed at some length in another work ^
the subject of the Intermediate State and the Koman
doctrine of Purgatory, especially the belief that souls
pass through purgatory to the enjoyment of the
Beatific Vision before the Judgment Day. Those
who wish to consult the authoritative Eoman teaching
on that point will find it stated with great clearness
in Perrone's ' Prselectiones.' ^
As to the traffic in indulgences and pardons, I
know well that Eoman Catholics in this country and
in most enlightened countries would energetically
condemn the abuses which flourished in such rank
luxuriance at the period of the Eef ormation. But
all danger of their recurrence cannot be regarded as
* Life Here and Hereafter : Longmans.
2 Vol. i. pp. 806-848. Paris edition of 1842.
THE INTEEMEDIATE STATE 329
out of the question while the exorbitant claims of
the Papacy, and its needs as aspiring to temporal
dominion, remain uncancelled. I may be supposed,
even by some Eoman Catholics, to exaggerate the
claim of the Papacy to jurisdiction over souls beyond
the grave. But the truth is that I might have used
stronger language. To give an example : The late
Pope, in replying to a deputation of Belgians who had
presented him with a papal tiara on June 18, 1871,
used these words : —
' Ye offer me gifts : a triple crown, symbol of my
triple royal dignity, in Heaven, on earth, and in
Purgatory. And my kingdom will not perish,
because the Pope will always be, as I have been.
Pope, wherever he may be ; at one time in his own
States, to-day at the Vatican, some other day in
prison. But I accept this crown as a symbol of
resurrection. It will not serve me to-day, but
certainly in the days of my triumph.* ^
These discourses were addressed ' to the faithful
of Rome and of the world,' with the sub-title ' a tutti
i fedeli di Roma e dell' orbe,' and were carefully
revised by the Pope himself. How far do they fulfil
* Discorsi del Sommo Pontefice Pio IX, pronunziati in Vaticano
ai Fedeli di Roma e delV orbe dal principio della sua prigione fino al
presente, 3 vols. The passage which I have quoted is in the first
volume, p. 133, and is as follows in the original : ' Voi mi offrite dei
doni : un Triregno, simbolo della mia tripla dignita reale, nel Cielo,
sopra la terra, e nel Purgatorio. E il Mio regno non perira, perch^
il Papa sara, come fu, sempre Papa, dovunque ei sia ; una volta nei
suoi Stati, oggi al Vaticano, un altro giorno in prigione. Ma lo
accetto questa corona, come un simbolo di risorgimento. Ella non
mi servira oggi, ma bensi nei giorni del trionfo.'
330 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
the conditions of infallible utterances, as defined by
the Vatican decree ? It is an interesting question,
on which I may have something to say when I come
to discuss the question of Infallibility. Meanwhile I
trust that I have sufficiently explained the doctrine of
the Church of England regarding the Intermediate
State, and shown wherein it differs from the teaching
of the Church of Rome.
331
CHAPTEE X
ECCLESIASTICAL COUETS AND THE
ORNAMENTS RUBRIC
TuBfortiter in re was more conspicuous than the
suaviter in modo in the statement lately put forth
by the Council of the English Church Union. That
is usually the case with statements declaring
doctrines, whether religious or political. They aim,
if drawn up by honest men, at directness and terse-
ness, and avoid rhetoric and vagueness. And the con-
sequence is that they commonly startle persons who
are not familiar with such subjects. But it is some-
times good for people to be startled. It sets them
athinking, and drives them back on first principles.
Now it happens that the sentence which has caused
most excitement in the statement of the English
Church Union is the one sentence which is capable
of the easiest defence. Here it is : ' We have denied,
and we deny again, the right of the Crown or of
Parliament to determine the doctrine, the discipline,
and the ceremonial of the Church of England.'
This frank utterance has made the cup of Sir
William Harcourt's indignation overflow in a torrent
of invective. He denounces Lord Halifax as * the
332 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
ecclesiastical Jack Cade,' leading an ' open rebellion ' ;
and he declares dogmatically that ' the only reply to
this nonsense which it is necessary to give is that
the Crown and Parliament, when they enacted the
Prayer Book in the teeth of the bishops and the
clergy, did determine all the conditions of the
Church of England as established by law, and have
continued to do so for more than three centuries.'
And Sir "William goes on to declare that the allega-
tion which he denounces as ' open rebellion ' * is a
direct denial of the first principles of the English
Reformation, which was the work of the laity for the
laity, who also in the tribunals for the final decision
of Church functions have provided for themselves a
necessary and adequate safeguard.'
I venture humbly and respectfully, but decidedly,
not only to traverse every one of these statements,
but to prove that the assertion, which Sir WilHam
Harcourt has stigmatised as a signal for * open
rebellion,' is nothing more than a platitude of con-
stitutional law. I recognise the temerity of such an
assertion in opposition to a distinguished statesman
and lawyer, who is, moreover, one of the most
formidable intellectual athletes among living contro-
versialists. But I am sure that Sir WilHam
Harcourt will be the last to resent my rashness, for
he has himself set me the example by sundry excur-
sions into the field of theology, which has lain as
much outside his normal studies as that of law has
lain outside mine *To the law and to the testi-
mony,' then. In opposition to Sir Wilham Harcourt
THE ORNAMENTS RUBEIC 333
I respectfully lay down, and shall endeavour to
prove, the following propositions : —
1. That the English Eeformation was much /
more a political than a theological movement ; the
professed aim of the Keformers being to liberate the
Church and nation from the domination and inter-
meddling of the Pope. The Eeformers disclaimed
any intention to create a new Church, or a new
creed, or a new ceremonial further than by the
abolition of certain abuses and accretions which had
in the course of ages got mixed up with the ancient
ceremonial of the Church of England. Both clergy
and laity appealed to the Church of the CEcumenical
Councils (universally accepted) as the standard of
faith and worship.
2. That it is incorrect to say that ' the Crown and
Parliament enacted the Prayer Book in the teeth of
the bishops and clergy,' and that neither Crown nor
Parliament has ever claimed or exercised the right
of determining the doctrine, discipline, or ceremonial
of the Church without the Church's own sanction.
3. That this implies no derogation from the
constitutional supremacy of the Crown in matters
ecclesiastical.
1. The first two propositions belong to the
region of ecclesiastical history more than to that of
law, and there perhaps it is not presumptuous for me
to say that I am perhaps more at home — at least I
ought to be — than Sir William Harcourt. But his
authority would nevertheless be likely to overpower
mine, and I shall therefore appeal to names which
334 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Sir William himself will admit to be not inferior to
his own.
No man of our time studied the history of the
[Reformation with a more unbiased mind, a more
minute care, or a more comprehensive grasp of the
whole subject than Mr. Gladstone. He was singu-
larly well equipped for the task. To a wide and
accurate range of reading he added a remarkable
aptitude for theological and legal studies, and his
eristic discipline in the House of Commons made
him sharp to detect a flaw in an argument. Brought
up an Evangelical, he began his special study of the
Keformation with his mind biased, as far as it was
biased at all, in that direction. Having no foregone
conclusion to uphold, he kept his mind open to such
light as an impartial study of facts might shed
upon it. Now this is what Mr. Gladstone says : —
With us the question lay simply between the nation
and the Pope of Rome, and its first form as a religious
question had reference purely to his supremacy. . . .
That the question of the English Reformation was
eminently and specially national ; that it was raised as
between this island of the free on the one hand, and an
' Italian priest ' on the other, is a remarkable truth which
derives equally remarkable illustrations from our history.
The main subject of contention between the State and the
Romanists, or recusants as they were called, was not
their adhesion to this or that Popish doctrine, but their
acknowledgment of an unnational and anti-national head.
To meet this case the oath of supremacy was framed. . . .
The British Government -required of its subjects the
renunciation, not of Popish doctrines, but of the ecclesi-
THE OENAMENTS EUBRIC 335
astical supremacy of the Pope. ... It was not the
existing Church as a rehgious institution, but the secular
ambition of the Papal See, against which security was
sought by renouncing its jurisdiction.^
Newman's bias, after he became a Koman
Catholic, would have been to make the most of the
religious question as the motive cause of the Eefor-
mation. But he was an honest man and had
studied the question conscientiously, and this is his
conclusion : —
Not any religious doctrine at all, but a political
principle, was the primary English idea at that time
[reign of Elizabeth] of 'Popery.' And what was that
principle, and how could it best be kept out of England ?
What was the great question in the days of Henry and
Elizabeth? The Supremacy. . . . Did Henry VIII.
religiously hold justification by faith only? Did he
disbelieve Purgatory? Was Elizabeth zealous for the
marriage of the clergy ? or had she a conscience against
the Mass ? The supremacy of the Pope wa's the essence
of the * Popery ' to which, at the time of the Articles, the
Supreme Head or Governor of the English Church was
so violently hostile.^
Freeman had a religious devotion to the virtue
of historical accuracy, and he comes to the same
conclusion as Mr. Gladstone and Cardinal New-
man : —
Nothing was further from the mind of either Henry
the Eighth or of Elizabeth than that either of them was
' The State in its Relations ivith the Church, pp. 174, 189-90.
^ A;pologia, p. 1G2, The italics are Newman's.
336 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
doing anything new. Neither of them ever thought for
a moment of establishing a new Church or of estabhshing
anything at all. In their own eyes they were not esta-
blishing but reforming ; they were neither pulling down
nor setting up, but simply putting to-rights. They were
getting rid of innovations and corruptions ; they were
casting off an usurped foreign jurisdiction, and restoring
to the Crown its ancient authority over the State ecclesi-
astical.^
The late Dr. Brewer edited, with learned intro-
ductions, several of the volumes published under the
auspices of the Master of the Kolls. His introduc-
tion to the papers relating to the reign of Henry VIH.
makes a goodly quarto volume of 572 pages. He had
studied the history of the sixteenth and seventeeth
centuries with great care, and he agrees in the main
with the authorities already cited : —
But the Reformation did not owe its origin to Tyndal
or to Parliament ; to the corruptions of the clergy, or to
oppression of the Ecclesiastical Courts. There is no
reason to suppose that the nation as a whole was discon-
tented with the old religion. Facts point to the opposite
conclusion. . . . Nor, considering the temper of the
English people, is it probable that immorality could have
existed among the ancient clergy to the degree which the
exaggeration of poets, preachers, and satirists might lead
us to suppose. The existence of such corruption is not
justified by authentic documents, or by an impartial and
broad estimate of the character and conduct of the nation
before the Reformation. . . . But though the Reformation
advanced no further [than the abolition of Papal
Supremacy] in the reign of Henry VIII., and he still
> Disestablishment and Disendowment, p. 38.
THE ORNAMENTS RUBEIC 337
maintained the rites, ceremonies, and doctrines of the
ancient faith, it was already in his reign irrevocably
established.^
Macaulay's summing up of the Eeformation
period is not remarkable for its accuracy, and is
scornful and somewhat flippant. But he, too,
makes the supremacy the testing question. Elizabeth
as well as Henry VIII., he says,
certainly had no objection to the theology of Rome.
The Royal supremacy was to supersede the Papal ; but
' the Catholic doctrines and rites were to be retained in
the Church of England.' Elizabeth clearly discerned
the advantages which were to be derived from a close
connection between the monarchy and the priesthood.
At the time of her accession, indeed, she evidently
meditated a partial reconciliation wdth Rome; and
throughout her whole life she leaned strongly to some of
the most obnoxious parts of the Catholic system.^
But we are not dependent on second-hand testi-
mony for our knowledge of the position taken up
by Elizabeth; her words are on record. In her
Admonitions of 1559 she declares that she ' neither
doth nor ever will challenge any other authority
than that was challenged and lately used by the
noble kings of famous memory. King Henry VIII.
and King Edw^ard VI., which is, and was, of ancient
time due to the Imperial Crown of this Eealm.'
And again, in the year 1569, on the suppression of
' Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII. iv. 551.
2 Essays, i. 131, 133.
Z
338 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
the northern rebeUion, the Queen published a pro-
clamation, in which she said
that she claimed no other ecclesiastical authority than
had been due to her predecessors ; that she pretended no
right to define articles of faith, or to change ancient
ceremonies formerly adopted by the Catholic and
Apostolic Church . . . ; but that she conceived it her duty
to take care that all estates under her rule should live in
the faith and obedience of the Christian religion ; to see
all laws ordained for that end duly observed; and to
provide that the Church be governed by archbishops,
bishops, and ministers.
And then she assured her people that she meant
not
to molest them for religious opinions provided they did
not gainsay the Scriptures, or the Creeds Apostolic and
Catholic, nor for matters of religious ceremony as long as
they should outwardly conform to the laws of the realm,
which enforced the frequentation of Divine service in the
ordinary churches.^
It would be easy to go on multiplying authorities ;
but these will suffice to establish my first proposition,
that the motive cause of the Reformation was
political rather than doctrinal, and was centred in
the question of the Papal supremacy.
2. I now proceed to give evidence for my second
proposition. Sir William Harcourt has offered only
one piece of evidence in support of his view that the
Prayer Book is the offspring solely of the Crown
» Lingaid's Hist. v. 295.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 339
and Parliament ' in the teeth of the bishops and
clergy.' His solitary proof, which he appears to
regard as crucial, is the opposition to the Uniformity
Act of 1559 by all the bishops present in the House
of Lords in that division, and the verbal omission
from the Act afterwards of the words * the Lorda
spiritual ' as assenting to the Act. I shall examine
that point presently. But why does Sir William
fix on that year and that Act of Uniformity exclu-
sively as if it possessed a sacrosanct character and
nullified all that preceded and succeeded it ? For no
other reason that I can imagine than that it is the
only fact in the whole history of the Keformation
which gives a colourable pretext to his theory.
There are other Acts of Uniformity before and after
1559 in which the assent of the Lords spiritual is
mentioned. Why should they be excluded from the
evidence available on this subject? That style of
controversy will never do. It offends equally the
canons of logic, justice, and historical criticism. Now
let us look at the facts.
The norm of our present Prayer Book is to be
found in the ' Order of the Communion ' published
on March 8, 1548. It was compiled by seven
bishops (including Archbishop Cranmer and Bishop
Kidley), and the Deans of Christ Church, Oxford,
St. Paul's, Lincoln, Exeter, the Master of Trinity,
Cambridge, and Dr. Kobertson, afterwards Dean of
Durham.
This service left the Office of the Mass to be said
in Latin to the end of the consecration prayer and the
z 2
340 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
communion of the priest, but added to it in English
what is substantially our present Communion Office.
This was used by authority of Parliament, but
was compiled by authority of the Church. It
was followed by the First Prayer Book of Edward VI.,
y^hich is the basis of our present Prayer Book. It
prescribed, among other things, the use of the
Eucharistic vestments ; and the Act of Uniformity
which sanctioned it declares that it is in harmony
with 'the pure Christian religion taught by the
Scriptures,' as well as with 'the usages in the
primitive Church,' and that it was drawn up ' by the
aid of the Holy Ghost.' This Act of Uniformity
purports to have been passed by ' the Lords spiritual
and temporal and the Commons in this Parliament
assembled.' So far we have no trace of ' the Crown
and Parliament ' ' enacting the Prayer Book in the
teeth of the bishops and clergy.'
At this juncture, unfortunately, a number of
foreign Reformers — iconoclasts in religion and re-
publicans in politics — came to England, and were
placed in positions of great influence, including the
chairs of theology at the Universities. They were
in the confidence of the astute Calvin, who hoped by
their aid to overthrow the constitution of the
English Church and reconstruct it on the model of
Geneva. His recommendations were backed up by
some influential persons at Court, who calculated, as
Hallam and Macaulay have pointed out, that a new
Beformation on the Swiss pattern would be certain
to relieve the Church of much property which
THE OENAMENTS KUBRIC 341
nobody could use so profitably as themselves. The
precocious mind of the priggish boy who occupied
the throne of the Tudors was completely turned by
the artful flatteries of these men. He w^as persuaded
to regard himself as a second good Josiah,' whose
name would be blessed by future generations as a great
reformer. But the bishops set their faces against
the revolutionary proposals of the foreign Reformers,
and the King, finding himself thus balked of pos-
thumous renown, told Sir John Cheke that when
Parliament met he should effect his purpose by
exercise of his Eoyal authority.^ There is no proof
of his having ever executed that threat. Cardwell
surmises that 'the Convocation w^as induced to
delegate its authority to a commission appointed by
the King '^ ; but Lord Selborne, rejecting that view,
has proved {' Defence of the Church of England
against Disestablishment,' pp. 57-64) that the Book
of 1552 received the formal authority of Convocation.
Considering the genesis of the Second Book, the
wonder is that so few alterations were made of a
serious character. Some of the alterations, indeed,
were in the nature of improvements ; '^ others affected
• Strype's Memorials of Cranmer, ii. 9.
2 ' Hoc non me parum recreat quod mihi D. Checus indicavit : si
noluerint ipsi [episcopi], ait, efficere ut quas mutanda sint mutentur,
rex per seipsum id faciet ; et cum ad parliamentum ventum fuerit
ipse suae Majestatis authoritatem interponet.' — See Peter Martyr's
Letter to Bucer in Strype's Memorials of Cranmer, ii. 663.
^ The Two Liturgies of King Edward VI. p. xviii.
■* This is frankly admitted by a hostile witness : — ' Without doubt
subsequent revisions of the Book of Common Prayer [of 1549] have
342 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the integrity of the ancient ceremonial sanctioned by
the First Book ; none touched the essence of doctrine.
Cranmer disliked the alterations which the Second
Book made in the Communion Office. He was a
great admirer of the Book of 1549, in the compila-
tion of which he took a leading part. Writing of it
he says : * The manner of the Holy Communion,
which is now set forth within this Eealm, is agreeable
with the institution of Christ, with St. Paul, and the
old primitive Apostolic Church, and with the right
faith of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross.' * He
solicited Bucer's opinion of the Book, and Bucer
replied that he ' found nothing in it but what was
either taken out of the Word of God, or at least not
contrary to it, if fairly interpreted' — an opinion
which he revoked afterwards under the influence of
those who were set on organic changes.
Cranmer, as usual, played a weak and vacillating
part. Wedded to the First Book and opposed to
any further changes, he lacked the courage to resist
the King and his powerful prompters. So he ended
by swimming with the current, but recorded his
opinion of the aims and character of the new
introduced elements which, although it may not be easy to justify
them by the test of antiquity, have given to the daily service a
breadth or even a certain dignity which is altogether wanting in the
book of 1549.' ' The Prayer Book of 1549 relaxes the obligation of
private recitation [of matins and vespers] altogether, but this was
reimposed in the Second Book of 1552.' Edward VI. atid the Book
of Common Prayer. By Francis Aidan Gasquet, O.S.B., pp. 36, 39.
' One of the additions in the Second Book was the order to recite
the Athanasian Creed on several Saints' days aa well as on the great
festivals.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 343
Eeformers in a letter of protest to the King's
Council, in reply to a Eoyal mandate that he should
peruse and report upon the Second Book. The drift
of his protest may be gathered from the following
extract : —
I know your Lordships' wisdom to be such as that I
trust ye will not be moved with these glorious and unquiet
spirits which can like nothing but that is after their oiun
fancy ; and cease not to make trouble when things be most
quiet and in good order. If such men should be heard,
although the Book were made every year anew, yet it
should not lack faults in their opinion.^
This is a pregnant comment on the declaration of
the Act of Uniformity which ratified the Second
Book, namely, that ' such doubts as had been raised
in the use and exercise ' of the First Book proceeded
rather from * the curiosity of the ministers and mis-
takers than from any other worthy cause.'
This Act, which was passed on April 6, 1552,
ordered the use of the Second Book on the 1st of the en-
suing November. The copies of the Book which were
printed in the interval, however, were so full of errors,
that — partly for this reason, and partly, as it seems,
because the King was anxious to have the Book
revised still further in the interest of the Puritans —
an Order in Council was issued on September 27
cancelling the whole edition and forbidding the issue
of any more copies. On the 6th day of the
following July the boy-king, who had been ailing for
some months previously, died ; and his Second
* State Papers {Domestic) Edward VL xv. 15«
344 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Book of Common Prayer died with him. It seems
tolerably clear that its adoption was very irregular
and partial, and of questionable legality.^ Its use
would have been illegal before the Feast of All Saints,
1552. But all the copies printed up to the end of
September in that year had been suppressed by the
Order in Council already referred to. There is not a
fragment of proof, that I know of, to show that any
other edition had been printed in the meantime.
There is evidence that the Second Book was used
in some churches in the interval, for it was covered
by Act of Parliament. It is for lawyers to decide
how far the Order in Council affected its legality.
It was pretty evident before the end of 1552 that
the King was dying, and the perilous uncertainty as
to the succession filled the minds of those in
authority with apprehensions which were not likely
to leave much room for deliberations about the new
Prayer Book. The King himself too, knowing that
his illness was incurable, had to think of other
matters than the disputatious letters of Calvin and
the flatteries of self-seeking courtiers. The Duke of
Northumberland, who after the death of the Protector
really ruled the kingdom, was bent on securing the
' See Letter of George Withers to the Prince Elector Palatine
{Zurich Letters, Second Series, ii. 159, 160). Speaking of the sup-
pressed edition of the Second Prayer Book he says : ' But the King,
who truly feared God, not being yet satisfied with these improve-
ments, was about to put the last finish to this work, and appointed
a day for the assembling of both Houses of Parliament. All were
full of hope and expectation ; but in the meantime our most excellent
King was taken away by an untimely death.'
THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC 345
sceptre for his daughter-in-law, the unfortunate
Lady Jane Grey, and had actually persuaded the
King to appoint her his successor by Letters Patent.
The partisans of Mary were equally resolute on the
other side ; and in the prospect of a struggle which
promised to be as desolating as the Wars of the
Eoses, the small knot of Puritanical Reformers and
their nostrums were forgotten.
This is the nearest approach in all the history of
the Reformation to Sir William Harcourt's assertion
that * the Crown and Parliament enacted the Prayer
Book in the teeth of the bishops and clergy.' But
it is an approach only. For the Uniformity Act of
1552 was passed with the assent of the Lords
spiritual as well as temporal. Sir William, however,
was mainly thinking of the Uniformity Act of 1559.
On that occasion it is undoubtedly true that all
the bishops present in the House of Lords voted
against the Act. It is equally true that the Act
itself omits all express mention of the spiritual
Lords as assenting parties to the Act, using only the
phrase, ' with the assent of the Lords and Commons.'
But this is not decisive, for the same phrase is used
in tte Uniformity Act of 1552, when the spiritual
peers were assenting parties. The Uniformity Act
of 1549 is still more to the point, for after mention-
ing 'the Lords spiritual and temporal and the
Commons in this present Parliament assembled ' as
assenting to the Act, it afterwards speaks of 'the
assent of the Lords and Commons in this present
Parliament assembled ' — the very phrase on which
346 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Sir William Harcourt fastens in the Elizabethan
Acts of 1559 and 1552.
But Sir William has a second string to his bow.
The Elizabethan Act says : * And for due execution
hereof, the Queen's most excellent Majesty, the
Lords temporal and all the Commons in this present
Parliament assembled, doth in God's name earnestly
require and charge all the archbishops, bishops, and
other ordinaries, that they shall endeavour them-
selves to the uttermost of their knowledge, that the
due and true execution hereof may be had through-
out their dioceses and charges, as they will answer
before God for such evils and plagues wherewith
Almighty God may justly punish His people for
neglecting His good and wholesome law,' &c. This
proves nothing. Obviously the spiritual peers
could not ' earnestly require and charge ' themselves
to do anything even if they had been assenting parties
to the Act. Thus we see that the phrase which has
delighted Sir William Harcourt, and which forms the
corner-stone of his novel theory of the Reformation,
vanishes like those frail substances which look beauti-
ful when disentombed from some ancient sepulchre, but
crumble to pieces when exposed to the light of the sun.
But there is more to be said on this matter.
The year after the Uniformity Act of 1559, Elizabeth
put out a Latin version of the Prayer Book, with
some alterations and additions which brought it
nearer the Book of 1549. In the Letters Patent
which authorised this Latin Book she says expressly
that the Book of 1559 was passed * with the consent
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 347
of the three Estates of the Eealm.' ^ This is a flat
contradiction of Sir William Harcourt's assertion.
Yet there is undoubtedly an apparent discrepancy
between the votes of the bishops against the Act of
Uniformity and the Queen's unequivocal assertion
in a formal State document that the Act of Uni-
formity was passed ' with the assent of the three
Estates of our Eealm,' namely, the Lords spiritual,
the Lords temporal, and the Commons. This is
said in the face of Parliament and the nation, and
there is no contradiction from any quarter, not even
from the bishops. What is the explanation? I
venture to offer the following.
When the Act oT Uniformity was passing through
Parliament ten out of the twenty-six sees were
vacant through death, leaving sixteen bishops as peers
of Parliament. Of these, nine voted against the third
reading of the Act. One was absent through illness
and others for no assignable reason. The Bill was
thus opposed by just one more than a third of the
whole bench, and of these more than half were dis-
qualified by canonical and statutory law. All the
episcopal consecrations in the reign of Mary are in
that category, for they were made by authority of
* * Omnibus ad quos praesentes iitersB pervenerint, salutem. Cum
mem ores officii nostri erga Deum Omnipotentem (cujus providentia
principes regnant) legibus quibusdam saluberrimis, consensu trium
Begni nostri statuum, sancitis, anno regni nostri primo, Eegium
nostrum consensum libenter praebuerimus : inter quas una lex lata
est, ut Preces publicas una et eadem certa et praescripta precandi
forma, lingua vulgari et vernacula, passim in Ecclesia Anglicana
haberentur,' &c.
348 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the Pope which had been, from 1534, renounced by
the Convocations of the Church lawfully convened ;
and this canonical renunciation was never repealed
by either Convocation. Moreover, thirteen bishops,
canonically and legally appointed, had been deprived
by Mary without pretence of sanction from the
ecclesiastical law of England, and intruders were
thrust into their sees. In addition. Queen Elizabeth
and her advisers took the precaution of fortifying
their position by statute as well as by canon law
before enforcing the Act of Uniformity.
Mary's statute restoring the Papal Supremacy
was secured before the Uniformity Act reached the
House of Lords, and the Marian bishops could be
thus legally as well as canonically disqualified as
spiritual peers, although they were not as yet formally
deprived. This is the very objection that Bonner
afterwards took to the consecration of Archbishop
Parker and the other Elizabethan bishops, namely,
that the Ordinal used lacked statutory authority,^
not having received the assent of Parliament. But
the Queen had anticipated this objection by supplying
the legal defects of the Ordinal ; a precaution which
some Koman Catholic writers have perverted as if
it meant the rectification by the Queen of some flaw
in the act of Consecration.
The view therefore which EHzabeth and her
ministers appear to have taken of the negative votes
of the Marian bishops is that they were null and
void, the voters being disqualified on grounds both
* White's Lives of the Elizabethan Bishops, p. 36.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 349
legal and canonical. Had they supported the Act
and accepted the situation, it is probable that their
position would have been legalised, like that of
the Ordinal. As it was, their votes were ignored,
and the assent of the new bishops was assumed.
The Act of Uniformity, therefore, on which Sir
William Harcourt relies, assumes the assent of the
spiritual peers, and the Queen positively asserts it
without a dissentient voice. Two things are con-
spicuous in Elizabeth's conduct all through that
troubled period : one, her anxiety to have the law
on her side ; the other, pace Sir William Harcourt,
her peremptory repudiation of any right on the part
of the laity to legislate for the Church. The spiritual
peers constitute the first of the three estates of the
Bealm, and whatever lawyers may think now, it is
unquestionable that in the time of Elizabeth and
previously an Act of Parliament would have been
considered of doubtful authority, if not altogether
invalid, passed in a Parliament where the spiritual
state was ignored. ' In the Parliament Boll of
21 Eich. n. it is said that many ordinances have
been disannulled because the State of the clergy
were not present in Parliament at the making of
them. So that the distinction between Estates in
the kingdom and Estates in Parliament, as if the
bishops were one of the first and not of the second,
is merely imaginary, and leaves one Estate unrepre-
sented in Parhament.' ^ Elizabeth had far too much
^ De Lolme On the English Constitution, pp. 134-5. I owe this
quotation to Mr. James Parker.
350 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
respect for precedent to run any risk of that sort.
Certainly this view of the Constitution came down
at least to the Great KebelHon. When the bishops
were turned out of the House of Lords by the Long
Parliament they protested against any legislation
enacted in their absence as null and void.
Elizabeth's repudiation of the right of the House
of Commons to interfere in ecclesiastical affairs,
except by way of sanction for ecclesiastical matters
brought before it either by Eoyal authority or by
the House of Lords, where the Church was repre-
sented by the bishops, could be illustrated by various
examples. Let two suffice. The case is put succinctly
and clearly by a very able and learned foreign writer
on the English Constitution, Dr. Eudolph Gneist,
Professor of Law in the University of Berlin. He
writes : —
When in 14 Elizabeth a bill touching the rites and
ceremonies of the Church had been read a third time, the
Queen declared to the House, through the Speaker, that
' no bill concerning religion should be proposed or received
into this House, unless the same be first considered and
approved by the clergy.' This, however, referred to the
initiation of legislation touching the Church, and actually
formed a new province, as to which no precedent cpuld
be found for the cooperation of Parliament. On the
contrary, the interference of the Commons with the
internal affairs of the Church, as well as all taxation of
spiritualties, had always been energetically rejected.^
The author gives no reference, but there is a
parallel passage in the Calendar of State Papers
' Hist, of the Engl. Const, ii. 149. English translation.
THE OENAMENTS EUBKIC 351
edited by Mrs. Green. ^ As late as the year 1593, in
a speech dehvered by Sir Edward Coke, Speaker of
the House of Commons, we find this language. He
tells the House that he had been sent for by her
Majesty, who directed him to tell the House, among
other things, ' that it is in her power to call Parlia-
ments and to end them, and to assent to or dissent
from anything done therein. Secondly, that in her
Majesty's pleasure, delivered to them by the Lord
Keeper, it was not meant that they should meddle
either in matters of State or ecclesiastical causes;
and she wondered that any should be so forgetful of
her commandment, or so bold as to attempt a thing
so expressly contrary to that she had forbidden. She
further directs that if they attempt to exhibit any
Bills tending to matters of State or reformation in
causes ecclesiastical, the Lord Keeper, on his alle-
giance, shall refuse to read them.'
The Queen here refers to her having previously
* forbidden ' this sort of intermeddling in ecclesiastical
affairs on the part of the House of Commons, and
* wonders that any should be so forgetful of her
commandment.' This probably refers to a petition
jpresented to the Queen in the year 1586 by the
House of Commons, praying for reforms in the
direction of Puritanism. Her Majesty sent a snub-
bing and sarcastic reply, of which the drift may be
gathered from the following quotation : —
Her Majesty is fully resolved by her own reading and
princely judgment upon the truth of the reformation
» Calendar of Eliz. 1591-4, p. 322.
352 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
which we have akeady, and mindeth not now to begin to
settle herself in causes of religion. Her Majesty hath
been confirmed in her said judgment of the present
reformation by the letters and writings of the most famous
men in Christendom, as well of her own dominions as
of other countries. Her Majesty thinks it very incon-
venient and dangerous, while our enemies are labouring
to overthrow the religion established as false and erroneous,
that we, by new disputations, should seem ourselves to
doubt thereof. Her Majesty hath fully considered, not
only of the exceptions that are made against the present
reformation, and doth find them frivolous, but also of the
platform that is desired, and accounteth it most prejudicial
unto the religion established, to her crown, to her
government, to her subjects. Her Majesty thinketh that,
though it were granted that some things were amiss in
the Church, yet seeing she is fully persuaded, and
knoweth it to be true, that for the very substance and
grounds of true religion no man living can justly control
them ; to make every day new laws in matters of circum-
stances and of less moment (especially touching religion)
were a means to breed great lightness in her subjects, to
nourish unstayed humour in them, in seeking still for
exchanges. * Malum est et reipub. noxium assuefieri
homines ad faciHtatem mutandarum legum.' If anything
were amiss it appertaineth to the clergy more properly to
see the same redressed. ' Unicuique in sua arte credendum.
Quam quisque norit artem in hac se exerceat. Navem
agere ignarus navis timet.' Her Majesty takes your
petition herein to be against the prerogative of her
crown. For by their full consents it hath been confirmed
and enacted (as the truth herein requireth) that the full
power, authority, jurisdiction and supremacy, in Church
causes which heretofore the popes usurped and took to
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 353
themselves, should be united and annexed to the Imperial
Crown of this Eealm.*
Yet Sir William Harcourt picks out Elizabeth's
reign in particular as the auspicious era, when the
laity got their feet on the necks of the clergy and
reformed the Prayer Book *in the teeth of the
bishops and the clergy ! ' I humbly submit that,
inasmuch as men's heads are soft in comparison with
stone walls, it is ill luck for a controversialist to run
his head against the stone walls of history.
But I am willing to be generous and to test my
case by subsequent periods of history. Sir William
Harcourt's theory is vitiated by another fatal flaw.
The following letter appeared from his pen in the
* Westminster Gazette ' in the first week of last
July :-—
The Eeformation Statutes.
To the Editor of 'The Westmmster Gazette.*
Sir, — My attention has been called to some comments
in your paper of June 30 upon the citation I made from
the Act of Uniformity to show that it was enacted by the
authority of the * Lords Temporal and the Commons '
alone, to the exclusion of the * Lords Spiritual.'
The statute from which I read in the House of
Commons was, I need not say, the great Eeformation x\ct
of BHzabeth, in which this notable circumstance is
specially recorded (1 Eliz., cap. 2). The note in the
Eevised Statutes, vol. i., p. 472, gives the reason. The
same observation applies to the preceding Eeformation
' Cardwell's Synodalia, ii. 559-61. •
A A
354 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
Act of Uniformity of Edward VI. (5 and 6 Ed. VI., cap. 1,
Revised Statutes, vol. i., p. 437).
These were the Reformation statutes by which the
doctrines and practice of the Church of England were
established by law, on its separation from the Church of
Rome, and were enacted not with the authority of the
' Spiritualty ' but against their consent.
I did not, of course, refer (as you seem to suppose) to
the Bestoration enactment of Charles II., which was in
no sense a Beformation statute, and was passed under
very different conditions.
Your obedient servant,
W. V. Harcouet.
I have already shov^n that Sir William has care-
lessly misread the statutes of Edward YI. and
Elizabeth to v^hich he refers. But let us assume,
for the sake of argument, that his construction of
them is correct. What then? Edward's Act is
dead, and has no more legal force than the laws of
Lycurgus. Elizabeth's Act of Uniformity, on the
other hand, was abolished by the Long Parliament,
and was revived by the Uniformity Act of 1662.
On that Act it rests. Now the Prayer Book sanc-
tioned by the Act of 1662 was not Elizabeth's Prayer
Book, but that Prayer Book as revised by the clergy,
w^ho made several additions to it, in the reign of
James I. That revision was never submitted to
Parliament. It rested solely upon the Eoyal
authority ratifying by Letters Patent the action of
the Metropolitan and of the other clerical Commis-
sioners. The Prayer Book thus revised, without any
THE OENAMBNTS EUBEIO 355
interference on the part of Parliament, was at the
Eestoration handed over to the Convocations of the
two Provinces for its final revision. The Northern
Convocation elected delegates to co-operate with the
Convocation of Canterbury, and their united labours
resulted in 600 alterations. This last revision passed
the Lords and was then sent down to the Commons,
who, while maintaining their right to discuss the
book thus amended, abstained from doing so out of
deference to Convocation. So deferential, indeed,
were they that they even shrank from correcting a
clerical error in the Baptismal Service, and remitted
it to Convocation, which thereupon deputed the
Bishops of Durham, St. Asaph, and Carlisle to make
the correction. The Act of Uniformity then author-
ised the revised Prayer Book in the following words :
* Be it enacted by the King's Most Excellent Majesty,
by the advice, and with the consent, of the Lords
spiritual and temporal, and of the Commons as-
sembled in this present Parliament,' &c. This Act
is now the statutory charter of the clergy, and if any
previous Act conflicts with it, it is a commonplace of
law, with which even laymen are familiar, that if two
Acts of Parliament differ, it is the second that pre-
vails. Why, then, does a distinguished lawyer and
statesman, like Sir William Harcourt, repudiate
*the Bestoratio7i enactment of Charles 11.,' and*
declare that it ' was in no sense a Beformation
statute, and was passed under very different circum-
stances ' ? I can imagine no other reason than the
fact that the last Act of Uniformity, which is now
356 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the basis in secular law of the Prayer Book, shatters
Sir William Harcourt's theory in pieces, and gives
statutory force to Queen Elizabeth's dictum, that * if
anything were amiss, it appertaineth to the clergy to
see the same redressed.' ^ It is of course natural
that Sir "William should dislike a statute of which
the history furnishes a complete refutation of his
whole argument. But is it not a characteristic mark
of lawlessness to pick and choose among laws, insist-
ing on those of which we approve, and rejecting those
which we dislike? Surely Sir William is himself
here violating the very code of morals which he is
trying to impose with such draconic rigour on the
clergy.
The last attempt made by an external authority
to legislate for the Church in matters of doctrine,
discipline, and ceremonial, was William III.'s
scheme in 1689. The King attempted to impose
his scheme on the Church without the assent of
Convocation, but was arrested by addresses from
both Houses of Parliament, praying that, * according
to the ancient practice and usage of this kingdom in
time of Parliament, his Majesty would be graciously
pleased to issue forth his writs, as soon as con-
veniently might be, for calling a Convocation of the
clergy of this kingdom, to be advised with in ecclesi-
astical matters.' ^ He was obliged to comply. Convo-
cation was summoned and the scheme was laid before
' See KennetVs Register, p. 680 ; and Documents relating to the
Act of XJniformity, p. 453.
« Pari. Hist. v. 210.
THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC 357
it. The Upper House, under the influence of the
Erastian Primate, Tillotson, was favourably dis-
posed ; but the Lower House of Convocation, after
animated debates and conferences with the Upper
House, rejected the scheme, and made an end
of it.^ Parhament disclaimed for itself and the
Crown the right to determine the doctrine, the
discipline, or the ceremonial of the Church of
England; in other words, vindicated proleptically
the proposition which Sir William Harcourt has
denounced as * a direct denial of the first principles
of the Keformation, which was the work of the
laity for the laity.' Nobody can master a subject
more thoroughly than Sir William Harcourt when
he gives his mind and devotes a sufficient time
to it. Witness his mastery of finance, which was
comparatively new ground to him till he became
Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is quite evident,
from his speeches in Parliament and his letters to
the ' Times,' that he has never seriously studied the
history of the Keformation at all. He has simply
adopted a popular tradition, and assumed its accuracy
without any attempt to verify it. The tradition is
a pure myth, as I think I have now shown.
But before I pass to my next proposition it may
be well to note a few of the items in the scheme
which Convocation rejected. It recommended
the disuse of 'the chanting of Divine service in
Cathedral Churches ; ' of ' the Apocryphal Lessons
• Cardwell's Hist, of Conf. ch. ix. ; Lathbury's Hist, of the Con-
vocation of the Church of Engl. ch. xi.
358 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and those of the Old Testament which are too
natural,' and 'all the legendary Saints' days.' It
recommended that *if any refuse to receive the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper kneeling, it may be
administered to them in their pews ; ' that ' distinction
of meats in Lent be abolished ; ' * that the rubric
which obliges ministers to read or hear common
prayer publicly or privately every day be changed to
an exhortation to the people to frequent those
prayers ; ' ' that the absolution in the Morning and
Evening Prayer may be read by a deacon, the word
''priest" in the rubric being changed into " minister; "
and those words and remission be put out as not
very intelligible ; ' that ' all high titles or appella-
tions of the King, Queen, &c., shall be left out of
the prayers, such as " Most illustrious, religious,
mighty," &c.'
There was a lively debate as to whether the
Church of England should be called ' Protestant.'
The Lower House rejected the term as ' equivocal,'
* since Socinians,' &c., were so designated, and it
was dropped accordingly. In my humble opinion the
Church of England has done wisely in refusing to
admit the term ' Protestant ' as entering into the
definition of her claims. It is a negative term,
and things are properly defined by their properties,
not by their accidental negations. ' The Protestant
faith ' is a contradiction in terms. The note of faith
is * I believe ; ' of Protestantism, * I do not believe.'
It is a grievous mistake to place the essence of a
Church in the negation of something which it
THE OKNAMENTS EUBEIG 359
repudiates, and thus tie its life to the existence of
error. To tell me that a man is a ' Protestant ' is
to tell me absolutely nothing more about his religious
opinions than that he is not a Eoman Catholic. It
is a definition which embraces every man who is
not a Eoman Catholic ; not only orthodox Christians
but Socinians, Mormons, Comtists, Agnostics, and
even Atheists. Every Church is Protestant in so
far as it protests against error, but to fix upon that
characteristic as its raison d'etre is an absurdity,
and is very bad tactics in addition. The Pope and
Cardinal Vaughan take good care to designate the
Church of England as ' Protestant,' while they claim
a monopoly of the term ' CathoHc,' and it would be
playing into their hands to acquiesce in that position.
The Church of England claims to be the Catholic
Church of this land, and it is by a true instinct that
she has always refused to surrender that title to the
amorphous designation of Protestant. It is just
because of my loyalty to the Church of England
and my opposition to the errors and domination of
the Church of Kome that I refuse to call myself by
a name which signifies nothing positive, and sur-
renders the whole ground of controversy to the
Church of Eome. Burke says, with his usual
accuracy and sagacity : —
It is not a fundamental part of the settlement at the
Eevolution that the State should be Protestant without
any qualification of the term. . . . Our predecessors in
legislation were not so irrational (not to say impious) as
to form an operose ecclesiastical establishment, and even
360 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
to render the State itself, in some degree, subservient to
it, when their rehgion (if such it might be called) was
nothing but the negation of some other. This always
appeared to me a monster of contradiction and absurdity,
. . . The Church of Scotland knows as little of Pro-
testantism undefined as the Church of England and
Ireland do. She has by the articles of union secured to
herself the perpetual establishment of the Confession of
Faith, and the Presbyterian Church government. In
England, even during the troubled interregnum, it was
not thought fit to establish a negative religion ; but that
Parliament settled the Presbyterian as the Church
discipline ; the Directory as the rule of public worship ;
and the Westminster Catechism as the institute of faith.*
Sir William Harcourt will not, I am sure, im-
peach the loyalty or orthodoxy of Edmund Burke.
But when he says that Lord Halifax * might as well
deny the right of the Crown and Parliament to tax
the people ' as deny their right to alter the creed and
ceremonial of the Church, he forgets that Crown
and Parliament did not claim the right to tax that
portion of the people which constitutes the clergy.
The clergy taxed themselves in Convocation by
constitutional right till they voluntarily resigned
that right in the reign of Charles II. And Speaker
Onslow, in a note to a passage in Burnet's ' History
of his own Times ' (iv. 508), says that in the Act of
Parliament which accepted this resignation of right
by Convocation, ' there is an express saving of the
right of the clergy to tax themselves in Convocation
if they think fit.' The origin of the exclusion of
* • A Letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe, M.P.' Works, iv. 517.
THE OENAMENTS EUBKIC 361
the clergy of the Church of England from the House
of Commons is the fact of their having a Parliament
of their own (Convocation), where they were taxed by
their representatives. The Act of 1796 excluding
all men in Episcopal orders, so as to get rid of
Home Tooke, who had given up his clerical profes-
sion, was an unjust and oppressive extension of the
old rule. So that Sir "William Harcourt's illustra-
tion, instead of being, as he intended it, a reductio
ad ahsurdum of Lord Halifax's dictum, in fact
confirms it.
3. My third proposition is that the doctrine which
I have laid down on this point derogates in no way
from the constitutional supremacy of the Crown
in matters ecclesiastical. There is much confusion
in the public mind on this subject. The Koyal
Supremacy operates within well-defined limits.
Henry VIII. extorted from the clergy, after much
difficulty, the title of ' Supreme Head of the Church
of England,' but with the qualifying clause : ' As far
as the law of God allows,' During the first year of
Mary's reign the royal writs ran : * Mary, by the
grace of God Supreme Head of the Church of
England.' After the repeal of the anti-papal legis-
lation of her father the title of course became illegal.
But Elizabeth would not palter with it in any sense,
and in the first statute of her reign, restoring the
ancient jurisdiction of the Crown over all estates of
the Realm, the title of * Supreme Head of the Church '
was dropped, and that of ' Supreme Governor of all
persons and in all causes, ecclesiastical as well as
362 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
civil,' was substituted for it. That has been the
legal title of our Sovereigns ever since. And it is a
perfectly defensible title even from the point of
view of the strictest Churchman. Nor is England
the only country where the Sovereign, under what-
ever title, exercises powers quite as ample as those
covered by the Queen's Supremacy. At least before
the Vatican Council there was practically no difference
in this respect between England and Continental
Catholic countries. What difference the Vatican
decrees have made I do not know. Emile Ollivier,
who was Prime Minister of the French Government
when the Council met, declared afterwards that the
proclamation of Papal infallibility was equivalent to
separation between Church and State caused by the
Pope.^
Austria has always been considered very loyal to
fche Holy See ; yet the Eoyal Supremacy in Austria
is quite as stringent as in England. I remember
Dr. Dollinger pointing out to me, immediately after
the passing of the Falk Laws in Germany, that they
hardly went beyond the scope of the laws of the
Austrian Empire ; and any one who reads Count
Ferdinand dal Pozzo's ' Catholicism in Austria ' will
agree with Dr. Dollinger. Take the following : —
When any society whatsoever enters into the State
its members have a right to the protection of the
State, in order to enforce the observance of the con-
^ ' Je ne connais pas, depuis 89, d'ev6nement aussi considerable ;
c'est la separation de I'Eglise et I'Etat, op6ree par le pape lui-
meme.' — L'Eglise et VEtat au Concile du Vatican, i. 399.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 363
ventions, and all the conditions of the society. If any
member be injured in his rights, and, on the other hand,
the directors of the society refuse to do him justice,
the injured member may apply to the Sovereign, asking
the redress of his grievances and administration of
justice. The Sovereign, however, ought to grant it in a
manner suitable to the nature of the society itself. On this
principle are grounded the applications known under the
various denominations of a recourse to the yrince — apj^eal
ah abusu, &c. They are substantially complaints addressed
to the prince or to his tribunals, against the decisions of
ecclesiastical superiors, when there is reason to believe
that they have misapplied their powers. In the early
ages of the Church applications of this description
frequently occurred. St. Athanasius, condemned by the
Council of Tyre, implored the aid of Constantine. In the
same way St. Chrysostom, patriarch of Constantinople,
unjustly reprobated by the Synod of the Oak, petitioned
the Emperor Arcadius for protection. . . . But were the
question to turn on purely ecclesiastical matters, the
application to the prince should only be admitted when
it is averred that the ecclesiastical judge has somewhat
violently injured the applicant in not following the legal
rules in his proceedings.^
All the subjects of Her Majesty are entitled to
this amount of protection from the civil Courts : not
members of the Established Church merely, but
Nonconformists of every description, including
* Pp. 118-9, cf. pp. 113, 114, where it is shown that 'the placet
royal is required to validate every ecclesiastical decree, whether of
discipline or of doctrine, and whether proceeding from local eccle-
siastical tribunals or from the Pope.'
Count dal Pozzo was an eminent Austrian lawyer, who was for
a time President of the Imperial Court of Genoa when Northern
Italy was under Austrian rule.
364 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Boman Catholics. Two or three instances will prove
this. Some years ago a Roman Catholic nun in
Ireland was dismissed from her convent and from
conventual life altogether. She appealed to the
civil tribunals, and her appeal was heard. But a still
more striking case is that of Father O'Keeffe, who
in the year 1873 appealed to the Court of Queen's
Bench in Ireland against an ecclesiastical sentence
of Archbishop Cardinal Cullen, who was, moreover.
Papal Legate. The Cardinal acted on a Rescript
from the Pope in addition to his Legatine authority.
The Court differed on some points of the case; but
the Chief Justice sustained Father O'Keeffe on all
points.
In the year 1881 some trustees of a chapel in
Huddersfield appealed to the civil Court against
the election of a minister of the name of Stannard
on the ground that he preached false doctrine. I
quote from the ' Times ' report : ^ —
This schedule contained the ten following articles : —
' 1. The Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures and
their sole authority and entire sufficiency as the rule of
faith and practice. 2. The Unity of God with the proper
Deity of the Father, of the Word, and the Holy Spirit.
3. The universal and total depravity of man and his
exposure to the anger of God on account of his sins.
4. The sufficiency of the atonement which was made for
sin by our Lord Jesus Christ, and His ability and willing-
ness to save all who come to Him for salvation. 5. Free
justification by faith, and by faith alone, in the Lord
Jesus Christ. 5. The necessity of the Holy Spirit's in-
' Feb. 2, 1881.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 365
fluence in the work of regeneration and also in the work
of sanctification. 7. The predestination according to
God's gracious purpose of a multitude which no man can
number unto eternal salvation by Jesus Christ. 8. The
immutable obligation of the moral law as the rule of
human conduct. 9. The resurrection of the dead, both
just and unjust. 10. The eternal happiness of the
righteous, and the everlasting punishment of the wicked.'
The principal ground of the plaintiffs' case was that the
tone and character of Mr. Stannard's public teaching
from the pulpit were not in harmony with this doctrinal
standard.
The High Court of Justice decided in favour of
the plaintiffs on the doctrinal question. Other
instances might be quoted, both in England and
Scotland, of appeals from the ecclesiastical Courts
of non -established religious bodies to the secular
tribunals. So that the disestablishment of the
Church of England would not liberate it at all from
the jurisdiction of the Crown through its regular
Courts. There is no escape from the Eoyal Supre-
macy. The Sovereign is the fountain of justice,
and a final appeal must always lie to him where
civil rights are concerned. No English Churchman
who knows anything about the matter would deny
so elementary a proposition, and I do not find it
denied in the manifesto of the English Church
Union which has stirred Sir William Harcourt's
wrath. To deny the authority of the Judicial
Committee of the Privy Council in ecclesiastical
causes, and to claim, at the same time the restoration
of the Church's own Courts, is by no means to deny
366 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
the authority of the Crown or the Eoyal Supremacy.
Let us consider this.
The principle for which I am contending is
clearly set forth in the grand preamble of the Statute
of 1532, as follows : —
Where, by divers sundry old authorities, histories, and
chronicles, it is manifestly explained and expressed that
this Eealm of England is an empire, and so hath been
accepted in the world, governed by one supreme head
and king, having the dignity and royal estate of the
imperial crown of the same ; unto whom a body politic*
compact of all sorts and degrees of people, divided in
terms and by names of spiritualty and temporalty, been
bounden and owen to bear, next to God, a natural and
humble obedience : he being also institute and furnished by
the goodness and sufferance of Almighty God with plenary,
whole, and entire power, preeminence, authority, prero-
gative, and jurisdiction, to render and yield justice and final
determination to all manner of folk, resiants, or subjects
within this his Eealm, in all causes, matters, debates,
and contentions happening to occur, insurge, or begin
within the limits thereof, without restraint or provocation
to any foreign princes or potentates of the world : the
body spiritual whereof having power, when any cause of
the law divine happened to come in question, or of
spiritual learning, then it was declared, interpreted, and
shown by that part of the said body politic called the
spiritualty, now being usually called the Enghsh Church,
which always hath been reputed, and also found of that
sort, that both for knowledge, integrity, and sufficiency
of number, it hath been always thought, and is also at
this hour, sufficient and meet of itself, without the inter-
meddling of any exterior person or persons, to declare and
determine all such doubts, and to administer all such
THE OENAMENTS KUBEIG 367
offices and duties, as to their rooms spiritual doth ap-
pertain : for the due administration whereof, and to keep
them from corruption and sinister affection, the king's
most noble progenitors, and the antecessors of the nobles
of this Eealm, have sufficiently endowed the said Church
both with honour and possessions : and the law temporal,
for trial of property of lands and goods, and for the
conservation of the people of this Eealm in unity and
peace, without rapine or spoil, was and yet is adminis-
tered, adjudged, and executed, by sundry judges and
ministers of the other part of the said body politic, called
the temporalty : and both these authorities and juris-
dictions do conjoin together in due administration of
justice, the one to help the other.
Here, then, we see drav^n, with sculptured pre-
cision, the line of demarcation between the respective
domains of the spiritualty and temporalty ; each
independent of the other so long as it keeps within
its own borders and observes its own laws and pre-
scribed rules of procedure ; while the Sovereign is
supreme over both, to see that each administers
justice fairly and in accordance with the laws
belonging to each. This is now the charter of con-
stitutional law that regulates the mutual relations
of the spiritualty and temporalty, and there could
hardly be a more direct contradiction than it offers
to Sir William Harcourt's dictum in his letter to the
* Times ' of March 9, namely, that the claim of the
spiritualty to adjudicate within its own domain ' is
a direct denial of the first principles of the English
Eeformation, which was the work of the laity for the
laity, who also in the tribunals for the final decision
368 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of Church questions have provided for themselves a
necessary and adequate safeguard.'
And the great luminaries of English constitu-
tional law have always drawn and emphasised the
distinction which Sir William Harcourt dismisses
with scorn. It would be difficult to appeal to a
greater name in that respect than that of Lord
Coke, who says, not as a matter admitting of con-
troversy, but as an axiom of law, —
As in temporal causes the King, by the mouth of his
judges in his Courts of Justice, doth judge and determine
the same by the temporal laws of England, so in causes
ecclesiastical and spiritual . . . the same are to be
determined and decided by the ecclesiastical judges
according to the King's ecclesiastical laws of this Eealm.*
And in his Fourth Institute (321) he observes : —
And certain it is that this kingdom has been best
governed, and peace and quiet preserved, when both
parties — that is, when the justices of the temporal Courts
and the ecclesiastical judges — have kept themselves
within their proper jurisdiction, without encroaching or
usurping one upon another. And where such encroach-
ments or usurpations have been made, they have been
the seeds of great trouble and inconvenience.
The encroachments of the Judicial Committee on
the spiritual domain are a striking illustration of
this last observation.
The distinction between the spiritual and temporal
jurisdiction is exemplified in various ways. For
' Cawdrie's case.
THE OENAMENTS RUBEIO 369
instance, Convocation is in a manner more indepen-
dent of the Crown than ParHament. It is not, as
ParHament is, the Sovereign's Council. He is not
its head, nor does he open or prorogue it, as he does
Parhament. The Primate is its head, and opens
and prorogues it, and it is not power but leave that
Convocation has to seek for the purpose of making
canons ; and its canons remain in being, though
without coercive force, without the Boyal assent,
which may be given years afterwards ; whereas a
bill that has passed both Houses of Parliament
ceases to be unless it has received the Royal assent
before the end of that session. Again, canons
receive the Royal assent in the gross ; Parliamentary
bills, one by one.
The Judicial Committee has itself disclaimed
any right to adjudicate on the doctrine or ceremonial
of the Church of England. The Court has merely
claimed the right, when appealed to, to interpret
legal documents according to the principles of law.
The Court laid down this rule very plainly in the
Gorham case, as the following quotations will
show : —
' It is not for the Court to decide whether opinions are
theologically sound or unsound, but whether such opinions
are contrary or repugnant to the doctrines which the
Church of EDgland, by its Articles, Formularies, and
Eubrics, requires to be held by its ministers.
' The Court will apply to the construction of the
Articles and Liturgy the same rules which have been
long established, and are by law applicable to the con-
struction of all written instruments, assisted only by the
B B
370 THE REFOKMATION SBTTLBMENt
consideration of such rational or historical facts as may
be necessary for the understanding of the subject-matter
to which the instruments relate, and the meaning of the
words employed,
* In all cases in which the Articles, considered as a
test, admit of different interpretations : Held, that any
sense of which the words fairly admit may be allowed, if
that sense be not contradictory to something which the
Church has elsewhere allowed or required ; and if there
be any doctrine on which the Articles are silent or
ambiguously expressed, so as to be capable of two mean-
ings : Held, that it was intended to leave that doctrine to
private judgment, unless the Eubrics and Formularies
clearly and distinctly decide it. . . .
' The Court has no jurisdiction or authority to settle
matters of faith, or to determiiie what ought in any par-
ticular to he the doctrine of the Church of England ; its
duty extends only to the consideration of that which is by
law established to be the doctrine of the Church of
England, upon the true and legal construction of the
Articles and Formularies.'
Again : ' This Court, constituted for the purpose of
advising Her Majesty in matters which come within its .
competency, has no jurisdiction or authority to settle
matters of faith, or to determine what ought in any
particular to be the doctrine of the Church of England.
Its duty extends only to the consideration of that
which is by law established to be the doctrine of the
Church of England, upon the true and legal consideration
of her Articles and Formularies ; and we consider that it
is not the duty of any Court to be minute and rigid in
cases of this sort. We agree with Sir William Scott in
the opinion which he expressed in Stone's Case, in the
Consistory Court of London : " That if any Article is
really a subject of dubious interpretatio7i, it tvould be
THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC 371
highly improper that this Court should fix on one meaning,
and prosecute all those who hold a contrary opinion
regarding its iiiterpretation.'" ' ^
The Judicial Committee, in the Purchas case,
quoted this rule of judicial interpretation with ap-
probation, and then proceeded immediately to violate
it in the most extraordinary manner ; not intention-
ally of course, but owing to their entire ignorance of
the whole subject with which they had to deal — an
ignorance stimulated by very strong unconscious
bias.
What I have now said may suffice to show that
in asking for restoration of spiritual Courts for the
trial of spiritual causes Churchmen are demanding
nothing revolutionary, nothing unreasonable, but,
on the contrary, are merely claiming their just rights
guaranteed to them by the British Constitution.
But it may be useful to exemplify this by the
case of the Presbyterian Established Church of
Scotland. It is, within its own domain, entirely
independent of the civil power. After the Koyal
Commissioner has formally opened the General As-
sembly on behalf of the Sovereign, the Moderator
formally opens it on behalf of the spiritualty ; and
this dual exercise of jurisdiction is also observed
at the prorogation of the Assembly. All the Courts
are purely ecclesiastical, and are quite independent
of the secular Courts, provided they administer
their own laws within the limits of their proper
' Brooke's Privy Council Judgments, pp. 1, 2, 35.
B B 2
372 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
jurisdiction. This has been sometimes disputed on
the ground that the lay elders are constituent
members of the Courts. But the objection is un-
tenable : first, because the elders are appointed
entirely by the Church, the Sovereign and the civil
power having absolutely nothing to do v^ith it ;
secondly, because the elders, if not spiritual persons,
are certainly ecclesiastical persons.
A layman may be an ecclesiastical person in law,
his status in that respect depending on the status
of the person or body from whom he derives his
jurisdiction, and the questions with which he has to
deal. A bishop's chancellor is an ecclesiastical judge,
though a layman ; and so was the Dean of the
Arches. But the Scotch elders are ecclesiastical per-
sons for an additional reason. They are a constituent
element of the ministry. Their proper designation
is not ' lay elders,' but ' ruling elders ; ' and they are
set apart for their office at a solemn service in
church. Their ecclesiastical character is plainly
indicated by the questions put to them before their
appointment to their ministry. For example : ' Are
you persuaded that the Lord Jesus Christ, the only
King and Head of the Church, has therein appointed
a government distinct from, and not subordinate, to,
civil government ? Are zeal for the glory of God,
love to the Lord Jesus Christ, and a desire to save
souls, and not worldly interests or expectations, as
far as you know from your own heart, your great
motives and chief inducements to enter into the
office of ruling elder? Have you used undue
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 373
methods, by yourself or others, to obtain the call of
this Church? Do you adhere to your acceptance
of the call to become ruling elder of this Church ?
Do you engage, in the strength of the grace that is in
Christ Jesus, to perform with diligence and faithful-
ness the duties of ruling elder, watching over the
flock of which you are called to be an overseer, in
all things showing yourself to be a pattern of good
works, and giving a conscientious attendance upon
the meetings of this (Kirk) session, and also of
superior Courts when called to sit as a member in
them?'
That in matters of legislation and judicature the
estabhshed Church of Scotland is, within its own
domain, absolutely independent, is not open to con-
troversy : it is a matter of fact. It has no power to
alter its authorised formularies without the sanction
of Parliament ; but within that frontier it is quite
independent. When I was asked by Archbishop
Tait to give evidence before the Ecclesiastical Courts
Commission in 1883 I w^ent carefully into this ques-
tion and consulted competent persons in Scotland,
among others Dr. Grub, a learned historian and
professor of law in the University of Aberdeen, and
Dr. Boyd of St. Andrews C A. K. H. B.'), who held
the office of Moderator of the General Assembly;
and they all assured me that from a decision of a
properly conducted ecclesiastical tribunal in Scotland
there is absolutely no appeal. But there is no need
to labour the matter, for the point has been judicially
decided : for instance, in the case of Sturrock v. Greig.
374 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
In that case Lord Justice Clerk Hope declared as
follows : —
The first section [of the ' Confession of Faith '] an-
nounces a great truth of the Church, liable to misappre-
hension doubtless, but a doctrine which is the foundation
of the whole authority and government of the Church
over its members ; that is, that in the matter of disci-
pline, whether as to doctrine or evil practice, or non-
observance of Church ordinances, the Church is exercising
a government through its Church officers, appointed by
the Lord Jesus, distinct from the civil magistrates.
Whatever questions have been raised as to the wider effect
of this declaration, to which I need not now advert, this
is undeniable, that in regard to discipline the authority
of the Church, as a distinct and separate government, is
so derived from that source. To that declaration, as the
foundation of the exercise of Church censure over the
members of the Church, I think Courts of law must give
full effect as much as to any other statutory enactment.
It is not our business to consider the truth of that declara-
tion ; if it were, I should be prepared to defend it.
Neither are we to consider whether it will arm men with
alarming power, capable of producing great mischief.
The statute has given the remedy in the Courts which it
trusted— in the appeals competent to the Superior Church
Courts.
He goes on to say that the Church Courts 'have
been trusted as a separate government. The
declaration of the authority under which they act
assumes that it must be separately administered,
free from control, from subjection, or subordination
to civil tribunals.'
The Court went even so far as to decide that —
THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC 375
No action for damages will lie against a Church
Court of the Established Church for any sentence or
judgment pronounced by them in a proper case of disci-
pline duly brought before them, regularly conducted, and
within their competency and province as a Church Court,
even although it be averred that the judgment w^as pro-
nounced maliciously and without probable cause. ^
So that there is absolutely no remedy if the Eccle-
siastical Courts follow their own regular procedure.
In the case of Lockhart v. The Presbytery of
Deer, the four judges of the First Division of the
Court of Session laid dow^n the law in similar
terms. The Lord President, in delivering judgment,
said : —
We have just as little right to interfere with the pro-
ceedings of the Church Courts in matters of ecclesiastical
discipline as we have to interfere with the proceedings of
the Court of Justiciary in a criminal question.^
I may add to these instances a case which Lord
Halifax has lately published in the ' Times.' The
decision, which was delivered on June 29, 1870, is as
follows : —
A minister of the Established Church in Scotland was
suspended by the presbytery of Dunkeld for six months,
during which time he was compelled to pay £55 to his
assistant for discharging the duties of the cure. The
General Assembly, which is the supreme and final Church
Court, composed exclusively of ministers and elders, was
' The Law of Creeds in Scotland, by A. Taylor Innes. The case
of Sturrock v. Greig was in 1849.
'^ Ibid. p. 231.
376 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
not satisfied with the decision of the presbytery, and in
May 1870 ordered the presbytery to proceed to a fresh
trial on the same charge. Upon this the minister prayed
the civil Courts to suspend the judgment of the Assembly
on the ground that the Assembly had exceeded its juris-
diction. The Court of Session, however, held that the
proceeding complained of being within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Church Courts, it had no power to
review them. The following were the decisions of the
judges : —
It appears to the Lord Ordinary that the whole matter
was a question of ecclesiastical law and procedure, of
which it was the exclusive province of the General
Assembly to judge, and with which the Court of Session
had no right to interfere. If the Court were to do so it
would simply be reviewing the proceedings of the supreme
Ecclesiastical Court.
The Lord Justice Clerk : Within their spiritual pro-
vince the Church Courts are as supreme as we are
within the civil, and, as this is a matter relating to the
civil discipline of the Church and solely within the cogni-
sance of the Church Courts, I think we have no power to
interfere.
Lord Cowan : I am of the same opinion. The
Assembly is the supreme tribunal in ecclesiastical offences,
whether attaching to the morality of ministers or to
alleged heretical opinions. I repudiate the idea of a
civil Court being entitled to overrule the deliverances of
the Assembly in matters of that kind. It may be that
incidentally and necessarily the civil interests of the
clergyman may be affected. Every such judgment pro-
nounced by the Ass3mbly has necessarily that effect, but
because the civil interests of the man found guilty of an
offence may be affected, is that any reason for the civil
Courts interfering? By no means. The procedure
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 377
having regard to offences cognisable by the Church
Courts, and to be followed, on conviction, by ecclesiastical
pains and penalties, the Church Courts had supreme and
exclusive jurisdiction.
Lord Benholme : Within their own department the
law of the land gives the Assembly an exclusive and final
jurisdiction. The General Assembly is the supreme
Ecclesiastical Court in Scotland.
How mild, after all this, seems the denial of the
English Church Union that Crown and Parliament
have a ' right to determine the doctrine, discipline,
and ceremonial of the Church of England ' ! That
dictum has been in force in Scotland for centuries,
and with the best results all round. Justice has
been so administered in the Ecclesiastical Courts
as to give at least as much satisfaction as the
decisions of the secular tribunals. Yet Lord
Halifax is, in Sir William Harcourt's opinion, an
' ecclesiastical Jack Cade ' because he claims for
the Church of England what the Constitution has
guaranteed to her, and what we see in operation in
Scotland without any of those evils and dangers
which our Cassandras on this side of the Tweed
threaten as the result of restoring to the Church
the jurisdiction of which she has been deprived, in
violation of that very Keformation Settlement to
which those who wish to cripple her energies so
loudly appeal.
If, indeed, the Judicial Committee had proved
itself a competent tribunal, and given general satis-
faction in dealing with ecclesiastical questions, the
378 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
flaw in its origin and title might have been forgotten
or condoned. For Englishmen are patient of
anomalies and irregularities as long as they work
well in practice. But of all the Courts that have
ever dispensed justice in England none, I venture to
think, has proved itself so entirely incompetent as
the Judicial Committee has done in adjudicating
upon ecclesiastical questions. Ignorance and un-
conscious bias have presided over its judgments in a
degree which is hardly credible to those who have
not examined its deliverances in detail. And the
result is that their Lordships have landed us in
chaos. Their decisions, like the pots in the fable
that went sailing down the stream, crack each other.
It is impossible to obey one judgment without
violating another. They are judgments of policy,
not of law, and vary with the passion or prejudice
of the occasion and the popular strength at the back
of the impugned doctrines or practices. It is this, I
believe, even more than its secular character, which
has so discredited the decisions of the Judicial
Committee. That is an indictment which ought not
to be made against an august tribunal without proof.
I proceed, therefore, to give my proof.
The . First Prayer Book of Edward VI. has
the following Eubric in the beginning of the Com-
munion Office : —
Upon the day, and at the time appointed for the
administration of the Holy Communion, the priest that
shall execute the holy ministry shall put upon him the
vesture appointed for that ministration, that is to say, a
THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC 379
white albe plain, with a vestment or cope. And where
there be many priests or deacons, then so many shall be
ready to help the priest in the ministration as shall be
requisite, and shall have upon them likewise the vestures
appointed for their ministry, that is to say, albes with
tunioles.
The Second Prayer Book of Edward expunged
this Kubric and substituted the following : —
And here is to be noted that the minister at the time
of the Communion, and at all other times in his ministra-
tion, shall use neither alb, vestment, nor cope ; but being
archbishop or bishop, he shall have and wear a rochet,
and being a priest or deacon, he shall have and wear a
surplice only.
Thus we see that when Parliament — I have
discussed elsewhere the sanction of Convocation to
this Book — intended to abolish the old Eucharistic
vestments, it said so in plain straightforward lan-
guage which anybody could understand.
Both the Prayer Books of Edward w^ere abolished
by Mary's legislation, and when Elizabeth came to
the throne she was most anxious to restore the First
Prayer Book of Edward and retain the ancient
ceremonial. Failing to carry her point so far, she
appointed a small company of divines to revise
Edward's Second Book under the presidency of
Parker, who, however, was absent most of the time
on account of illness. The Puritan element was
represented by Sandys. Secretary Cecil, doubtless
by instruction from the Queen, sent a series of
380 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
suggestions to the committee, including the follow-
ing :—
Whether such ceremonies as were lately taken away
by King Edward's [Second] Book might not be resumed,
not being evil in themselves ? Whether the image of the
cross were not to be retained? Whether processions
should not be used ? Whether, in the celebration of the
Communion, priests should not use a cope beside a
surplice ? '
This points to the direction in which the Queen
desired that alterations should be made. The divines,
however, did not act on these suggestions. They
left the Kubric forbidding the vestments. But the
Queen refused to sanction the revised book until
provision was made for the ' ornaments ' abolished
by the Book of 1552. The following clause was
therefore inserted into the Act of Uniformity which
legalised the revised Prayer Book : —
Provided always, and be it enacted, that such orna-
ments of the Church and of the ministers thereof shall
be retained and be in use as was in this Church of England,
by authority of Parliament, in the second year of the
reign of King Edward VI. ; until other order shall be
therein taken by the authority of the Queen's Majesty,
with the advice of her Commissioners appointed and
authorised under the Great Seal of England for causes
ecclesiastical, or of the metropolitan of this realm. And
also that if there shall happen any contempt or irreverence
to be used in the ceremonies or rites of the Church, by
the misusing of the orders appointed in this book : the
' Strype's Ann. vol. i. pt. i. pp. 122-3.
THE OENAMENTS RUBEIC 381
Queen's Majesty may, by the like advice of the said Com-
missioners, or metropohtan, ordain and publish such further
ceremonies or rites as may be most for the advancement
of God's glory, the edifying of the Church, and the due
reverence of Christ's holy mysteries and sacraments.
In a contemporary Latin translation of this Act
of Uniformity the first sentence of this clause is
rendered :—
' Provisum atque statutum sit, quod talia ecclesiastica
ornamenta et ministrorum ejusdem conservabuntur, et
Usui subservient, quemadmodum mos erat in hac ecclesia
Anglicana ex auctoritate Parliamenti in anno secundo
Regni Eegis Edwardi Sexti,'
' As v^as the custom in this Church of England *
makes rather better sense than the English Version,
and may be taken as the contemporary interpreta-
tion.
There is a slight verbal difference, but no differ-
ence of meaning, between the language of the
statute and the language of the Kubric of Elizabeth's
Prayer Book, which is as follows : —
And here is to be noted, that the minister at the time
of the Communion, and at all other times in his ministra-
tion, shall use such ornaments in the Church as were in
use by authority of Parhament in the second year of the
reign of King Edward VI., according to the Act of
Parliament set in the beginning of this book.
To any mind, not blinded by prejudice, and
fairly acquainted with the history of the period, both
Rubric and Statute are quite plain and unambiguous.
382 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
The Statute reserved the right to enforce, as circum-
stances permitted, the full ritual of the second year
of Edward VI. That was impracticable for the
present, but a way was left open for it. It was
' further ceremonies or rites ' that the Queen con-
templated, not any prohibition of those legalised by
the Act. This is plainly the meaning of the ' other
order ' for which the Act of Uniformity makes
provision, and this natural interpretation of the Act
is corroborated by a mass of external evidence, as I
shall prove presently.
The Long Parliament abolished the Ornaments
Eubric on the very ground iihat it kept in legal being
the Eubric of the Book of 1549, which prescribed the
Eucha^istic vestments. At the Kestoration Con-
vocation and Parliament restored the Ornaments
Eubric, slightly altered, although warned by the
Puritans that it would * bring back ' the vestments ;
and it now reads as follows : —
And here is to be noted, that such ornaments of the
Church, and of the ministers thereof, at all times of their
ministration, shall be retained and be in use, as were in
the Church of England, by the authority of Parliament, in
the second year of the reign of King Edward the Sixth.
The Act of Uniformity which ratified this
Eubric says nothing about 'other order.' This is
the last statutory pronouncement on the subject,
and it is obvious, on all recognised rules of interpre-
tation, that if any previous enactment of any kind
comes into collision with our present Eubric, that
THE OENAMENTS EUBRIC 383
enactment is ipso facto repealed. When the lan-
guage of a statute is plain it must be construed
literally. This has been declared so often from the
Bench that it must be taken as an axiom of legal
interpretation. In Edrick's Case the judges said : —
' They ought not to make any construction against
the express letter of the Statute ; for nothing can so
express the meaning of the makers of the act as their
own direct words, for iiidex animi — sermo. And it would
be dangerous to give scope to make a construction in any
case against the express words, when the meaning of the
makers doth not appear to the contrary, and when no
inconvenience will therefrom follow, and therefore a
verbis legis 7i07i est recedendum' ' In fact,' says Stephens,
'when the Legislature has used words of a plain and
definite import, it would be very dangerous to put upon
them a construction which would amount to holding that
the Legislature did not mean what it has expressed. The
fittest in all cases where the intention of the Legislature is
brought into question is to adhere to the loords of the
Statute, construing them according to their nature and
import in the order in which they stand in the Act of
Parliament.'
'The good expositor,' says Lord Coke, 'makes every
sentence have its operation to suppress all the mischiefs ;
he gives effect to every word in the Statute. He does
not construe it so that anything should be vain and
superfluous, nor yet makes exposition against express
words ; for viperina est expositio qucB corrodit viscera
textus {PoivUer's Case, 34), but so expounds it that
one part of the x\ct may agree with the other, and all
may stand together. But the best expositors of all Acts
of Parliament in aU cases, are the Acts of Parliament
themselves, by construction and conferring the parts of
384 THE REFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
them together : optima statuti interpretatrix est {pmnihus
particulis ejusdem inspectis) ipsum statutu7n.' •
The Judicial Committee acted on this recognised
rule of legal interpretation in the case of Liddell v.
Westerton. The question before the Court was the
ornaments of the Church, including altar vestments.
Eeferring to the First and Second Prayer Books of
Edward VI. the Court said : —
The Queen was in favour of the First, but she was
obliged to give way, and a compromise was made, by
which the services were to be in conformity with the
Second Prayer Book, with certain alterations ; but the
ornaments of the Church, whether those worn or those
otherwise used by the minister, were to be according to
the First Prayer Book.
Then the Court quotes the clause on ecclesiastical
ornaments in the Uniformity Act of 1559, and says
that ' the Rubric to the new Prayer Book ' was
' framed to express the same thing.' The Court
then proceeds : —
It will be observed that this Rubric does not adopt
precisely the language of the Statute, but expresses the
same thing in other words. The Statute says * such
ornaments of the Church and of the ministers thereof
shall be retained and be in use ; ' and the Rubric, * that
the minister shall use such ornaments in the Church.'
The Rubric to the Prayer Book of January 1, 1604, adopts
the language of the Rubric of EUzabeth; but they all
obviously mean the same thing, that the same dresses
' Bonhayii's Case.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 385
and the same utensils or articles which were used under
the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. may still be used.
This is in accordance with law, grammar, and
common sense. And the Court was a strong one,
consisting of the Lord Chancellor (Cranworth) ;
Lord Wensleydale ; the Chancellor of the Duchy of
Cornwall (Mr. Pemberton Leigh) ; Sir John Patte-
son ; Sir William Maule ; Archbishop Sumner ;
Bishop of London (Tait). In the Purchas and
Kidsdale cases, which gave a directly contrary
decision, the Judicial Committee feJt that the
Liddell v. Westerton judgment was an awkward
obstacle in their way, and they tried to surmount
the difficulty by alleging that the question of the
minister's vestments was not before that Court. But
that is a sophism. The question of altar vestments
is in pari materia with ministerial vestments, and
the Court of 1857 said so expressly when it affirmed
that ' the ornaments of the Church, whether those
worn, or those otherwise used by the minister, were
to be according to the Pirst Prayer Book.' There is
no doubt about it, and nothing but the imperious
exigencies of a foregone conclusion could have
induced a Court of Justice to take refuge in so
manifest a fallacy as that perpetrated in the Purchas
and Kidsdale cases.
And now let us come to close quarters with the
decisions in the Purchas and Kidsdale cases. These
two Courts reversed the plain meaning of the
Rubric ol 1662. They deliberately changed an
c c
386 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
injunction into a prohibition. The Eubric, it is
admitted on all hands, taken by itself, orders the
use of the Eucharistic vestments. The Court, in
the Eidsdale case, frankly admitted this. How,
then, did that Court, following the decision in the
Purchas case, manage to turn the Kubric upside
down and make it mean precisely the contrary of
what it plainly says ? The following is the answer
as given by the Court in the Purchas case : —
The vestment, or cope, alb, and tunicle, were ordered
by the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. They were
abolished by the Prayer Book of 1552, and the surplice
was substituted. They were provisionally restored by
the Statute of Elizabeth, and by her Prayer Book of 1559.
But the Injunctions and x\dvertisements of Elizabeth
established a new order within a few years from the
passing of the Statute, under which chasuble, alb, and
tunicle disappeared. The Canons of 1603-4, adopting
anew the reference to the Eubric of Edward VI.,
sanctioned in express term's all that the Advertisements
had done in the matter of the vestments, and ordered the
surijlice only to be used in parish churches. The revisers
of our present Prayer Book, under another form of words,
repeated the reference to the second year of Edward VI.,
and they did so advisedly, after attention had been called
to the possibility of a return to the vestments.
Their Lordships accordingly declared the Eucha-
ristic vestments illegal.
Keally this is enough to take one's breath away.
Will the reader try to realise what it means '? The
Queen, as we have seen, refused peremptorily to
sanction the Second Prayer Book of Edward unless
THE OENAMENTS RUBKIC 387
certain alterations were made in it, and especially a
provision for the restoration of the entire ritual and
ecclesiastical ornaments of the second year of
Edward. She carried her point. The Rubric for-
bidding the Eucharistic vestments was expunged
from the Prayer Book of 1552. Their legality was
restored by a special clause in the Act of Uniformity,
and by a new Rubric displacing the prohibitory one
of 1552. Now why, in the name of reason and
common sense, should the Queen take all this
trouble, and put forth all her Tudor determination
of purpose, if her intention all the while was to
prohibit the vestments ? They were prohibited by
a distinct Rubric in the Prayer Book which she
restored. Why not leave the prohibition? Why
insist, on the contrary, on substituting another
Rubric reversing the prohibition ; and, not satisfied
with that, inserting a special clause in the Statute
to legalise the vestments ; if her sole purpose was to
get rid of them altogether? Elizabeth was a very
able woman, with a will of iron. If we are to recog-
nise this exhibition of Privy Council law as accurate,
we must reverse the judgment of history and pro-
nounce Elizabeth to be little better than a fool — one
of those spoilt vacillating sovereigns who change
their minds from day to day for the mere love of
change, or out of what the Americans call * sheer
cussedness.' She makes a tremendous fuss and
braves powerful opposition to restore the Eucharistic
vestments, and all for the purpose of giving herself
statutory power to undo what she had done ! That
c c 2
388 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
is what the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
not in the cynical spirit of the old augurs, but
calmly, deliberately, and with all the honesty of
religious zealots, ask us to believe ! Credat Judceus
Apella ; non ego. Nor am I singular in my incredu-
lity. The Purchas judgment has been raked and
riddled by legal criticism. I quote the following
from a powerful pamphlet by Justice Sir John
Taylor Coleridge, one of the ablest and most
cautious judges who ever adorned the bench : —
The Act of Uniformity [which covers the Ornaments
Eubric] is to be construed by the same rules exactly
as any Act passed in the last Session of Parliament.
The clause in question (by which I mean the Eubric in
question) is perfectly unambiguous in language, free from
all difficulty as to construction ; it therefore lets in no
argument as to intention other than that which the words
themselves import. There might be a seeming difficulty
in fact, because it might not be known what vestments
were in use by authority of Parliament in the second
year of King Edward VI. ; but this difficulty has been
removed. It is conceded in the Eeport that the vest-
ments, the use of which is now condemned, were in use
by authority of Parliament in that year. Having that
fact, you are bound to construe the Eubric as if those
vestments were specifically named in it, instead of being
only referred to. If an Act should be passed to-morrow
that the uniform of the Guards should henceforth be
such as was ordered for them by authority, and used by
them in the 1st Geo. I., you would first ascertain what
that uniform was ; and, having ascertained it, you would
not inquire into the changes which may have been made,
many or few, with or without lawful authority, between
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 389
the 1st Geo. I. and the new Act. All these that Act,
specifying the certain date, would have made wholly
immaterial. It would have seemed strange, I suppose,
if a commanding officer, disobeying the statute, had said
in his defence^* There have been many changes since
the reign of George I. ; and as to " retaining," we put a
gloss on that, and thought it might mean only retaining
to the Queen's use ; so we have put the uniforms safely in
store.' But I think it would have seemed more strange
to punish and mulct him severely if he had obeyed the
law, and put no gloss on plain words. ^
There we have the true judicial mind, construing
a legal document according to the recognised canons
of legal interpretation. The Long Parliament made
a clean sweep of the Church and Prayer Book,
and at the Restoration Convocation and Parliament
restored the Ornaments Eubric, Advertisements and
Injunctions of Elizabeth notwithstanding, and in
spite also of the remonstrance of the Puritans,
who declared, with the tacit approval of the bishops,
that the restoration of the Eubric would mean the
legal restoration of the vestments. The present
Rubric therefore has absolutely no legal connection
whatever with anything that happened in the reign
of Elizbeth or any other reign. There is no reference
in it, directly or by implication, to anything that
went before it except the legal ritual and ecclesiastical
ornaments of the second year of Edward VI. ; and
the Act of Uniformity, which sanctioned it, says
nothing about any * other order.' The Rubric stands
' Remarks on Beport of Judicial Committee, pp. 7, 8,
390 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
by itself, clear, unambiguous, and forbidding any
construction in discord with its plain grammar. The
construction put upon the Eubric by the Court in
the Purchas case is an outrageous violation of all
the principles of British law and all the dictates of
common justice. Instead of interpreting the exist-
ing law, the Court, under cover of its judicial pre-
rogative, acted the part of a legislature, repealing
one law and substituting another. And nobody is
more quick- sighted to detect this lawless raiding by the
judicature into territory not its own than the judges
themselves when they are free from the influence of
a domineering bias. One of the judges in the Ridsdale
case was the late Lord Selborne ; a highly honourable
and devout man, and enjoying the highest reputation
as a lawyer. He gave the sanction of his name,
with entire conscientiousness, to one of the grossest
miscarriages of justice ever perpetrated by a British
Court of law. And this he did in violation of rules
and principles which he was himself foremost to
defend when his prejudices were not strongly enlisted
against the still small voice of justice. Let me give
an example. It will be in the recollection of some
of my readers that Mr. Bradlaugh was prosecuted by
amember of the House of Commons in order to recover
damages for his sitting and voting after a majority of
the House had refused to let him either aflirm or take
the oath. The question came before the House of
Lords for judgment on April 9, 1883, and the judg-
ment was delivered by Lord Selborne, who was then
Lord Chancellor. I extract the following from the
THE OENAMENTS EUBKIC 391
report of the ' Daily News ' of the following
day: —
The Lord Chancellor, having referred at length to the
authorities bearing upon the point, said the argument at
the bar had satisfied him that the grounds upon which
the judgment appealed against rested could not be
maintained. The language of the Act afforded no
sufficient ground for implying an intention on the part of
the Legislature to give the common informer as well as
the Crown a right of action for the penalty. One of his
noble and learned friends, he understood, was of opinion
that though the words of the xAct of 1866 might not by
themselves afford any sufficient ground for such an
intention, it might, nevertheless, be implied according to
the true principles applicable to the construction of the
statute. He (the Lord Chancellor) thought it would be
legislation and not interpretation to import into the Act,
by any inference from repealed enactments, provisions
. . . which the Act itself did not contain.
This is sound law, and is a direct, though uncon-
scious, condemnation of the Kidsdale and Purchas
judgments.
But not only are those judgments a violation of the
rules of law and grammar ; they are in direct conflict
with the plain facts of history in addition. The
theory on which they are based is that the phrase,
* until other order,' in the Act of Uniformity, means
that the ritual of Edward VI. 's second year was now
restored until the Queen saw her way to the aboli-
tion of it. I have already remarked on the unspeak-
able absurdity of that assumption ; but let us grant it
for the sake of argument. Certain Advertisements
392 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLJBMENT
were drawn up in 1564 by Archbishop Parker and
some of the bishops, on the initiative of the Queen ;
and in these Advertisements the use of the cope was
made imperative in cathedral and collegiate churches
at the celebration of the Eucharist. The Purchas
judgment says, by a characteristic blunder, that
this applied only to high festivals. Anxious to
restrict the use of the vestments as much as possible,
theil: Lordships eagerly snatched at any plausible
excuse that would enable them to carry out their
purpose. The Advertisements say nothing about
high festivals ; but the 24th Canon says : —
In all cathedral and collegiate churches the Holy
Communion shall be administered upon principal feast-
days ; sometimes by the bishop, if he be present, and
sometimes by the dean, and at some time by a canon
or prebendary, the principal minister using a decent
cope, and being assisted with the gospeller and epistler
agreeably, according to the Advertisements published
Anno 7 EHz.
From this the Court inferred that the cope is
lawful ' upon principal feast-days.' If the judges
had taken the trouble to carry their research as far
as the next Canon, they would have read : ' In the
time of Divine Service and Prayers in all cathedral
and. collegiate churches, when there is no Com-
munion, it shall be sufficient to wear surplices.'
This clearly implies that the cope was to be used
whenever the Holy Communion was administered.
What these two Canons show, and also the Advertise-
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 393
merits, is the lax observance of the Kubrics, both in
the time of EHzabeth and in that of James I. And
the Canons and Advertisements at the same time
shatter another of the dogmatic blunders with
which the judgment bristles. Here it is : —
Their Lordships remark further that the doctrine of a
minimum of ritual, represented by the surplice, with a
maximum represented by the mediaeval vestments, is
inconsistent with the fact that the Eubric is a positive
order, under a penal statute, accepted by each clergyman
in a remarkably strong expression of ' assent and consent,'
and capable of being enforced with severe penalties.
It is really trying to the temper to criticise
calmly a judgment which positively revels in igno-
rance. When their Lordships indited the words
which I have quoted they had the Advertisements
and Canons before them. The former say : ' Item,
that in cathedral churches and colleges the Holy
Communion be ministered upon the first or second
Sunday of every month at the least.' The Canon
says, ' upon principal feast-days.' And this, more-
over, in cathedral and collegiate churches only. It
was still rarer in ordinary parish churches. Yet the
Prayer Book enjoins a weekly celebration at least.
And as to the ' remarkable ' stringency of subscrip-
tion, ' capable of being enforced with severe penalties,'
let us see what Archbishop Bancroft, who Hved in
the reign both of Elizabeth and James, says : —
How carelessly subscription is exacted in England I
am ashamed to report. Such is the retchlessness of
394 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
many of our bishops on the one side, and their desire to
be at ease and quietness to think upon their own affairs ;
and on the other side such is the obstinacy and intoler-
able pride of that factitious sort [i.e. the Puritans], as
that betwixt both sides, either subscription is not at all
required, or if it be, the bishops admit them so to qualifie,
it, that it were better to be omitted altogether. If the
best and the learnedest man in Christendom e were in
Geneva, and should oppose himself to anything that the
Church there holdeth, if he escaped with his life, he might
thank God ; but he should be sure not to continue as a
minister there. There is no Church established in
Christendome so remisse in this point as the Church of
England : for, in effect, every man useth and refuseth
what he hsteth. Some few of late have been restrained,
who had almost raised the land into an open sedition.
But also they followed their own fancies, and may not be
dealt with withall (forsooth) for fear of disquietness.^
Compare this with the rosy picture which the
Judicial Committee give us of the Arcadian peace
and imiversal obedience to Eubrics in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries. The Puritans of that
time knew better, and so, to their dire distress and
discomfort, did the bishops who tried to extort from
them a very slender minimum of rubrical obser-
vances.
But what was the purpose of the Advertisements?
There was a maxim in the Koman law, which, by
the way, is commonly misunderstood, as if it meant,
' What's the use ? ' When a Koman judge washed
to find a clue to the intention of an act, he asked Cui
• Survey of the Pretended Holy Diacipline^ p. 249.
THE OENAMENTS EUBRIC 395
bono ? ' to whose advantage ? who would benefit by
it ? ' Who would benefit by the Advertisements ?
Against whom were they directed ? The Judicial
Committee say that they were directed against those
who Wore * the mediaeval vestments ; ' against, that
is, the vast majority of the English clergy. There
were nine thousand parish priests when Elizabeth
ascended the throne, besides other clergy ; and of
these all but two hundred at most conformed to
the new regime. It was to conciliate this mass of
clergy, with the laity in sympathy with them, that
Elizabeth insisted on restoring the ritual of the
second year of Edward, thus leaving matters to go
on without any change in the service of public
worship that would much offend the eyes of the
usual worshippers. The Advertisements, according
to the Judicial Committee, were directed entirely
against those quiet country and town clergy who
continued to wear the old vestments and practise
the old ceremonies under the protection of the Act
of Uniformity. The old mode of worship ' was pro-
visionally restored,' the Judicial Committee tell us,
in order to be immediately put under ban, and thus
dash the hopes of the great multitude who had been
conciliated by the concession. Yet, marvellous to
say, not a cry of distress, not a remonstrance, not a
murmur escapes from the menaced and harassed
majority, who were the victims of this capricious
and mocking cruelty on the part of the Queen. But
the ' little flock ' of the returned Puritans, as one of
themselves describes them, make the welkin ring
396 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
with their complaints against the restored worship
of Edward's second year, and against the enforce-
ment of the minimum sanctioned by the Advertise-
ments. They evidently never heard of the con-
struction put upon the Act of Uniformity and
Ornaments Eubric by the Judicial Committee three
hundred years afterwards; Let us take a few
examples. One of the chief Puritan leaders was
George Withers, and his testimony is valuable as
showing the view which the Puritans at the time
took of the ' other order ' in the Act of Uniformity of
1559. This is what Withers says of the state of
things on the accession of Elizabeth : —
The second form of prayers, which Edward left behind
him at his death, was restored to the Church. But the
ceremonies which, as was above stated, were retained in
the Church at the first Eeformation of Edward, are
restored under the same name. Power, moreover, was
given to the Queen and the Archbishop to introduce
whatever additional ceremonies they might think proper ;
and they immediately afterwards both discontinued the
ordinary bread heretofore used in the administration of
the Lord's Supper, and for the sake of a newer reforma-
tion adopted the round wafer, after the manner of that
used by the Papists.^
This is an indisputable proof that the ' other
order ' of the Act of Uniformity was understood at
the time to mean the correction of defects, not the
abolition of the legal standard. The wonder is how
any one could think otherwise. The Act itself
> Zurich Letters, Second Series, p. 161.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 397
expressly provides for the addition of ' further
ceremonies or rites ' in the event of ' any contempt
or irreverence to be used in the ceremonies or rites
of the Church by the misusing of the orders ap-
pointed in this book.' As an instance of what the
Queen meant by ' other order,' we have her letter,
' given under our signet at our Palace of West-
minster, the 22nd of January, the third year of our
reign,' and addressed to four of her Commissioners,
' so authorised by our Great Seal,' the Archbishop of
Canterbury, Bishop of London, ' William Bil, our
Almoner, and Walter Haddon, one of the masters of
our requests.' She begins by giving them to under-
stand * that where it is provided by Act of
Parliament, holden in the first year of our reign,
that whensoever we shall see cause to take further
order in any rite or ceremony appointed in the Book
of Common Prayer,' &c. She enjoins on them to
see to 'the comely keeping and order of the said
churches, and especially of the upper part, called the
chancel/ finding that there were ' great disorders,
and the decays of churches, and in the unseemly
keeping and order of the chancels and such like.'
These disorders the Commissioners are to correct,
' specially that in all collegiate and cathedral
churches, where cost may be more probably allowed,
one manner to be used ; and in all parish churches
also, either the same, or at the least the like, and
one manner throughout our realm.' ^
' Strype's Life of Parker, iii. 46,
398 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
This shows what the Queen was aiming at,
and what she meant by ' other ' or ' further order.'
She restored in law, in spite of Puritan opposition,
the order of worship of 2 Edward VI. That was
her standard ; but the practice in many places was
very different. Immediately on her accession the
Puritan party showed their hand, and therefore she
prudently secured statutory power to take ' other
order ' for the purpose of checking their lawlessness.
That is the plain meaning of that clause of the Act,
and it is also the meaning of the Advertisements.
The letter which I have just quoted is good evidence,
for instance, of the enforcement of the cope, with
the congruous vestments of the Epistoler and
Gospeller. It did not mean that those vestments
were thereby made illegal in parish churches, but
that they were to be a pattern to parish churches
when the latter could afford, or could be prevailed
upon to adopt, a higher ritual. Parish churches
were to have ' either the same ' as cathedrals, ' or at
the least the like.' The cathedrals were to be the
models at which parish churches were, as far as prac-
ticable, to aim.
The immediate cause of the Advertisements was
a letter addressed by the Queen, on January 25,
1564,* to Archbishop Parker, ' requiring him to
confer with the bishops of his province, and others
having ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; for the redressing
disorders in the Church, occasioned by different
* Strype's Life of Parler, iii, 65.
THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC 399
doctrines and rites, and for the taking order to admit
none into preferment but those that are conformable.'
In this letter she rebukes ' the Primate, and other
the bishops of your province with suffrance of
sundry varieties and novelties, not only in opinions,
but because in external ceremonies and rites there is
crept in and brought into the Church by some few
persons, abounding more in their own senses than
wisdom would, and delighting in singularities and
changes, an open and manifest disorder, and offence
to the godly, wise, and obedient persons, by diversities
of opinions and changes, and specially in the
external, decent, and lawful rites and ceremonies to
be used in churches.'
The meaning of this is perfectly plain. The
disorders were all caused 'by some few persons,
abounding more in their own senses than wisdom,'
and setting themselves against 'the external,
decent, and lawful rites and ceremonies to be used
in churches.' There is no manner of doubt what
those were. They were the full ritual of 2 Edward
.VI. : Eucharistic vestments, lights at celebration of
the Holy Communion, ceremonial use of incense, &c.
And the lawlessness of this noisy faction is con-
trasted unfavourably with ' the godly, wise, and
obedient persons '— that is the nine thousand parish
priests who practised the mode of worship enjoined
by the Act of Uniformity and Ornaments Kubric,
which is admitted even by the Purchas and Eidsdale
judgments to have been lawful at the date of this
letter of Elizabeth, and for two years afterwards.
400 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
The Queen accordingly ' requires, enjoins, and
straitly charges you, being the MetropoHtan, accord-
ing to the power and authority which you have
under us over the province of Canterbury (as the
hke we will order for the province of York) , to confer
with the Bishops your brethren, such as be in
commission for causes ecclesiastical,' and ' so to
proceed by order, injunction, or censure, according
to the order and appointment of such laws and
ordinances as are provided by Act of Parliament,
and the true meaning thereof ; ' and also ' to observe,
keep, and maintain such order and uniformity in all
the external rites and ceremonies, both for the
Church and for their own persons, as by laws, good
usages, and orders, are already allowed, well pro-
vided, and established.'
Surely it needs a triple panoply of prejudice to
see in these instructions any hint, still less any
order, to alter the law and upset the order of worship
prescribed by Statute and Eubric. On the contrary,
the Primate and his coadjutors are to devise means
whereby the lawless clergy may be made to conform
to the existing law. The Ornaments Eubric, instead
of being condemned as ' provisional,' is upheld as
* established.'
The Queen concludes : —
And in the execution hereof we require you to use all ex-
pedition, that to such a course as this is shall seem neces-
sary : that hereafter we be not occasioned, for lack of your
diligence, to provide* such further remedy, by some other
sharp proceedings, as shall percase not be easy to be borne
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 401
by such as shall be disordered : and therewith also we
shall impute to you the cause thereof.
Strype has the following note here : —
This last paragraph was substituted in the room of
some other words, which I find written by Cecil's own
hand in a former rough draught, which (carrying some-
thing in them that might be made use of in favour of those
Dissenters) the Queen, I suppose, commanded to be
struck out, and the words above inserted in the place
thereof. The words of the rough draught were as
follows : ' And yet in the execution hereof we require you
to use all good discretion, that hereof no trouble grow in
the Church ; neither that sach as of frowardness and
obstinacy forbear to acknowledge our supreme authority
over all sorts of our subjects be hereby encouraged any-
wise to think that we mean to have any change of policy,
or of the laws already made and established, but that the
same shall remain in their due force and strength.'
Surely this is decisive of the intention with
which the Advertisements were framed. The Queen's
minister tones down , a little the stringent and
menacing language of the Queen, yet enjoins that
her Majesty's intentions shall be carried out with
such discretion that the lawless clergy shall not be
* encouraged anywise to think ' that there is going to
be any change of policy ' or of the laws already
made, but that the same shall remain in their due
force and strength.' But even this is too mild for
the Queen. She strikes it out, and inserts in its
place a threat of * other sharp proceedings ' against
the recalcitrants.
402 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
In obedience to the Queen's commands, says
Strype : ^ —
The Archbishop and some of the other Bishops of
the Ecclesiastical Commission proceeded to compile cer-
tain Articles, to be observed partly for due order in the
public administration of the Holy Sacraments, and partly
for the apparel of persons ecclesiastical. These Articles were
printed with a Preface this year 1564, by Eeginald Wolf,
according to Bishop Sparrow's Collections, and entitled
Advertisements. Though by a writing on the backside
of the fair copy that was sent to the Secretary, when they
were first framed, it seems they were not presently pub-
lished nor authorised. For these are the words written
upon them by the Secretary's own hand, March 1564,
Ordinances accorded by the Archbishop of Canterbury, dc.
in his province. These were not authorised nor published.
Strype proceeds : —
The matter, I suppose, was this : When these Articles
(by Leicester's means no question) were refused to be
confirmed by the Queen's Council, the Archbishop, how-
ever, thought it advisable to print them under his and the
rest of the Commissioners' hands, to signify at least what
their judgment and will was ; and so let their authority
go as far as it would. Which was probable to take effect
with the greater part of the clergy ; especially considering
their canonical obedience they had sworn to their Dio-
cesans. But because the book wanted the Queen's
authority they thought fit not to term the contents thereof
Articles or Ordinances, by which name they went at first,
but by a modester denomination, viz. Advertisements.
This was the reason that there is some difference in
» Strype's Life of Parker, i. 313
THE OKNAMENTS EUBKIC 403
the Preface thereof, as we have it printed in Bishop
Sparrow's Collections from that which is in the MS. copy
sent unto the Secretary. That Preface is all the same,
but only, whereas in the MS. it ran thus : [The Queen's
Majesty -hath by the assent of the Metropolitan, and
with certain other the Commissioners in causes eccle-
siastical, decreed certain rules and orders to be used, as
hereafter followeth] : in the said Collections we read thus :
[The Queen's Majesty hath by her letters directed unto
the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Metropolitan, required,
enjoined, and strictly charged, that with assistance and
conference had with other Bishops, namely such as be in
commission for causes ecclesiastical, some orders may be
taken whereby all diversities and varieties among them of
the clergy and the people, as breeding nothing but conten-
tion, offence, and breach of common charity, and be against
the laws, good usages, and ordinances of the realm,^ might
be reformed and repressed, and brought to one manner of
uniformity throughout the whole realm : that the people
may thereby quietly honour and serve Almighty God in
truth, concord, unity, peace, and quietness, as by her
Majesty's said letters more at large doth appear. Where-
upon by diligence, conference, and communication in the
same, and at last by assent and consent of the persons
beforesaid, these rules ensuing have been thought meet
and convenient to be used and followed.] There be also
some other small alterations. As the word constitutions
in the MS. is changed into temporal orders in the Collec-
tions : and positive laws in discipline is changed into rules
in some part of discipline, I have also diligently com-
pared the printed book with the aforesaid MS. copy,
* These words in italics, in the published form of the Advertise-
ments, as well as the Queen's letter to the Primate, show that the
intention was to level up to the standard of the Ornaments Rubric,
not to level down to a lower standard.
p D 2
404 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and find them different in many places, and sundry
things are left out which are in the copy; the Arch-
bishop thinking fit in that manner to publish them,
because of their luant of the stamp of authority to oblige
persons to the observance of them.
The difference between the original draught of
the Advertisements and the form in which they were
published in 1566, here pointed out by Strype, marks
the difference between the stamp of authority and
the absence of it. The Queen kept on urging the
Primate to repress the lawlessness of the Puritans.
That well-meaning but weak man, in his turn,
implored the Queen and her Council to give the seal
of authority to the Episcopal Advertisements. This
the Queen and the Council steadily refused to do.
The poor Primate complained that he could not
enforce the Advertisements on his own authority,
especially in London, which was the headquarters
and stronghold of the Puritans, and which was under
the jurisdiction of a Puritan bishop. 'An ox,' said
the distracted Archbishop, * cannot draw more than
he can.' Strype says : —
But all this pains and labour had not a success
answerable. The Queen had followed the Archbishop
with repeated commands to press the ecclesiastical
orders. And she was in such good earnest to have them
observed all her kingdom over, that she had now willed
the Archbishop of York to declare in his province also
her pleasure determinately to have them take place there.
But her Majesty's Council was backward to empower and
eountenanee our Archbishop in his endeavours for that
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 405
purpose. This, with the clamour and rage of the dis-
senting clergy and their adherents, and the hard names
they gave him, quite discouraged the good man. He
liked not the work, especially being accompanied with so
much severity ; but it was out of obedience to the Queen,
who was continually calling upon him, and ordering the
Secretary to write to him, to quicken him. But finding
his own inability to do her that service she required of
him, he very often and earnestly sent to the Secretary,
that the Queen's Council might stand by him with their
authority. But he could not obtain his desirs.^
On April 28, 1566, the Primate wrote a pathetic
letter to Cecil, in which he says : —
The Queen's Majesty willed my Lord of York to de-
clare her pleasure determinately, to have the order to go
forward. I trust her Highness hath devised how it may
be performed. I utterly despair therein as of myself :
and therefore must sit still, as I have now done, always
waiting either her toleration, or else further aid. Mr.
Secretary, can it be thought that I alone, having sun and
moon against me, can compass this difliculty? If you,
of her Majesty's Council, provide no otherwise for this
matter than as it appeareth openly, what the sequel will
be, horresco vel reininiscendo cogitare.
At last the Queen authorised the publication of
the Advertisements, after the erasure of every
sentence and expression which implied the formal
and legal authority of the Sovereign under the
* other order ' clause of the Act of Uniformity.
The Primate now felt that he could enforce the
Advertisements at least upon the ringleaders of the
^ Strype's Parker, i. 451.
406 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
lawless Puritan ministers, and he proceeded against
them with more rigour, but only with partial
success. The Puritans were furious ; but they were
quick to mark the difference between the legal value
of the Advertisements and documents bearing the
legal stamp. For instance, in a letter written by
one of the leading Puritans, without date, but
evidently after the issue of the Advertisements, the
writer says : —
In what way the Sacraments are disfigured by human
inventions will easily appear from the public form of
prayer, the royal Injunctions, and the Admonitions, or (as
they call them) the Advertisements of the Bishops.
In brief, then, the state of the case is as follows :
On coming to the throne, the Queen made a strenuous
effort to restore the First Prayer Book of Edward VI.
Failing in this, she had the Eubric against the
Eucharistic vestments expunged from the Prayer
Book of 1552, with sundry other changes, before
she sanctioned the restoration of that Book. More-
over, she insisted on the addition of a clause in the
Act of Uniformity, restoring in its integrity the rule
of public worship in legal use in the second year of
Edward YI., and incorporated this, with a slight
verbal alteration, in a Eubric prefixed to the new
Book. She made these alterations and additions a
sine qua non of her sanctioning the Book. And
knowing the revolutionary and intractable temper
of the Puritans, she took the precaution — being a
stickler for law — of giving herself power in the Act of
THE OBNAMENTS RUBRIC 407
Uniformity to take * other order ' — explained, a few
lines later, as adding ' further ceremonies and rites '
—as occasion might require. Under this sanction
she published, the following year, under the authority
of Eoyal Letters Patent, a Latin version of the
Prayer Book, with some changes which brought it
nearer the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. ; e.g.
the restoration of the Rubric sanctioning the reserva-
tion of the Sacrament for the Sick. Every action
which she took in virtue of the ' other order ' sanc-
tioned by the Act of Uniformity was in the direction
of enforcing the law of the Ornaments Eubric. In
no single case did she take any action to abridge in
any particular the standard of public worship pre-
scribed by that Rubric. The lawlessness of the
Puritans had at last become so rampant, that the
Queen wrote a strong letter to the Primate enjoining
him to take action with his suffragans to devise
means for curbing this clerical lawlessness of ' a few
persons,' and enforcing obedience to the 'established
laws.' The Advertisements of 1564 were the result.
But the Queen, while urging Parker to action against
the Puritans, persistently refused to give to the
Advertisements the sanction provided for by the
Act of Uniformity. In 1566 she gave an informal
sanction to the publication of the Advertisements ;
and in consequence of this informality the original
title of ' Admonitions ' was altered to ' Advertise-
ments,' and every passage and word were struck out
which implied legal authority. Thus shorn of legal
authority, the Advertisements were published.
408 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
Why did the Queen refuse to give legal authority
to the Advertisements? There v^ere two reasons.
The first v^^as that the Advertisements fell short of her
expectation. It is clear from her letter to Parker that
she vi^ished him and his colleagues to make the Orna-
ments Bubric the standard at v^hich they v^ere to
aim. Instead of this they adopted a rule of an ideal
maximum sanctioned by the Statute and Kubric —
and practised by the vast majority of parish priests,
as is evident from their silence — and a realisable
minimum, to be enforced on the rebellious minority.
The Queen had no objection to their enforcing this
minimum rule on their own authority ; but, with an
unconsciously prophetic eye to Privy Council law,
she refused to give the stamp of legality to anything
short of the Ornaments Kubric.
Her second reason was partly political, and
partly personal. Her Council, with their natural
aversion to the stirring up of a swarm of Puritan
hornets buzzing about their ears, acted on the
Melbournean maxim, ' Can't you let it alone ? '
But some members of the Council and powerful
courtiers were in sympathy with the Puritans,
thinking them the winning side. Preeminent among
these was the Queen's favourite, the Earl of
Leicester. To him Pilkington, the puritanical
Bishop of Durham, made a passionate appeal in
favour of toleration for the Puritans.^ Thus the
imbroglio ended in the compromise of publishing
the Advertisements, with the informal sanction of
• Strype's Parker, iii. 69.
THE OKNAMENTS EUBEIC 409
fche Queen, but without endowing them with the
force of legal instruments. Collier says, with strict
accuracy, that * the Queen, as was observed, refused
to confirm these " Advertisements," though drawn
at her direction.' And he adds that ' the '' Advertise-
ments " were checked at present by the interposing
of the Earl of Leicester, of Knolles, and some other
Court patrons of Dissenters.' ^
Soames, an expert in the history of the Reforma-
tion, says : —
Hence a formal approval of the Lambeth regulations
was found unattainable. Had their tenor been disliked,
the proceedings upon them which quickly followed never
would have occurred. Elizabeth, however, withheld her
name, on the plea that it was unnecessary, the prelates
having already sufficient authority to act as she wished.
Their position thus became highly difficult and invidious.
It is plain enough that any reluctance to act would have
been immediately resented at Court, yet all the painful
proceedings in which they soon became involved might
be colourably represented as chiefly flowing from their
own intolerance. . . . This publication [of the Advertise-
ments] cites the Queen's letter [to Parker, quoted above]
as an authority ; her ministers therefore could not have
disapproved it. No signatures, however, are printed but
those of the Primate and of the Bishops, Grindal, Cox,
Guest, Home, and Bullingham. The original document
appears to have been signed by others besides ; but this
' Eccl. Hist. vi. 391, 392, 419 ; cf. Strype's Parker, i. 320. ' In
the meantime the Archbishop and his fellows of the Ecclesiastical
Commission did go on, as far as they could, to reduce the Church
to one uniform order, the Queen still calling upon them so to do,
reckoning their own authority sufficient.'
410 THE EBFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
is immaterial, as it has none but ecclesiastical authority
to plead.'
I venture to assert, therefore, on the evidence,
that the Advertisements had no force whatever in
law. And I make that assertion without the
slightest bias, and purely in the interest of historical
accuracy. For the truth is that the legal status of
the Advertisements is entirely irrelevant to my argu-
ment, though it is absolutely essential to the case
set up by the Purchas and Eidsdale judgments. I
have shown that the Advertisements were directed
exclusively against the Puritan Nonconformists. In
her letter to Parker, already quoted, the Queen
draws a pointed contrast between the disobedience
of the Puritans and the silent acquiescence of the
mass of the clergy in the order of public worship
prescribed by the Ornaments Eubric. Whittingham,
Dean of Durham, in a long appeal to Leicester,
indirectly confirms the distinction thus marked by
the Queen. ' Alas ! my lord,' he exclaims, ' that
such compulsion should be used towards us, and
so great levity towards the Papists. How many of
the Papists enjoy liberty and livings which neither
hath sworn obedience to the Queen's Majesty, nor
yet do any part of duty towards their miserable
flocks,' i.e. after Puritan methods. ^ This bears out
• Elizabethan Religious Hist. pp. 42-3.
2 Strype's Parker, iii. 83. The relation in which Leicester was
with the Puritans is shown by the next paragraph of this letter :
' noble Earl, at least be our patron and stay in this behalf, that
we lose not that liberty which hitherto by the Queen's Majesty's
benignity we have enjoyed with comfort and quietness.'
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 411
what I have argued in a previous part of this work,
namely, that the Queen tacitly sanctioned all the
old ritual, provided the new Prayer Book was
accepted.
It is thus evident, beyond all possibility of doubt,
that the Advertisements were directed against the
Puritans, and against them alone, and were intended
to enforce against them a minimum of ritual,^ namely,'
the Eucharistic vestments in cathedral, collegiate,
and college churches,^ the surplice in the parish
churches, and the prescribed vestments for outdoor
wear. In other words, the Advertisements prescribed
the low- water mark below which the Puritans must
not recede, while leaving the high- water mark where
the Ornaments Eubric had left it. This was indeed
doing no more than giving a quasi-sanction to exist-
ing practice. One of the leading Puritans, writing
on August 16, 1563 — that is, more than six months
before the Advertisements were heard of — said : ' I
am speaking of that round cap and popish surplice,
' The Judicial Committee dismissed with scorn the argument
that the Advertisements insisted on a minimum of ritual observances,
while leaving the legal maximum undisturbed. Yet the Advertise-
ments say so in so many words. For instance, the Advertisements
insist on the clergy ' reading at least one chapter of the Old and another
of the New Testament every day,' and having a monthly celebration
of the Holy Communion. If we are to adopt the law of the Judicial
Committee we must conclude that it is illegal for the clergy to
administer the Holy Communion every Sunday, or to read two chapters
of each Testament daily, as the Eubric orders. There is indeed no
end to the absurdities in which their Lordships' reasoning would
land us. See Collier, Hist. vi. 391.
^ In the ecclesiastical language of that day ' collegiate ' embraces
college chapels.
412 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
which are now enjoined us, not by the unlawful
tyranny of the Pope, but by the just and legitimate
authority of the Queen.' ^ That means the authority
of the Ornaments Kubric, for there was no other
legal authority at the time. In other words, such
indulgence was shown to the Puritans, that a
minimum of ritual observances was conceded to
them, provided they conformed to it loyally.
It is almost inconceivable, and would be in-
credible did we not know it to be a fact, that,
on the state of facts now described, two Courts
of the highest dignity, and consisting of able and
upright men, would in our own time — and in cases
which involved penal consequences — deliberately
declare that a set of episcopal regulations of the
year 1564, which never received legal authority,
abrogated a statutory order of the year 1662, which
makes no reference whatever to them, or to any
other document. The legal rule is that when two
statutes are in conflict the later practically abrogates
as much of the former as runs counter to it. But
here we have — not a statute, but — a sort of episcopal
pastoral abrogating an Act of Parliament passed a
' Zurich Lett. i. 134. The editor of the English translation of these
Letters throws out the following suggestion : ' It may be well, however,
to observe that the original word rendered by the term Surplice ap-
pears sometimes to have been used by the writers when, according to
the Injunctions, the cope, and perhaps some other habits, may have
been included or intended ; and, indeed, considerable uncertainty seems
to have prevailed as to the occasions on which these vestments were
respectively used, as well as to the precise meaning of some of the
terms by which they were designated in the original letters ' (vol. ii.
Preface, p. ix).
THE OENAMENTS RUBEIO 413
century later ! Sir William Harcourt stood aghast
at the bare idea of the two Primates giving a decision
which might not be on all fours with the Purchas
judgment. But when he has realised the facts,
I cannot help thinking that he will welcome any
decision of that kind from any quarter, and that
he will, moreover, take the English Church Union
and the whole tribe of Eitualists to his bosom for
their resistance to judgments which make an epi-
scopal pastoral repeal an Act of Parliament enacted
a hundred years afterwards.
I might stop here, for I respectfully claim to
have proved that the Purchas and Eidsdale judg-
ments are a gross perversion of justice, history, logic,
and grammar. The Advertisements gone, their Lord-
ships' whole case collapses, and they are left
floundering in the deep, like Sindbad and his com-
panions when the whale, which they had mistaken
for an island, sank beneath them. But it may be
instructive to examine briefly some of the reasons,
in addition to the Advertisements, which conducted
the Court to its extraordinary conclusion.
* From the passing of the Act of Uniformity,'
say their Lordships, ' there is abundant evidence to
show that the vestments in question were not used
at all.' It is a characteristic of their Lordships, in
the two wonderful judgments which I am consider-
ing, to make their own ignorance the measure of
other people's knowledge. If the assertion were
true, it would not avail them. I do not know how
far non-user would protect a man from the enforce-
il4 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
ment of an obsolete statute against him. The
validity of the wager-of-battle law was upheld by
the Courts not so long ago ; and the following case
occurred in our own time. A man happened to
stumble on an old unrepealed statute, in which it
was enacted that a tailor who made the buttons of
a suit of clothes of the same cloth as the suit could
not recover payment. He immediately ordered
a number of suits with buttons of the same
material, and afterwards refused to pay. The
tailor sued him, and the defendant pleaded the
statute. The judge made some unpleasant obser-
vations on his conduct, but admitted that he had
the law on his side. The law was immediately
repealed.
But however the case may stand with regard to
the enforcement of an obsolete statute, there is no
question at all that obedience to it is not penal.
That was the point before their Lordships, and their
plea of non-user is a pure irrelevancy. But it is not
only irrelevant, it is inaccurate in addition. It was
premature on the part of their Lordships to assume
that what they did not know did not exist. Let us
see.
The Advertisements, as we have seen, were
made applicable to both provinces. In 1570 Grindal
was translated to York, and he gives a doleful
account of what he found there. Popery was, in his
opinion, rampant. York minster seemed to be
* another church rather than a member of the rest *
of the churches with which he had been familiar.
He notes ' three evil qualities in the northern
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 415
province: great ignorance, much deafness to better
[i.e. Puritan] instructions, and great stiffness to
retain wonted errors.' So he set himself to purify
the minster and other churches from the order of
worship and ornaments which he found there.
Accordingly he issued Injunctions abolishing rood-
screens, albs, tunicles, censers, crosses, candlesticks,
images, altars ; the crucifix also, which was to be
displaced by the royal arms, or some other 'con-
venient -crest.' And the minister was henceforth
to be * vested only in a surplice with sleeves,'
and to read the prayers from a desk outside
the chancel, with his face always turned to the
congregation. This was an exhibition of lawless-
ness even by the rule of the Advertisements, and his
lawless temper soon afterwards got Grindal into
trouble. The Queen suspended him for the rest of
his life. But Grindal makes some remarkable
admissions. Here is one : —
When the Queen first began to reign, the Popish
religion being cast off, she reduced religion to that
condition wherein it was while Edward VI. was alive.
And to this all the states of the kingdom with full consent
gave their voices in the great Council of the nation called
the Parliament. The authority of this Council is so great
that the laws made therein could not by any means be
dissolved, unless by the same that made them. In that
form of religion set up by King Edward there were some
commands concerning the habits of ministers, and some
other things, which some good men desired might be
abolished or mended. But the authority of the law
hindered them from doing anything that way; yet the
law allowed the Queen, with the counsel of some of the
416 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Bishops, to allow some things. But indeed nothing was
either altered or diminished {At veto de lege nihil nee
mutatum 7iec imminutum est).
When we bear in mind that this was after the
Advertisements, and that Grindal was one of the
commissioners who compiled them, and whose sig-
nature they bear, his letter proves to demonstration
that the Advertisements neither altered nor dimin-
ished any part of the Ornaments Kubric. On the
other hand, his Injunctions issued in the diocese of
York in 1570 prove that the eucharistic vestments
were at that time in use there in parish churches as
well as in cathedrals.
Strype tells a story which sounds very modern,
and which would have brought down upon Grindal
the lash of Sir William Harcourt. A man of the name
of Smith told the Archbishop, when he was Bishop of
London, * that he would as lief go to mass as to some
churches ; and such was the parish church where
he dwelt, and that he was a very Papist who
officiated there. But the Bishop said that they
ought not to find fault with all for a few ; and that
they might go to other places.' ^ The present Bishop
of London is a good historian, and probably he con-
sidered himself safe in courteously giving Mr.
Kensit the advice which a Puritan predecessor had,
three centuries before, given to a similar Protestant
brawler.
The Court in the Purchas case asserted that its
interpretation of the Ornaments Rubric was in
' Strype's Grindal pp. 158, 171.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 417
harmony with the expositio contemporanea ' from
the days of Ehzabeth to about 1840.' The fact is
precisely the reverse. Scarcely a single writer of
eminence during that period can be named who does
not assert or assume that the Ornaments Bubric
means what it says — that is, that the entire ritual of
the second year of Edward has been legally in posses-
sion from the year 1559. To refute their Lordships'
dictum in detail would need a volume ; but crucial
examples will suffice. I have already quoted from a
letter written by Withers, a Puritan leader, after the
Advertisements. The following quotations show
that the vestments and other ritual of Edward's
second year were understood to be still legal imme-
diately after the bishops, under pressure from the
Queen, began to enforce the minimum allowed by
the Advertisements. Eeferring to the accession of
Elizabeth, Withers writes : —
The high Parliament of the whole realm was
assembled, Popery again cast out, and the second form
of prayers, which Edward left behind him at his death,
was restored to the Church. But the ceremonies which,
as was above stated, were retained in the Church at the
first reformation of Edward, are restored under the same
name. Power, moreover, was given to the Queen and the
Archbishop to introduce whatever additional ceremonies
they might think proper ; and they immediately afterwards
both discontinued the ordinary bread heretofore used in
the administration of the Lord's Supper, and for the sake
of newer reformation adopted the round wafer after the
pattern of that used by the papists. . . . What must we
say when most of them [the clergy] are Popish priests,
E E
418 THE BEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
consecrated to perform mass ; and the far greater part of
the remainder are most ignorant persons, appointed at
the will of the people, not to the ministry of the word,
but to repeat the office of the day or festival, which
almost any child might do without any difficulty.^
Here we have the contemporaneous testimony of
a leading Puritan to the following facts : (1) that the
Legislature of 1559 restored the entire ritual of the
second year of Edward VI ; (2) that the Advertise-
ments intended to enforce that ritual by ' additional
ceremonies * and not to diminish it in any particular ;
(3) that most of the beneficed clergy were then
'popish priests,' and unbeneficed priests whose
duty it was ' to repeat the office of the day or festival ; '
(4) that this was in accordance with ' the will of the
people.' In plain words, the mass of the clergy
carried on Divine Service as they did during the
reign of Mary, with the same vestments and
ceremonies, but using the English Prayer Book.
This piece of contemporary evidence is of itself
enough to shiver the whole fabric of ignorant
assumptions on which the Purchas and Ridsdale
judgments are founded.
Another contemporary Puritan witness is Jerome
Zanchius. In a letter to Queen Elizabeth dated
from Heidelberg ' Sept. 10, 1571 ' — that is, more
than five years after the publication of the Advertise-
ments — Zanchius writes : —
Your most gracious Majesty may believe me that the
restoration of such Popish vestments will be a far greater
' Zurich Lett. ii. 161, 163.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 419
evil than may appear at the first glance, even to those
who are most sharp-sighted. For I seem to see and hear
the monks calling out from their pulpits, and confirming
their people in this ungodly religion by your Majesty's
example, and saying, ' What ? Why, the Queen of
England herself, most learned and prudent as she is, is
beginning by degrees to return to the religion of the holy
Eoman Church ; for the most holy and consecrated
vestments of the clergy are now resumed.' ^
In the same letter he stigmatises those * resumed '
vestments as ' the ridiculous and execrable garments
of the mass-priests,' 'the sacerdotal vestments in
the ministry.' He also objects to * the order about
wearing the linen surplice.' Two inferences are
fairly deducible from this letter : (1) that Zanchius
had no doubt about the legality of the Eucharistic
vestments five years after the publication of the
Advertisements ; (2) that he clearly understood the
difference between this and the enforcement of the
surplice as a minimum. * The garments of the
ungodly mass-priests,' * the sacerdotal vestments,'
* the holy and consecrated vestments,' cannot mean
the surplice, and must mean the ordinary Eucharistic
vestments. The surplice was not in itself a
sacerdotal vestment, nor was it consecrated except
when used with the full vestments of the mass.
The word ' vestment ' by itself commonly includes
the whole Eucharistic suit, and not merely the
chasuble.
In the year 1564, when Archbishop Parker was
» Zurich Lett ii 343.
B H 2
420 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
engaged on the Advertisements, he invited the
representatives of the Puritans to formulate their
objections to the vestments, which they did in
categorical form. He replied point by point, and the
objections and answers show plainly that all the
sacerdotal vestments were in question. For instance :
it was objected that the vestments obscured the
ministry because by their appeal to the eyes they
were an obstacle to the contemplation of spiritual
things. The Archbishop replies that the ministry,
on the contrary, is made more conspicuous to pious
minds by decorous vestments, and he instances the
sacerdotal petalon worn by St. John the Evangelist
as recorded by Eusebius, and the use of sacrificial
vestments by Cyprian.^
Parker also canvassed in December of the same
year, after he had drawn up the Advertisements, the
opinions of Bucer and Alasco, the two leading foreign
opponents of the vestments. The latter declared that
' the use of those vestments could not be sanctioned
by any Church without impiety.' Bucer stigmatised
them as ' like the Aaronic vestments, and of the same
* Contra usum vesluum argumenta. Eesjwnsiones.
viii.
Ministerium obscurant vestes, quia Non magis quam vestes usitat8e,qui-
incurrentes in oculos hominum, remoran- bus vuJgus ut plurimum capitur. Eru-
tur a contemplatione rerum spiritualium. endi erunt oculi : si quae remorantur
quovis modo a contemplatione spiritua-
lium, penitus tollerentur. Atqui piis
conspicuum magis redditur ministerium
decora veste. Hinc in ecclesiastica his-
toria legimus de vestibus Joannis Evan-
gelistae, qui gestavit petalum, seu lami-
nam pontificalem. Et Cyprianus dederit
birrhum carnifici, dalmaticam vestem
dlaconis, et stetit in lineis.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 421
material, shape, and colour as those used by the
Papists ' ^ — a description which cannot possibly apply
to the surplice.
My next piece of evidence is from Sir John
Maclean's ' Parochial and Family History of the
Deanery of Trig Minor in the County of Cornwall,*
Part II., p. 343. The reader will there find an
inventory of Church goods a year after the publication
of the Advertisements, and two years after they were
drawn up and publicly discussed. There we have
it on record that the two churchwardens of the
parish church of Bodmin gave a voucher for having
then * received into their hands and keeping, of the
said Nicholas Cory, Mayor, and of all the whole
parish aforesaid, to he used aiid occupied to the
honour of God, in the same church, from the day and
year aforesaid [i.e. the Sth of Elizabeth'] foreward
all such goods and ornaments as followeth ; and hath
taken upon them and their successors to yield a true
reckoning of all the same goods and ornaments and
delivery thereof, to make without delay to the said
Nicholas Cory and his successors, for the time being
Mayor, and to all the whole parish of Bodmin
aforesaid, this time twelvemonth.' Among these
ornaments, ' to be used and occupied to the honour of
God in the same parish church, from the day and
year aforesaid ' (i.e. 15G7),are several sets of chasubles,
albs, and copes, the use of which, according to the
Purchas and Eidsdale judgments, was at the time
illegal and highly penal. It will not do to say that
» Strype's Parker, i. 387, 342.
422 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Cornwall was a long way from London, and the
Mayor, churchwardens, and parishioners did not
know about the publication of the Advertisements.
It did not take a year for news to travel from London
to Bodmin ; and, moreover, the existence of the
Advertisements was well known all through the
previous two years, although the publication of them
did not receive the informal sanction of the Queen
till 1566. Besides, it would have been the duty of
the bishop of the diocese to lose no time in making
known to his clergy and churchwardens the change
made in the statute law by the Advertisements, if
such change had really been made.^
Four years later than the Bodmin case — i.e. in
1571 — the will of a Somersetshire gentleman of the
name of Humphrey Coles, a Justice of the Peace,
and therefore presumably acquainted with the law,
was proved by the Solicitor-General of the day, who
was one of the executors, and of course familiar with
the law. Among other things the will says : — ■
I will to the churchwardens of the parish church of
Corff, in the county of Somerset, to the use of the same
church, mid maintenance of Divine Service there, the cope
[which, according to the Purchas and Eidsdale judgments,
had been for five years illegal in parish churches] of
velvet, embroidered, that my loife lent to the parishioners
there, and all vestments and other furniture of mine what-
* The inventory from which I have quoted mentions also the use
of ' Jesus' cotes, tormentor's cotes, and devil's cotes.' These belonged
to the wardrobe of the Miracle Plays, which continued to be acted
long after the Eeformation, generally in the churchyards, but some-
times in the churches.
THE OKNAMENTS KUBEIC 423
soever the churchwardens have, meet for the maintenance
of Divine Service there.
Surely the most ardent worshipper of Privy
Council law will not seriously contend that it took
five years for the news of the alleged abrogation of
the statutory Eubric by an episcopal fiat to reach the
county of Somerset. But let us proceed. Skipping
over the reign of James, which offers no evidence of
importance either way, we come to the year 1641,
when a Committee of the House of Lords suggested
* whether the Eubric should not be mended, where
all vestments in time of Divine Service are now [i.e.
in 1641] commanded which were used 2 Edward VI.'
The Committee which made this suggestion con-
sisted of ten earls, ten bishops (including the learned
Ussher), and ten barons, who were assisted by some
of the most distinguished divines of the day. Surely
no one who is not dominated by a foregone conclu-
sion will believe that the Bench of Bishops in 1641,
and the most learned men in the kingdom, could
have been under the delusion that * all ' the vestments
of Edward's second year were then * commanded,'
if they had all, except the surplice, been notoriously
illegal since 1566. The thing is incredible. In
1644 the suggestion of 1641 was carried into effect
by an Act of Parliament, which ordained that * no
copes, surplices, or superstitious vestments, roods or
rood-lofts, or holy-water font, shall be or be any
more used in any church or chapel within this realm.'
But the * superstitious vestments ' here mentioned,
it has been argued, did not mean the chasuble, but
424 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
the square cap and tippet. That is nonsense, for
the cap and tippet were prescribed for outdoor
wear, not for use ' in any church or chapel.' The
* copes, surpHces, superstitious vestments ' of the Act
of 1644 clearly mean, and are convertible with, the
suggestion of 1641, which embraced * all vestments
which were used 2 Edward VI.'
Then came the Eevolution, the overthrow of the
Church, and the abolition of the Prayer Book, even
in private chapels, under the most cruel penalties.
On the restoration of the Church and monarchy the
Prayer Book was revised, and was sanctioned, with
the present Ornaments Kubric, by Act of Parliament.
It is a simple matter of fact that down to the
Purchas judgment not one reputable authority can
be cited who gives the slightest sanction to the
non-natural interpretation of the Judicial Committee.
It is not necessary to weary the reader with a
catena of authorities in favour of the plain meaning
of the Rubric. Let three well-known names suffice.
Wheatley's 'Rational Illustrations of the Book of
Common Prayer ' is a standard work, which is
generally found on the list of books recommended to
candidates for Holy Orders. It was published in
1722. After enumerating the vestments and other
ornaments in use in Edward's second regnal
year Wheatley says : ' These are the ministerial
ornaments and habits enjoined by our present
Rubric, in conformity to the first practice of our
Church immediately after the Reformation.' He
then quotes the Rubric of the Book of 1552, which
THE OENAMENTS RUBEIC 425
abolished all vestments but the surplice, and adds :
'But in the next review, under Queen Elizabeth,
the old Eubrics were again brought into authority,
and so have continued ever since ; being established
by the Act of Uniformity that passed soon after the
Eestoration. ' ^
Another well-known writer on the Prayer Book
is Archdeacon Sharp. In a series of Charges pub-
lished in 1753 Sharp, after quoting the 14th Canon,
writes as follows : —
And upon the 58th Canon, which enjoins Ministers
reading Divine Service, and administering the Sacraments,
to wear surplices, and graduates their withal hoods, I
need say the less, because it is superseded by the Rubric
before the Common Prayer in 1661, which is statute law,
and determines that all the ornaments of the Ministers at
all times of their ministration shall be the same as they
were by authority of Parliament in the second year of
Edward VI. So that the Injunction concerning the
habits and ornaments of Ministers which is at the end of
Edward VI.'s First Service Book, with its explanation in
the Act of Uniformity by Queen Elizabeth, is the legal
or statutable rule of our Church habits to this day, and is
so far from being explained by this Canon that it rather
serves to explain the Canon itself, as I shall show in an
instance or two. For, first, this Injunction of King
Edward's referred to in our present Rubric, though it
requires the surplice to be used in all parish churches and
chapels annexed to the same, yet doth in express words
give liberty to the clergy to use or not use the surplice in
their ministrations in other places, which is an indulgence
• P. 91.
426 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
that the Canon doth not expressly give, and I even ques-
tion whether it can be fairly inferred from it.
And the other thing that I would observe in the said
Injunction is, that no order is given therein concerning
the use of the hood with the surplice in parish churches,
though the same is allowed to be used by dignitaries in
Cathedral Churches and in College Chapels. Therefore,
as I take it, the clause in this Canon, which enjoins
graduates to wear the hoods of their respective degrees
in parish churches, is not strictly binding, forasmuch as
the present Eubric, which is of later date and decisive of
all questions about the habits in ministration, refers us to
a rule by which the said practice is not required.
My third authority is the late Bishop Phillpotts
of Exeter, in his well-known answer to the parish-
ioners of Helston, when they desired him to prohibit
the use of the surplice in the pulpit : —
On this particular I have no difficulty in saying that
Mr. Blunt has been right since he has preached in his
surplice. The sermon is part of the Communion Service,
and whatever be the proper garb of the Minister in the
one part of that service, the same ought to be worn by
him throughout. The Eubric and Canons recognise no
difference whatever. The Eubric at the commencement
of * The Order for Morning and Evening Prayer ' says,
' That such ornaments of the Church, and of the
Ministers thereof, at all times of their ministration, shall
be retained and be in use, as were in this Church of
England by the authority of Parliament, in the second
year of the reign of King Edward VI.' — in other words,
' a white alb plain, with a vestment or cope.' These were
forbidden in King Edward VI.'s Second Book, which
ordered that ' The Minister at the times of the Com-
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 427
munion, and at all other times of his ministration, shall
use neither alb, vestment, nor cope, but being an arch-
bishop or bishop, he shall have and v^ear a rochet : and
being a priest or deacon, he shall have and wear a
surplice only.' This was a triumph of the party most
opposed to the Church of Eome, and most anxious to
carry reformation to the very furthest point. But their
triumph was brief. Within a few months Queen Mary
restored Popery ; and when the accession of Queen
Elizabeth brought back the Eeformation, she and the
Convocation, and the Parliament, deliberately rejected
the simpler direction of Edward's Second Book, and
revived the ornaments of the First. This decision was
followed again by the Crown, Convocation, and Parha-
ment, at the Eestoration of Charles II., when the existing
Act of Uniformity established the Book of Common
Prayer, with its rubrics, in the form in which they now
stand.
From this statement it will be seen that the surplice
may be objected to with some reason : but then it must
be because the law requires * the alb and the vestment or
cope.'
Why have these been disused ? Because the parish-
ioners — that is, the churchwardens who represent the
parishioners — have neglected their duty to provide them :
for such is the duty of the parishioners by the plain
and express Canon law of England (Gibson, 200). True
it would be a very costly duty, and for that reason,
most probably, churchwardens have neglected it, and
archdeacons have connived at the neglect. I have no
wish that it should be otherwise. But be this as it may,
if the churchwardens of Helston shall perform this duty,
at the charge of the parish, providing an alb, a vestment,
and a cope, as they might in strictness be required to do
(Gibson, 201), I shall enjoin the minister, be he who he
428 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
may, to use them. But until these ornaments are pro-
vided by the parishioners, it is the duty of the minister to
use the garment actually provided by them for him, which
is the surplice. The parishioners never provide a gown ;
nor if they did, would he have a right to wear it in any part
of his ministrations. For the gown is nowhere mentioned
nor alluded to in any of the rubrics.
This decision is valuable not only on account of
the great ability and legal acumen of Bishop
Phillpotts, but for two other reasons. In the first
place it points to one main cause v^hy the Eucha-
ristic vestments fell into desuetude, namely, the un-
v^illingness of the parishioners to go to the expense
of providing them. Centuries before the Reforma-
tion we have evidence of constant disputes between
parishioners and incumbents as to the legal share of
each in providing the necessary ornaments of the
Church and of the Ministers.
Bishop Phillpotts's decision is valuable, in the
second place, because it gives proleptically a prac-
tical refutation of an assumption which underlies
the whole of the Purchas judgment, namely, that it
is inconceivable that the rulers of the Church should
have allowed the Eucharistic vestments to remain
in abeyance if they had really believed that they
were statutably binding. But here we have, in our
own generation, an eminent and fearless prelate in-
sisting on the strictly binding force of the Rubric as
regards the full Eucharistic vestments, yet declaring
his intention to rest satisfied with the use of the
surplice, unless indeed the parishioners should
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 429
provide the obsolete vestments ; in which case the
Bishop would put the law in force and compel their
use. Why should it be thought incredible that
bishops in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries
should take the same view of their duty in this
respect as a recent late Bishop of Exeter ?
So much for the Judicial Committee's ' clear and
ohundant expositiocontempora?iea' against the legality
and use of the Eucharistic vestments from the year
1566 * to about 1840.' The assertion, like the rest of
their Lordships' arguments, is entirely against the
evidence. But even if no evidence were producible
it would prove nothing. Being legal, the presump-
tion is in favour of their use, not universally, owing
to the negligence of clergy and parishioners in pro-
viding them, but here and there in places where
they had not been made away with. The onus pro-
bandi is on the objectors. But I have produced in-
controvertible evidence of the use of the 1547-8 ritual
years after the date given by the Judicial Committee
for its legal and actual extinction. I now offer the
following piece of evidence that this ritual was not
only legal, but was in use down to the eve of the
Great EebelHon, and after the Restoration. I have a
curious and very rare tract now lying before me,
bearing the following title : ' Lambeth Faire,
wherein you have all the Bishops' Trinkets set to
sale. Printed Anno Doni. 1641.' It is a satirical
description, in rhyme, of a public sale of * the orna-
ments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof *
then in use. The Bishops having been ' put downe '
430 THE EBFOEMATION ' SETTLEMENT
by Parliament, are supposed to preside at the sale of
the now useless ' trinkets.' Let us see what sort of
' trinkets ' they were : —
This being done of Bishops, all the Crew
Began with speed their wearing Eobes to shew,
And with extended voyce they all did cry,
Come, Customers, see what you lack, and buy ;
Here's Vestments Consecrate, all sorts and sizes.
Here we have two facts stated : first that * vest-
ments consecrate ' were then among the ornaments
of the Church of England ; secondly, that they were
then in use, for they are offered for sale as ' wearing
robes,' not as antiquarian relics. Now the only
' vestments consecrate ' being the Eucharistic vest-
ments properly so called, this reference to them as
' wearing robes ' seems to me conclusive, at least so
far as this, that they were then considered by the
Puritans as among the chief grievances to be got rid
of. But, according to the Purchas judgment, they
had been ' swept away with severe exactness ' more
than seventy years previously.
Among other ' trinkets ' described in ' Lambeth
Faire ' are the following : ' a crucifix,' ' crosier staffe,'
'crosses,' 'high altars,' 'sacred fonts,' 'guilt (sic)
cherubims,' ' bellowing organs,' ' curious hymnes,'
'mitres,' 'bells baptized,' 'golden slippers conse-
crated ' and ' emboss 'd with Holines Divine.' The
following passage, moreover, seems to show con-
clusively that what are called altar lights were then
in use : —
THE OENAMENTS EUBRIC 431
Wax Candles, Tapors, another cries and calls,
These brought I with me from Cathedrall Paules ;
They'l scare fche Divele, and put him unto flight,
When he perceives a consecrated light ;
When we at Mattens and at Even-song were,
We had them by us then devoid of feare ;
They'l bring delight unto your eyes and nose,
They burn so cleare and smell so like a Eose,
And when you think that it hath burnt enough,
Then blow it out, you shall not smell the snuffe,
Or else you may on whom you will bestow it ;
They'l joy to think a Bishop once did owe it.
In 1688 Eichard Baxter and some of his friends
made proposals for the reform of the Prayer Book,
and they insisted that ' among the most necessary
alterations of the Liturgy ' was * that the Eubric for
the old ornaments which were in use in the second
year of King Edward YI. be put out.'
The following entry in a parish register was sent
to me some years ago by a friend. It is written in
the register between 1704 and 1705 : —
The ornaments of the parish church of Wellow : —
Item. — Two chalises parcell guilt ; and one silver
chalise unguilt.
Item. — One cope of red purple velvet ; with a pair of
vestments of the same.
Item. — One cope of blew velvet and a pair of vest-
ments of the same.
Item. — Three paire of satten vestments and a whyte
chysible.
Item. — Two alter cloaths of silke, and a paire of curteus
of silke.
132 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Item. — A saye cloath and a buckram cloath, and a red
pawle.
Item. — A velvet coate, three knells of diaper, and one
of needle worke.
Item. — Too corporas cloaths, and flfour corporas casis.
Item. — Three alter cloaths of holland for the high alt.
Item. — Four banners ; two silke banners ; and a
crosse banner of silke and the stremoer of silke.
Item. — A brason pulley and an iron pin.
Item. — A greate brasse pan ; and five platters of tin.
Item. — One table cloath.
Item. — A handle of a pax of silver.
Item. — Too silver candlesticks and a seynser of silver,
with pax of silver.
The copy of a bill of the ornaments of the church of
Wellow, delivered to Farmer Bull and William Coole,
churchwardens ; with the same parcell above written ;
delivered to them by the parish of Wellow.
It is not necessary to expose all the blunders of
the Judicial Committee ; but two of them deserve a
passing notice. They laid it down as a fact, too
patent to need argument or illustration, that the
order to use a surplice excludes by necessary im-
plication the use of a chasuble or cope, since both
could not be worn at the same time. The fact is
that a surplice or alb (which is a narrower surplice)
is always worn under the Eucharistic cope or
chasuble, as their Lordships would have seen if they
had read the Eubrics of Edward's Book, which
orders 'the priest that shall execute the holy
ministry ' to ' put upon him the vesture appointed
for that ministration, that is to say, a white albe
plain, with a vestment or cope.'
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 433
Another of their Lordships' extraordinary dicta is
that omission mean's prohibition, or, as they express
it, that every Kubric *by necessary impHcation
abohshes what it does not retain.' If this is good
law, it is broken every week in every church in the
land. Pulpits are illegal, and organs, and hoods,
and stoles of any kind. Indeed their Lordships,
with that capricious consistency which occasionally
visits their reasoning, have actually forbidden stoles
of any colour or no colour. So that every clergyman
who wears a stole is acting as illegally as he who
wears a chasuble. Their Lordships' rule would have
made havoc of Divine Service before the Beforma-
tion as well as since. The first Bubric of the
Hereford Missal, for example, prescribes the use of
the alb and amice for the officiating priest. Are we
to infer from this that he was forbidden to wear the
chasuble ? Of course we know the contrary. The
Kubric in the York Missal supplies a still more
ludicrous illustration. ' When the priest washes his
hands before Mass,' it says, ' he shall say this
prayer.' Does that forbid him to wear any eccle-
siastical vestments at all '?
I say it with all submission, but I believe that
their Lordships have here contradicted a funda-
mental principle of English law. Greek law said :
Quce lex non jubet vetat} Our law, following the
Boman, says : Quce lex non jubet jpermittit} Mr.
• Tcii }xkv yap iffri tuv SiKaicov rcb Kara nraffav apcT^v inrh rod vo/jlov
rcTayfifva, oiov oh K^\evei a/iroKTivvvvai kavrhu 6 vojjios, & 5e /i^ /ceAeyei,
airayopevei. Aristotle, Eth. bk. v. ch. 11.
- » Cum apud GraBCos leges non juris tantum sed virtutis causa
FF
434 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Archibald Stephens, who was counsel for the
prosecutor in Sheppard v. Bennett, reduced their
Lordships' maxim to an absurdity. He argued that
* the Second Prayer Book of Edward prohibited all
manual acts in the Prayer of Consecration ' because
it did not enjoin them. This was too much for the
Court, and gave rise to the following interpellation :
Lord Justice Mellish : Was there no direction to break
the bread ?
Mr. Stephens : There was no direction.
Archbishop of York : Your argument would prove too
much.
Lord Chancellor : There must, ex necessitate, here be
some manual acts.
Mr. Stephens : My contention is, there were none ; and
your Lordships have already ruled that * omission is
prohibition.'
Archbishop of York : Then in 1552 the minister could
not take the paten or the chalice in his hand ?
Mr. Stephens : No.
With that neat refutation ad absurdum I leave
the matter.
I have remarked in a former chapter on the
fallacy of assuming that either non-user or even non-
existence of the vestments is any -proof of their
illegality. But the Judicial Committee repeatedly
appeal to this alleged fact as conclusive evidence of
illegality. They find bishops asking in their Visita-
ferrentur, legibus prsecepta continebantur quibus magistratus edice-
bant quae fieri vellent. Apud nos autem, stricto jure inter Eomanos
jam orto, lex nihil jubet, sed quae fieri nolit, edicit, ita ut contraria
Aristoteli jam nunc obtineat regula : quce lex non jubet permittit. —
Jklichelet, Commentar. ad AristoL Ethic. Nicom. p. 195.
THE OENAMBNTS EUBRIC 435
tion Articles whether the minister wore a surpHce,
and their Lordships take this as ' proof that the
chasuble was illegal. But a better knowledge of
the history of the times would have shown them
that it was not a case of surplice against chasuble,
but of surplice against ' a horseman's cloak ' or
ordinary secular dress. The difficulty was to get the
Puritan clergy ^ to wear any clerical vestments of
any kind. Moreover, copes and chasubles were
sometimes valuable spoil, and were often sold to
the highest bidder, or privately disposed of. I have
already quoted Burleigh's description of the ruin and
desolation which Puritanism had wrought in matters
of religion over large tracts of the country. Numbers
of Sir William Harcourt's devout Protestant laity
engaged heartily in the work of reformation on
Puritan models for the sake of the loot. So that a
witty divine of the day declared in a published
sermon that * Popish lands make Protestant land-
lords.' Let me corroborate here by independent
evidence the doleful picture drawn by Burleigh. In
an official Eeport to the Queen's Council, in the
thirty-fourth year of Elizabeth's reign, on the con-
dition of Lancashire and Cheshire, I find the follow-
ing description : —
Small reformation has been made there by the
Ecclesiastical Commission, as may appear by the empti-
' To prevent misunderstanding let me say that the Puritanism of
the Elizabethan era had scarcely anything in common with the
Evangelicalism of our day or with ordinary Protestant Nonconfor-
mity. Its residuary legatees are the Kensits and the Church Asso-
ciation.
FF 2
436 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
ness of churches on Sundays and holy days, and the
multitudes of bastards and drunkards. Great sums have
been levied under pretence of the Commission ; but the
counties are in worse case than before, and the number of
those who do not resort to Divine Service greater. The
people lack instruction, for the preachers are few, most
of the parsons unlearned, and many of the learned not
resident ; and divers unlearned daily admitted into very
good benefices by the bishop. . . . Some of the coroners
and justices of the peace and their families do not frequent
church ; and many of them have not communicated at
the Lord's Supper since the beginning of her Majesty's
reign. . . . Alehouses are innumerable, and the law for
suppressing and keeping them in order is unexecuted ;
whereby toleration of drunkenness, unlawful games, and
other great abuses follow. Although their Lordships [of
the Council] have often written to the justices for redress,
small or no reformation has followed ; and cockfights
and other unlawful games are tolerated on Sundays and
holy days during Divine Service, at which justices of the
peace and some Ecclesiastical Commissioners are often
present.^
That was the state of degradation, social and
religious, to which Puritanism reduced England,
wherever it got 9, free hand, in the reign of Elizabeth.
And such is the state to which the spiritual descen-
dants of those Puritans — the Church Association
and its allies — would reduce England now, if they
had their way ; not intentionally, of course, but
from their ignorance of human nature and of
the forces which tend to elevate it and make for
righteousness. It took a long time to raise the
* Calendar of State Papers: Domestic, 1591-1594, pp. 158--9.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 437
clergy from the degraded state to which the aUiance
of Erastianism and Puritanism had reduced them.
Here is Swift's description of the social condition of
the English vicar of his day : —
He hath a house and barn in repair, a field or two to
graze his cows, with a garden and orchard. No guest
expects more from him than a pot of ale ; he lives like an
honest plain farmer, as his wife is dressed but little better
than Goody. He is sometimes graciously invited by the
squire, where he sits at a humble distance ; if he gets the
love of his people, they often make him Httle useful
presents ; he is happy by being born to no higher
expectation, for he is usually the son of some ordinary
tradesman or middling farmer. His learning is much of
a size with his birth and education ; no more of either
than what a poor hungry servitor can be expected to
bring from his college.^
If the English people wish to get that class of
clergy back, undoubtedly the Protestant agitators
are going the right away about it. Let the Puri-
tanico-Erastian principle have its way, and let the
Church be regarded as an ordinary human institution,
looking to the State for its doctrine, its discipline, and
its ceremonial, as if it were a department of the
Civil Service, and the result will be that men of
brains, of education, and of self-respect will refuse
to take orders, and Swift's class of peasant
* servitors ' will take their place. As a ' profession *
the Church is the poorest. I imagine that the
average pay of the . clergy at this moment is under
200Z. a year. What but the love of God and pity
* Writings on Religion and tlie Church, i. 267.
438 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
for human misery and sorrow could tempt a man
of ordinary brains and education to dedicate his
life to the toil, anxieties, and worry of so poorly
paid a profession? A few years after my ordina-
tion I felt the need of study for proficiency in my
calling. I gave up accordingly three years to study,
devoting my leisure to journalism, and helping some
of my brother clergy on Sunday. Without hard
work I made a fair income; and I claim nothing
more than ordinary brains and education. Why
should a man abandon such a position for the sake
of 2001. a year, or less, and much harder work, with
the addition of being made ' the offscouring of all
things,' and the sport of ignorant bigotry and
Philistinism at Albert Hall demonstrations ? We
have been hearing complaints for some time past
that the proportion of ' honours ' men, and even of
University men, who take orders, is growing alarm-
ingly smaller every year. No self-respecting man,
if he be not impelled by the love of God and the
' enthusiasm of humanity,' will care to be made the
target of Sir William Harcourt's invective, or be
smitten with the jawbone of Lady Wimborne's
ubiquitous donkey.
But to return to the Judicial Committee. What
but the most childlike ignorance of the condition of
England from Elizabeth's accession to the Restora-
tion, and for some time after, could have persuaded
a body of upright and intelligent men that the
absence of costly vestments in scenes of irreligion
and desolation, such as I have described, is proof of
THE OENAMENTS EUBRIG 439
their illegality ? They might just as well have
decided that daily service and v^eekly celebrations of
the Holy Communion are illegal, for these were as
rare as the Eucharistic vestments under the tyranny
of Puritan lawlessness. Both were carried on all
through that period of spiritual desolation and
barrenness, but only here and there.
Mr. Tomlinson wrote a pamphlet against Arch-
bishop Benson's Lincoln judgment, and afterwards
expanded it into a book. The book is the offspring
of that prolific parent of myths, a mare's nest, and
its argument is so confused and so inconsistent with
facts, that I should have deemed it waste of time to
notice it, did I not find that men like Lord Grim-
thorpe have proclaimed this mare's nest to be a
wonderful discovery. People are in general so
ignorant of the history of the Reformation that they
are too prone to take a writer's valuation of himself or
of his friends for granted, without testing it. Lord
Grimthorpe always writes in the tone of an infallible
pope, who is master of all knowledge in heaven
above, or in the earth beneath, or in the water under
the earth ; and the unreflecting are apt to suppose
that a man who writes so confidently, and obtained
some reputation at the Parliamentary bar, is likely
to be right when he writes on subjects which he
has never studied, and of which he knows very little.
Knowledge of theology and of ecclesiastical history
and law is not necessary to success at the Parlia-
mentary bar ; but it is necessary in dealing with the
subjects which I am discussing ; and as Lord Grim-
440 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
thorpe has become sponsor for the legitimacy of
Mr. TomHnson's hterary foundHng, it is perhaps
better to examine its claims.
Mr. Tomlinson's theory is that Elizabeth's Act
of Uniformity revived the Second Book of Edward,
' v^ith one alteration or addition [quoting the Act]
of certain lessons to be used on every Sunday in the
year, and the form of the Litany altered and cor-
rected, and two sentences only added in the delivery
of the Sacraments,^ and none otheb oe otherwise.'
The capitals indicate the importance which Mr.
Tomlinson attributes to the last words of this
quotation. His inference is that these words had
the effect in law of re-enacting the Rubrics of the
book of 1552, one of which forbids the Eucharistic
vestments in express words.
The first observation which Mr. Tomlinson's
theory invites is that it is not only opposed to all
contemporary and succeeding evidence, but also
against every legal decision on the subject, including
the Purchas and Ridsdale judgments. All the
Puritans in the reign of Elizabeth, without a single
exception, assumed that the Act of Uniformity and
the Ornaments Rubric restored the vestments of
Edward's First Book. It legalised the Prayer Book
of 1552, except the Rubric on vestments ; and that
was expunged in favour of an order restoring the
vestments which the Rubric of the Second Book
forbade. That is the unanimous complaint of all
* I quote Mr. Tomlinson literally. In the original, of course, the
word is * Sacrament.'
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 441
the Puritans, English and foreign. Had they known
such a deadly flaw as Mr. Tomlinson imagines,
they would have been quick to point it out. That
is the first objection to Mr. Tomlinson's theory, and
it is fatal.
Next, it would prove too much. As a matter of
fact, no * alteration or addition of certain Lessons '
was made when the Act passed, or for two years after-
wards. Moreover, an edition of the Prayer Book
came out in 1559, after the Act of Uniformity, with
the addition of the prayers for the Queen and the
clergy, the benediction, and the prayer beginning,
' God, whose nature and property,' &c. From this
it follows that Mr. Tomlinson's quotation from the
Act of Uniformity contemplated not only what had
actually been then done, but also what it was
intended to do. Moreover, the * other order ' pro-
vided for in the Act would legalise the addition of
the Ornaments Rubric to the Act. It is strange
that a gentleman who upholds the legality of addi-
tions to the Act of Uniformity by means of Royal
Injunctions should denounce as a ' fraud ' the ad-
dition of the Ornaments Rubric by Royal authority.
But where is the proof that the Ornaments
Rubric was not in the copy of the Prayer Book
appended to the Act of Uniformity when it was
before Parliament? There is absolutely no proof,
not a scrap of tangible evidence. It is certain that
the Ornaments Rubric was in the first edition of
Elizabeth's Book, printed simultaneously with the
Act of Uniformity. Of that edition only two copies
442 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
are known to exist. One is in the possession of
Lord Aldenham, and the other (Lord Ashburnham's
copy) came into Mr. Quaritch's possession last
summer. Its rarity may be guessed from the price,
184^. I had an opportunity of examining it, and
the Ornaments Eubric was in it. That Eubric is in
fact merely the Ornaments clause of the Act of
Uniformity, with a slight verbal alteration.
But Mr. Tomlinson's theory is exposed to another
deadly flaw. This gentleman, who is so stern a
censor of ' suppressions and misquotations ' ^ by
other people, is obliged by his theory to alter an Act
of Parliament, changing 'second' into ' seventh.' ^
The Elizabethan Act of Uniformity legalises the
ritual of the second year of Edward VI. Mr.
Tomlinson, in order to get in the ritual of 1552,
forbidding the Eucharistic vestments &c., is forced to
read ' seventh ' for ' second.' And what is his defence
of this violent proceeding? A gross misinterpreta-
tion of the following Eoyal Injunction, which he
thinks, with the usual confidence of the discoverers
of mare's nests, reverses the plain language of an
Act of Parliament. It is a sad waste of time and
space to quote and discuss pure irrelevancies and
fads ; but Mr. Tomlinson has an idea that those who
receive the Ornaments Rubric in its plain gram-
matical meaning fight shy of the Thirtieth Injunction
' He accuses myself of being ^facile priitceps in misquoting.'
There is no misquoting whatever in the passage to which he appeals
by way of proof.
2 The Prayer Book, Articles, and Homilies, p. 39.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIG 443
as fatal to their case. Here, then, is the Injunction
in full, with Mr. Tomlinson's portentous capitals : —
Item. — Her Majesty being desirous to have the
prelacy and clergy of this realm to be had as well in out-
ward reverence, as otherwise regarded for the worthiness
of their ministries, and thinking it necessary to have them
known to the people in all places and assemblies. Both
IN THE Church and without, and thereby to receive the
honour and estimation due to the Special Messengers
AND Ministers of Almighty God ; willeth and com-
mandeth that all archbishops and bishops, and all others
that be called or admitted to preaching or ministry
of the Sacraments, or that be admitted into vocation
ecclesiastical, or into any Society of learning in either of
the Universities, or elsewhere, shall use and wear such
seemly habits, garments, and such square caps, as were
most commonly and orderly received in the Latter Year
of the reign of King Edward the Sixth ; not thereby mean-
ing to attribute any holiness or special worthiness to the
said garments, but as St. Paul writeth : Omnia decenter
et secundum ordinem fiant (1 Cor. xiv. cap.).
Beyond all rational controversy this Injunction
refers to the ordinary garb of the clergy. They v^ere
to wear a clerical garb that would make ' them known
to the people in all places and assemblies.' Nor was
it enough to wear this clerical garb w^hen they went
to church : they must wear it everywhere. For some
had tried a compromise, putting on the clerical garb
when they went to church, either to officiate or to
worship, and exchanging it for ordinary lay dress
when they returned home. The Injunction orders
them to wear it always. It is as if the War Office
444 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
ordered all officers to wear uniform off duty as
well as on. Who would understand such an order
to mean that they were not to wear the regulation
full-dress uniform on the proper occasions ?
Three of the leading Puritans, writing in July 1566,
say :—
Our affairs are not altered for the better, but alas !
are sadly deteriorated. For it is now settled and
determined that instead of common bread a small
unleavened cake must be used ; that the Communion must
be received kneeling ; that out of doors must be worn a
square cap, bands, a long gown, and tippet ; but in the
sacred service the white vestment and cope are to be
retained {in ministcrio autcm sacro vestis alba et ca;pa
retineantur)}
This was after the publication of the Adver-
tisements. The writers make no distinction
between parish churches and cathedrals, or between
ordinary days and high festivals. They simply say
that the * sacerdotal habit,' the * sacred vestments,'
are now beginning to be forced on the Puritan
clergy in celebrating the Holy Communion, while ' a
dress not common, but peculiar and distinct, was
prescribed for ordinary use.' ' Vestis alba ' means
alb rather than surplice. Yet Mr. Tomlinson calmly
tells his readers that the Thirtieth Injunction and
the Act of Uniformity refer to ' the surplice only.'
So that we are to understand that the clergy were to
wear ' the surplice only,' ' both in the church and
without.* It is really waste of time to discuss such
• Zurich Lett, second series, letter 50.
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 445
nonsense, or would be if the public were not so
ignorant of the question. So let us follow Mr.
Tomlinson's reasoning a little further.
* Now the outdoor garb of the clergy,' he says,
* underwent no change whatever from the earlier to
the latter years of Edward VI.' Why, then, does the
Injunction say that those prescribed habits were such
* as were most commonly and orderly received in the
latter year of the reign of Edward the Sixth ' ?
Because, argues Mr. Tomlinson, that was the year of
the Second Prayer Book, which abolished all the
vestments except ' the surplice only ; ' and the
Thirtieth Injunction refers to the Bubric of that
Book. But what about the Act of Uniformity which
legalises the vestments of the second year of Edward ?
The two things are irreconcilable ; but what is that
to Mr. Tomlinson ? Hoc volo, sic jubeo ; sit pro
ratione volujitas. The reference to ' the latter year '
of Edward VI. is simple enough to any one not
bound to maintain a theory per fas et 7iefas. The
persistent complaint of the Puritans was that while
restoring the Second Book of Edward, with a few
alterations, the Act of Uniformity brought back the
vestments of the second year of Edward instead of
leaving the Bubric which prescribed the surplice
only. That Bubric had been expunged from the
Book in favour of the clause ,in the Act which
re-enacted the Eucharistic vestments. That was the
grievance of the Puritans. But the Thirtieth
Injunction says in effect: 'But no such objection
lies against the outdoor habits on which we insist,
446 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
for they were most commonly and orderly received
in the latter year of the reign of Edward VI.' — the
year to which the Puritans were always appealing.
That makes good sense of the Thirtieth Injunction.
Mr. Tomlinson's interpretation makes irretrievable
nonsense of it.
Here is one more specimen of Mr. Tomlinson's
method of reasoning. He quotes Sandys as
follows : —
The Parliament draweth towards an end. The last
book of service is gone through with a proviso to retain
the ornaments which were used in the first and second
year of King Edward, until it please the Queen to take
other order for them. Our gloss upon this text is that
we [clergy] shall not be forced to use them, but that
others [churchwardens &c.] in the mean time shall not
convey them away, but they may remain for the Queen.
The words within parenthesis are a suggestio
falsi on the part of Mr. Tomlinson, without an
atom of fact to support it. Strype, in quoting
the passage, says truly, ' But this must be looked
upon as the conjecture of a private man.' What
Sandys meant is what I have been contending for
all along, namely, that the Puritans, finding the
vestments restored in spite of their protests, fell
back on their second line of defence — i.e. that they
would not be forced to use them. The ' we ' does
not mean, as Mr. Tomlinson suggests, the clergy,
but Sandys and his fellow-Puritans. But Sandys's
letter contains one important point. He was one of
the revisers of the Second Book, and he says, in the
THE OENAMENTS RUBETC 447
teeth of Mr. Tomlinson's theory, that the Act of
Uniformity restored the ornaments which were used
in the first and second years of King Edward. I am
not sure that we know for certain what the full
ceremonial in use under Edward's First Book was.
Probably it was the old ceremonial, hardly, if at all,
changed. But Sandys puts the matter beyond a
doubt by including the first as well as the second
year of Edward. The old ceremonial was of course
used unabridged in Edward's first year.^
Mr. Tomlinson's dogmatism is always in an
inverse ratio to his knowledge. Here is an example.
He asserts peremptorily that * nobody ever paid the
slightest heed to the standard of 1549 during the
six years, 1559-66, which elapsed before the issue of
the Advertisements. Not a single bishop then wore
alb or chasuble, not a single priest wore alb or
tunacle, still less a " vestment " during all those six
years when, on the received theory, those " orna-
ments " were not merely permissible, but com-
pulsory.' Now considering that, with the exception
of two hundred at most, nine thousand parish priests
> The following quotation from Bucer's Censura, published in
1551 (see Dixon's Hist, of Ch. of Engl. iii. 291), shows that the
ceremonial in use under the First Book of Edward was the customary
one, the only difference consisting in the service being in English : —
' I may add on ceremonies that in many of your churches there
is still found a studied representation of the execrated Mass, in
vestures, lights, bowings, crossings, washing of the cup, breathing
on the bread and cup, carrying the book from right to left of the
table, having the table where the altar was, lifting the paten and
cup, and adoration paid by men who nevertheless will not communi-
cate. All these should be forbidden.'
448 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
retained their livings, all using the ^Id ritual, which
the Act of 1559 explicitly legalised, it would require
demonstrative proof that they all, or a majority, or
even a large number of them, suddenly left off the
mode of worship with which they were familiar,
and to which they were attached, for no rhyme or
reason. What evidence does Mr. TomHnson offer ?
Not a scrap. We are to take his infallible word for
it, the burden of proof being entirely on his back,
and the presumption against him amounting to
moral proof. But I have already given positive
evidence that ' the standard of 1549 ' was in matter of
fact followed during the period named and long
afterwards ; and my proofs could be multiplied. I
may add the following. In the ' Life of Sir Thomas
Smith ' it is recorded that among the ornaments of
his chapel in 1569 were ' vestment and alb for the
priest ; a Bible, and a pair of virginals instead of an
organ.' ^ That was three years after the publication
of the Advertisements ; and Smith occupied an
official and influential position.
With one more specimen of the way in which
Mr. Tomlinson is accustomed to get up his facts, I
will take my leave of him. ' That stiff High Church-
man, John Johnson,' he says, ' when he published
his " Clergyman's Vade-Mecum " in 1707, had not so
much as heard of Canon MacColl's theory.' True ;
but in subsequent editions Johnson confessed his
ignorance, retracted his error, and strenuously sup-
ported ' Canon MacColl's theory.' In a long com-
' P. 171.
THE^OENAMENTS EUBEIG 449
ment on the Ornaments Rubric in the fifth edition,
pubhshed in 1723, Johnson, speaking of the ' other
order ' of the Uniformity Act, says : —
Some have attempted to prove, that she did take such
Order ; but there is no certain proof of it ; nay, it is
evident enough that she did take no such Order : For
theEubric enjoining the same Ornaments that were used
in the first Book of Edward, still continued thro' her
reign, and the two following : And if she had taken such
Order ; yet the Eubric before Morning Prayer in oiu*
Present Liturgy, enforced by the Act of Uniformity,
14 Charles II., could not be affected by any Order
taken by Queen Elizabeth : therefore Bishop Gibson
truly says, ' Legally, the Ornaments of Ministers in
performing Divine Service are the same now, as they were
in the second year of Edward VL'
The Judicial Committee also condemned the use
of incense and altar lights on the same grounds as
the Eucharistic vestments, and their argument on
those points collapses with their argument against
the vestments. But I may cite the following
instances of the use of incense and altar lights after
the publication of the Advertisements.
In the * History of Trig Minor,' already quoted,
we have indisputable evidence not only of the use,
in the year 1567, of copes and chasubles of various
colours, but also of a ' ship of tin ' for incense, * a
censer of latten,' 'a lamp before the high altar,' 'a
sacring bell.' These took the place of ^two censers
of silver and two ships of silver,' which are found
in the inventory of 1539. They disappeared as
G G
450 THE RBFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
valuable loot in the predatory zeal of interested ' re-
forfners ; ' and the fact that the parish provided
cheap ones in their place, which v^ere in use after
the publication of the Advertisements, is good evi-
dence against the ruling of the Judicial Committee.
In Bishop Lloyd's Form of Consecrating Churches,
&c., there is a service for the consecration of
candlesticks and of censers. While the Bishop is
placing the candlesticks ' upon the altar,' the
chaplain is directed to say : * Thy v^ord is a lantern
tinto my feet : and a light unto my paths.
' For in Thee is the foundation of life : and in
Thy light shall v^e see light.'
This clearly implies that the altar candles v^ere
intended to be lighted.
So likewise when a censer is presented and re-
ceived, the clergy say : ' While the King sitteth at
his Table : my spikenard sendeth forth the smell
thereof.
' Let my prayer be set forth before Thee as the
incense : and let the lifting up of my hands be as
the Evening Sacrifice.'
Now let it be remembered that the volume from
which these extracts are taken was published in the
beginning of last century ; that it was compiled by a
bishop's chaplain, and dedicated to the Bench of
Bishops ; that it was certainly used by the Bishop
whose chaplain compiled it ; and that it agrees sub-
stantially with various Forms of Consecration
Services which were in common use in the seven-
teenth century. Is it possible to beheve that the
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIO 451
observances which it prescribes were all the while
forbidden by law and unknown in practice ?
There is in the British Museum a MS. of Bishop
Sanderson's, with a sketch of his chapel and lettered
references after the Restoration ; and among other
things the following inventory gives us a peep into
his manner of administering the Holy Communion :
* The gilt canister for the wafers, like a wicker
basket lined with cambric ; a vessel with pipes for
the water of mixture ; basin and ewer for washing
before consecration, and a towel ; footpace of three
steps covered with Turkey carpet ; a censer in
which the clerk putteth the frankincense ; the
navicula, like the keel of a boat, with a half cover
for the incense.'
But the Judicial Committee has not only shown
its incompetence to act as a final court of appeal in
ecclesiastical causes by reason of its entire ignorance
of the matters on which it has to adjudicate ; it has, in
addition, displayed such a marked bias as to destroy
confidence in its fairness on the part of those who
have carefully examined its judgments. Its decisions
have been dictated by policy rather than by law.
It has invariably acquitted men who have been
powerfully supported by influential parties, and
condemned men who appeared to lack that support.
Gorham flatly contradicted the plain language of the
Prayer Book, yet was acquitted because his doctrine
was popularly identified— though quite erroneously—
with the doctrine of the Evangelical party. The
* Essays and Reviews ' and Mr. Bennett of Frome had
Q 8 2
452 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
powerful parties behind them : therefore the accused
were acquitted. But the EituaHsts were supposed
to represent only a small party whose resentment
might be braved without danger. They were there-
fore condemned, against the plain letter of the law,
till an Archbishop declared in favour of the legality
of some things which the Judicial Committee had
condemned. That looked formidable ; therefore the
Judicial Committee supported the Archbishop.
A clergyman of the name of Dunbar Heath was
in 1860 tried for heresy on account of some confused
statements which he had published on the subject
of the Atonement. He was deprived by Dr. Lushing-
ton, Dean of the Arches Court, and appealed to the
Judicial Committee. And meanwhile he had taken
some steps to explain himself to his bishop and to
the Court. I quote the last paragraph of their
Lordships' judgment : —
Their Lordships have had their attention directed to a
letter addressed by Mr. Heath to the Lord Bishop of
Winchester on January 2, 1860, in which he states that,
if he has laid down any doctrine or position at variance
with the Articles or foi^mularies, he has done so un-
wittingly and in error, and in which he requests his
diocesan to point out in what respects he has done so,
that he may correct whatever error he has fallen into.
Another and more formal document has also been brought
before their Lordships, in which Mr. Heath has stated
that, if it appears to the Ordinary, and to the official
Principal of his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury,
that his language does contain or teach a doctrine directly
THE OENAMENTS EUBKIC 453
contrary or repugnant to any of the Thirty-nine Articles
of Eehgion, he expresses his regret and revokes his error.
Who can doubt, who has followed the various
judgments of this august tribunal, that if Mr. Heath
had been supported by a powerful party their Lord-
ships would have welcomed his expression of regret
and revocation of any error he might have un-
intentionally taught ? But Mr. Heath had no back-
ing. He had been a Fellow of Trinity, Cambridge,
and was a high — I think senior — wrangler. But he
had, nevertheless, a very confused mind, as I often
had occasion to notice, for I used to meet him at the
Koyal Society of Literature, of which we were both
Fellows. He was always in the clouds when he
joined in our discussions, and seemed to labour
under an incapacity to give intelligible expression to
his ideas. He was emphatically a man towards
whom every possible indulgence ought to have been
shown on a charge of heresy. But the Court refused
to accept his general expression of regret and
retractation. ' They are unwilling to proceed to the
last step in their duty, but unless he expressly and
unreservedly revokes the errors of which he has
been thus convicted, their Lordships have no course
left but to advise her Majesty to confirm the
sentence of deprivation under the Act.' And
deprived Mr. Dunbar Heath was accordingly. An-
other proof of bias characteristic of the Judicial
Committee is the fact that a Eitualist was always
made to pay the costs, according to the usual rule,
454 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
when he was condemned, but refused his costs in
several cases where judgment was in his favour.
I am sure that in making these complaints
against the fairness of the Judicial Committee I
shall carry with me the sympathy of all dispassio-
nate lawyers who may take the trouble to compare
my accusation with the facts. Some of the severest
impeachments of judicial impartiality that I know
have been uttered by lawyers. Lord Selborne, when
he sat in th^ House of Commons in 1868 as Sir
Boundell Palmer, offered a strong opposition to the
transference of election petitions from the House
of Commons to the judges, on the ground of what
he thought the inevitable political bias of the judges.
I quote his words : —
Judges, like other men, have their politics; but at
present cases in which political bias might be supposed
to affect their minds were rare, although in those cases
they frequently gave their judgments according to their
politics.^
When the Supreme Court of Judicature Act was
before the House of Commons it was proposed by
the Government to give certain discretionary powers
to the judges in the matter of assessing costs, and
in a few other particulars. The Bar flew to arms
in dismay, and proclaimed its profound distrust of
the impartiality of our judges in cases where their
feehngs were Hkely to be engaged. Let two extracts
from the speeches of two distinguished barristers^
' Speech by Sir Koundell Palmer on Mr. Disraeli's Bribery Bill.
See Hansard, third series, cxcii. pp. 286-7.
' Elevated to the judicial bench afterwards.
THE OENAMENTS EUBRIC 455
and members of the House of Commons suffice by
way of sample.^ Here is the opinion of Mr.
Lopes : —
When the proper time came he should move an
amendment that the Bill of Exceptions should be pre-
served. Again, under the Act of 1873 and this Bill, if a
judge misdirected a jury, or improperly received or
rejected evidence, a new trial was not to be granted,
unless the Court before whom the case came should be of
opinion that the miscarriage of justice was caused by the
misdirection, — unless the jury had been affected by it.
Judges were so apt to think they were right when they
were wrong, that this would be a very dangerous inroad
indeed. Hitherto, save in a few exceptional cases, costs
had always followed the event, and in no case was the
successful party deprived of his costs ; but the Bill
proposed to give a judge absolute discretion, so that a
judge who disapproved a verdict might order a success-
ful defendant to bear the costs of an action.
Mr. Watkin Williams used even stronger lan-
guage, as the following extract from his speech will
show : —
These Rules and Orders would be made by the
judges, and would come into operation, and then in the
month of March or next Easter the House might
interfere. But suppose the judges abohshed meanwhile
trial by jury. The Lord Chancellor might order cases to
be tried by a judge instead of before a jury, and when
the matter came to be discussed in Parliament, all
manner of proceedings would be taken under these Rules
and Orders, and they would be told that the greatest
inconvenience would be caused by the House repealing
' See Times of July 6, 1875,
466 THE BEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
them. He trusted that the House would never part with
this power. It might be said that the judges would
never do these things. Wouldn't they ? The first thing
done by these Eules and Orders was to abolish the Bill
of Exceptions which had been granted to suitors by
Edward I., to prevent caprice and the exercise of what
was called ' discretion ' on the part of the judges. The
Bill of Exceptions was one of the rights of the suitor.
The judges ought to administer the law, and ought not to
have the * discretion ' lohich would enable them to alter it.
Another exceptional feature in the Eules and Orders was
the power given to the Common Law judge over costs.
The power of giving costs would be in the discretion of
the judges, and it would totally alter the relations
between the judges and the Bar. It was right that in
Equity cases the judge should have the power of
deciding as to the payment of costs, because he has the
whole case before him. But imagine a case of libel, or of
interference with personal liberty, which would come
before a jury. If the judge took a view opposed to that
of the jury, he might avenge himself — and it was
necessary to speak out on this subject — by punishing the
counsel, the suitor, and the jury, because he differed with
them in opinion. . At present, if a judge manifested
caprice or lost his temper during a trial, the counsel bore
it patiently, because they knew that the judge was
subject to the laws. If he was wrong in his ruling they
tendered a bill of exceptions ; and if he overrode counsel
they had the jury to appeal to. The Eules and Orders
would alter all this, and produce changes such as no one
at present realised.
It appears then that the clergy are not the only
class in the community who gravely suspect the
partiality of our tribunals in questions where the
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 457
prejudices of the judges are tolerably certain to come
into play. And it must be allowed that the clergy
have special reasons for suspiciousness, inasmuch as
the questions which affect them are too often decided
by judges who have at best no more than the merest
rudimentary knowledge of them, and who conse-
quently commit themselves to statements and con-
clusions which those who have studied these ques-
tions know to be quite erroneous. There was a time
when English judges were profoundly versed in
ecclesiastical history and Canon Law. How many
are there on the Bench now who have seriously
studied these questions ? Is it so marvellous then
that men who have studied them feel no great respect
for judicial deliverances which, as in the case of the
Purchas judgment, bristle all over with blunders?
For myself, I know not why I should reject the
False Decretals of the Papacy and accept those of
the Judicial Committee. After all, Historic Truth
*is great, and will prevail,' the Purchas judgment
and its defenders notwithstanding.
But I hasten to add that I acquit the Judicial
Committee of anything worse than unconscious bias.
I have no doubt that the members of the Court have
always acted with entire conscientiousness. But
it is possible that the very conscientiousness of a
judge may tempt him unconsciously to bend the
law from the straight line of justice in the direction
of some interest which he conceives to be of para-
mount importance. So that his conscientiousness,
instead of being a protection to him, is a snare. The
458 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
late Sir George Cornewall Lewis has some obser-
vations on this subject, which are so pertinent that
I shall take the liberty of quoting them :—
It is universally admitted that no man ought to be a
judge in his own case. But, if the case were not his
own, his competency to form a judgment upon it might
be indisputable. So if any political measure be proposed
which affects the interest of a profession, it may happen
that persons belonging to that profession, though
peculiarly competent to form an opinion respecting it, on
account of their experience and knowledge, are dis-.
qualified on account of the probable bias of their judg-
ment by personal considerations ; and that the requisite
indifference is only to be found among those who do not
belong to the profession. Such outlying persons may
be the only impartial judges in the matter. . . . The
operation of a personal interest in perverting the judg-
ment is so insidious, that great honesty, combined with
perpetual vigilance, is necessary in order to guard
against its influence. Men utterly incapable of telling a
deliberate untruth, or deliberately expressing an insincere
opinion, are nevertheless liable to be warped by personal
interest in the deliberate formation of opinions. When
a strong bias of this sort exists, their minds, ready to
receive every tittle of evidence on one side of a question,
are utterly impervious to arguments on the other.
Hence we see opinions, founded on a belief (and often a
radically erroneous belief) of self-interest, pervade whole
classes of persons. Frequently the great majority of a
profession, or trade, or other body, adopt some opinion in
which they have, or think they have, a common interest,
and urge it with almost unanimous vehemence against
the public advantage. On occasions of this kind, the
persons interested doubtless convince themselves of the
THE OENAMENTS EUBEIC 459
reasonableness of the view which they put forward ; they
are guilty of no hypocrisy or insincerity; but their
judgment is warped by their belief as to their interest in
the question.^
But the bias of self-interest is not always the most
powerful bias. Many a man who knows himself too
well to suffer the promptings of self-interest to bias
him is readily influenced by the interest which he
feels in a great cause or institution. Lord Cairns
and Lord Selborne were far above the motives of self-
interest. But the former was a very strong Puritan,
and both were devoted to the interest of the Church
as an Establishment, and allowed their minds, I be-
lieve, to be biased against a party who, they thought,
were imperilling the Establishment. I may shock
some of my friends, but I will frankly own that the
judge whom I should be disposed to trust in these
questions would be a great and strong lawyer like
the late Sir George Jessel, who, as a Jew, would
have ' the requisite indifference.'
' Influence of Authority in Matters of O;pinion, pp. 34-36 ; cf.
Mill's Logic, ii. 286-7, third edition.
460 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
CHAPTBE XI
ANGLICAN AND KOMAN OEDEES
When one has a good case it is an error in tactics
to stand on the defensive. I propose therefore in
this chapter to test very briefly the vaHdity of
Eoman Orders by the criterion appHed by Leo XIII.
to the vaHdity of AngHcan Orders in the Bull in
which he declared their invalidity. In the most
weighty, learned, and dignified ' Answer ' of our two
Primates to that Bull it is shown conclusively that
the argument on which the Pope bases his conclu-
sion would invalidate the Orders of every Church in
Christendom, and most of all the Orders of the Church
of Eome. The retort of * The Cardinal Archbishop
and Bishops of the Province of Westminster,' in
their * Vindication of the Bull " Apostolicae Curae," '
is one of the weakest specimens of special pleading
which it has ever been my lot to read. It is of course
natural for Cardinal Vaughan and his colleagues to
assume throughout the infallibility of the Pope. To
those, who accept that dogma, further argument is
obviously superfluous. The Pope has declared that
Anglican Orders are invalid, and therefore causa
finita est for all infallibilists. But for others Cardinal
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN ORDBES 461
Vaughan's assumption has no value. It is evident
. from the whole of the ' Vindication ' that in the
minds of its authors the decisive proof of the
invalidity of Anglican Orders is the fact that the
Pope has pronounced them invalid. They evidently
agree with Cardinal Manning that * the appeal to
history is a treason and a heresy ; ' and their own
appeal to history is plainly a condescension, a con-
troversial device on the part of disputants who
take their history from a foregone conclusion, not
from the impartial evidence of facts. There is a
vast difference between studying history in order to
support an imperative dogma already received as a
necessary article of faith, and studying history with
a loyal intention to follow whithersoever it may lead.
The Pope having spoken, Cardinal Vaughan and his
colleagues are bound to find history in agreement
with the Pope, or to deny the Pope's infallibility.
Of course, therefore, they have found history in
agreement with the Pope. They try to disguise this
aspect of the question from their readers, and argue
as if they were free to accept the verdict of history,
which manifestly they are not. Indeed they start
with an apparently unconscious recognition of this
fact when they urge, —
In short, to deny Leo XIII.'s competency to define
the conditions of a valid sacrament is to strike at the
very roots of the sacramental system. For if there be no
authority on earth capable of deciding so fundamental a
point, how can we continue to attach vital importance
to the Sacraments, or to regard them as stable rites of
462 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
divine institution on the true observance of which the
maintenance of our spiritual Hfe depends ?
Observe how the quiet assumption that to deny
the Pope's * competency to define the conditions of a
vaHd sacrament ' is deemed equivalent to an affirma-
tion that ' there is no authority on earth capable of
deciding so fundamental a point.' Both the Papal
Bull and the Cardinal's' Vindication ' prudently pass
by the consecrations of Barlow and Parker and the
decree of Pope Eugenius IV., ' as not requiring to
be examined, since, even apart from them, the in-
validity of your [i.e. Anglican] Orders was decisively
proved.' The consecrations of Barlow and Parker
need not be discussed, for no scholar who has a
reputation to lose would now think of relying on the
old Roman arguments against them. The decree of
Pope Eugenius is a very different matter. It was
addressed ' to the Armenians ' in November, 1489,
as a rule of faith and practice on the doctrines
of the Trinity in Unity, the Incarnation, and the
Seven Sacraments. It answers all the tests of an
ex cathedra infallible pronouncement. And in
addition to this internal evidence of an ex cathedra
character, it was issued three months after the
Council of Florence, and Eugenius affirms that the
decree received the sanction of the Council. If ever
a Papal decree fulfilled the conditions of infallibility,
this doctrinal utterance by Pope Eugenius IV. did
so. Now let us look at its bearing on the validity
of Anglican Orders. After describing the Seven
ANGLICAN AND KOMAN OEDEBS 463
Sacraments, the Pope proceeds to say that all those
Sacraments require three conditions for their validity,
* namely, things as matter ; words as form ; and the
person of a minister conferring the Sacrament with
the intention of doing what the Church does : and
if any of these is absent, there is no Sacrament.
Among these Sacraments there are three — Baptism,
Confirmation, Order — which imprint on the soul an
indelible character, that is, a certain spiritual mark
distinct from others. Consequently they cannot be
repeated on the same person. But the remaining
four imprint no character and admit of reiteration.' *
After giving the usual explanation of the matter
and form in Baptism, the Pope goes on to say that
the matter of Confirmation is the chrism blessed by
the bishop ; and the form, the words — ' I sign thee
with the sign of the cross, and confirm thee with
the chrism of salvation, in the name of the Father,
and Son, and Holy Spirit.' This omits the laying
on of hands as part of the matter of Confirmation,
and gives, as its form, words which have by no
means been universally used. The comment of our
two Archbishops is irresistible : ' If therefore the
doctrine about a fixed matter and form in the Sacra-
ments were to be admitted, the Romans have-
* See Denzinger's EncMridioji Symbolorum et Definitionum gucB
de Rebus Fidei et Morum a Conciliis CF^cumenicis et Summis Ponti-
ficibus emanarunt, Wirceburgi, 1874, pp. 172, 176. Denzinger omits
the first part of this decree, which expounds the doctrines of the
Trinity and Incarnation dogmatically, in order to give colour to his
unfounded suggestion that the Pope intended no definition of the
doctrine of the Sacraments, but only ' practical instruction.'
464 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
administered Confirmation imperfectly for many
centuries, and the Greeks have none.'
That is a very serious matter for a Church which
novi^ regards every ex cathedra utterance of a Pope as
infalHble truth. But it is Pope Eugenius's definition
of the matter and form in the Sacrament of Order
which concerns us in particular. ' The matter here,'
says Pope Eugenius, ' is the delivery into the hands
of a person ordained to the priesthood of the chalice
with wine and the paten with bread ; and the form
of conferring the priesthood is : " Eeceive the power
of offering sacrifice in the Church for the living and
the dead, in the name of the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Spirit." '
If we are to accept this as infallible truth,
Christendom has been without a valid priesthood from
the first Christian Pentecost till now ; for the delivery
of the paten and chalice containing the Eucharistic
elements has never been received by any Church as
necessarily of the essence of the matter of sacerdotal
ordination, and is not now so considered by the
Church of Eome ; while the form prescribed by
Eugenius, though now insisted on as essential by
the Koman Church, has never been so regarded
•by the Church Universal.
Our own and the Oriental Churches, which have
never admitted the infallibility of the Pope, are
unaffected by this decree of Pope Eugenius IV.
Not so the Church of Eome. The Pope's decree is
binding on it, as an article of necessary faith, and
consequently it is bound by the logic of its dogmatic
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OKDERS 465
position to confess itself without priesthood or Sacra-
ments. Thus we see that it is not AngHcan Orders
which Leo XIII.'s Bull and Cardinal Vaughan's
'Vindication' have invalidated, but Eoman Orders.
What, again, can be a more glaring example of
special pleading than the following ? —
Your Eeformers no doubt retained the terras ' priest '
and * bishop ' as the distinctive names of the two higher
degrees of their clergy — probably because they did not
dare to discard terms so long established and so familiar^
But whilst retaining the terms they protested against the
meanings attached to them by the Catholics, and, in-
sisting on the etymological signification, used them, and
desired that in future they should be used, to denote, not
ministers empowered to offer sacrifice, but pastors over
their flocks, to teach them, to administer to them such
Sacraments as they believed in, and generally to tend
them spiritually. This meaning they professed to regard
as that of Scripture, and of the Primitive Church, which
explains the language of the Preface of your Ordinal.
What Cardinal Vaughan and his coadjutors here
cite as proof of a deliberate purpose to make a
fundamental change in the doctrine of the Church
of England is only an illustration of the tendency,
already noticed, of all reformers to dwell chiefly,
on the neglected side of important truths, and use
some reserve in dwelling on the side that had been
pushed to an extreme. Just as St. Paul dwelt on
the necessity of faith and seemed to depreciate'
works ; and St. James dwelt on the necessity of
works to the apparent neglect of faith ; and the
H H
466 THE KEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
early Christian Apologists denied in words the exis-
tence of Christian temples and Christian altars —
meaning such temples and altars as were used in
heathen worship ; so the first Anglican Keformers
dwelt more on the communion than on the sacrificial
aspect of the Eucharist. And when they seem to
deny, like Hooker, that sacrifice is part of the
Christian ministry, they mean sacrifices like those
of the Mosaic dispensation, and sometimes like the
carnal view of the Eucharistic sacrifice taught by
many Boman writers, and believed by the multitude.
That Cranmer, who had most to do with the compi-
lation of the Prayer Book, had no idea of innovating
on the Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist, properly
so called, is plain from his own language. ' The
manner of the Holy Communion,' he says, * which
is now set forth within this realm, is agreeable with
the institution of Christ, with St. Paul, and with the
right faith of the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross.' ^
And at his trial in 1553 he 'offered to join issue
upon this point, that the Order of the Church of
England, set out by the authority of the innocent and
godly Prince Edward VI. in his High Court of Parlia-
ment, is the same that was used in the Church ifteen
hundred years past.* ^
But even if Cardinal Vaughan were right in
thinking that Cranmer' s intention was to change the
doctrine of the Church of England, our reply is that
Cranmer failed in his intention. For the Ordinal has
* Defence of the Cath. Doc. of the Sacr. Bk. v. ch. 18.
» See Jeremy Taylor's Works, v. 238. Eden's edition.
ANGLICAN AND ROMAN OEDERS 467
always contained all the essentials of the rite of ordina-
tion to the priesthood. It is called ' The Form and
Manner of Ordering of Priests.' The first Kubric
says: 'When the day appointed by the Bishop is
come, after Morning Prayer is ended, there shall be a
Sermon or Exhortation, declaring the Duty and Office
of such as come to be admitted Priests ; how neces-
sary that Order is in the Church of Christ, and also
how the people ought to esteem them in their Office.'
Then the Archdeacon is to * present unto the Bishop
(sitting in his chair near to the Holy Table) all them
that shall receive the Order of Priesthood that day,'
saying : ' Reverend Father in God, I present unto
you these persons present, to be admitted to the
Order of Priesthood.' Thereupon the Bishop bids
the Archdeacon ' take heed that the persons ' pre-
sented are * apt and meet ' by learning and character
' to exercise their ministry duly ' — that is, the ' sacer-
dotium,' with all that it implies ; it is the generic
term, embracing all the functions of the Priesthood.
Then the Bishop addresses the congregation, and
invites objections, if there be any, to the qualifications
of any of the candidates for 'the holy Office of
Priesthood.' Then follows a prayer : ' Almighty God,
Giver of all good things, who by Thy Holy Spirit
hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in the
Church ; mercifully behold these Thy servants now
called to the Office of Priesthood ; and replenish
them so with the truth of Thy doctrine, and adorn
them with innocency of life, that, both by word and
H H*2
468 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
good example, they may faithfully serve Thee in
this office,' &c.
After the reading of the Epistle and the Gospel,
the Bishop addresses the candidates and reminds
them of * how great importance this office is where-
unto ye are called,' and exhorts them, ' in the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ, that you have in remembrance
unto how high a dignity, and to how weighty an
office and charge, ye are called.'
Then the Bishop asks : ' Do you think that you
be truly called according to the will of our Lord
Jesus Christ and the Order of this Church of England,
to the Order and Ministry of Priesthood ? ' ' Will
you then give your faithful diligence always so to
minister the Doctrine and Sacraments, and the
Discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded,
and as this Church and Eealm hath received the
same, according to the commandments of God,' &c.
After some more questions and devotions, ' the
Bishop with the priests present shall lay their hands
severally upon the head of every one that receiveth
the Order of Priesthood,' and the Bishop gives his
commission as follows : —
Eeceive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of
a Priest in the Church of God, now committed unto
thee by the Imposition of our hands. Whose sins thou
dost forgive, they are forgiven ; and whose sins thou dost
retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful
Dispenser of the Word of God and of His Holy Sacra-
ments ; In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 469
The candidates having thus received the Sacer-
dotimn in the plenitude of all that the word con-
notes, the Bishop gives each of them a Bible and
bestows jurisdiction by the following words : ' Take
thou Authority to preach the Word of God and to
minister the Holy Sacraments in the Congregation,
where thou shalt be lawfully appointed thereunto.'
The same distinct designation of office is observed
in the consecration of bishops.
The Pope and Cardinal Vaughan admit that our
present * form of ordination, together with the
prayer. Almighty God, Giver of all good thmgs . . .
behold these Thy servants now called to the Office of
Priesthood {or Episcopate), might, apart from the
further reason to be given presently, have furnished
the necessary degree of definiteness.' * The further
reason ' is that the Papal Bull ' very reasonably asks
how any of those other prayers can be thought
to designate the priesthood and episcopate in the
Catholic sense, when it is notorious that this is just
the meaning which the compilers ivere studious
to exclude from the entire service.' ^ What is
* notorious ' here is the ignorance of the Pope as to
the entire subject on which he was pronouncing an
ex cathedra judgment. For the fact is, as I have
shown, that the compilers of the Prayer Book, and
the whole body of representative Anglican divines,
* were studious ' to do, and succeeded in doing,
precisely the reverse of what the Pope and Cardinal
Vaughan impute to them. The Ajiglican divines
^ A Vindication, pp. 38, 39.
470 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
have always insisted on the doctrine of the Eucha-
ristic Sacrifice ' in the Catholic sense/ and have only
repudiated the tincatholic incrustations which grew
around it in the writings of Eoman divines and in
the abuse of a traffic in private masses.
The prayer, Almighty God, Giver of all good
things, &c., is admitted by Cardinal Yaughan and
his colleagues to be *best adapted to supply the
needed element of definiteness.' * But it is found
in your present Ordinal far removed from the imposi-
tion of hands,' and must therefore be regarded as
irrelevant. Nothing has brought so much discredit
on Roman theology as this hard mechanical view of
divine operations. ' The whole ordination service,'
as Cardinal John de Lugo (quoted by the two
Primates) admits, * is a single action, and it makes
no difference if the matter and form are separated
from one another (as is the case in the Pontifical),
if what intervenes makes up a moral whole.' ^ The
assertion that an ordination, otherwise valid, could
be invalidated by the interposition of a few moments
of time and a page of print between a certain prayer
and the laying on of hands is worthy only of
Mohamedan casuistry, according to which the
smallest deviation from the prescribed formula, in
word or action, invalidates the entire rite. And see
how it acts. The invocation has dropped out of the
Roman Liturgy, in which the words of institution
are held in Roman theology to be the consecrating
factor. The Easterns, properly and reverently re-
* Answer of the Archbishops, p. 30.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDERS 471
fusing to limit the action of the Eternal One by
measurements of time, regard the whole Liturgy as
a single action, and decline to dogmatise as to the
precise moment when the elements become effectual
for their purpose. It does not trouble them there-
fore that the invocation comes after the effectual words
have already been spoken according to the Roman
doctrine. Cardinal Vaughan is thus logically bound
to impeach the orthodoxy of all the Eastern
Liturgies; while the Easterns, on their part —
though too charitable to condemn the Eoman rite
as null — do accuse it of being mutilated and defec-
tive : —
The one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the
seven CEcumenical Councils admitted that the Sacred
Elements are sanctified after the prayer of invocation of
the Holy Ghost by the blessing of the priest, as witness
the ancient formularies (rvTriKo,) of Rome and Gaul.
But the Papal Church innovated in this also, having
arbitrarily considered the sanctification of the Sacred
Elements as taking place with the utterance of the words
of the Lord : * Take eat, this is My Body,' and * Drink
ye all of it, for this is My Blood.' ^
But the doctrine of Leo XIII. 's Bull and Cardi-
nal Yaughan's * Vindication ' of it is exposed to stiU
' A Patriarchal and Synodical Encyclical Letter unto the most
sacred and beloved-of-God Metropolitans and Bishops, our brethren
in Christ ; and unto the sacred and pure clergy under them ; and
unto the entire pious and orthodox faithful of the Most Holy Apo-
stolical and Patriarchal See of Constantinople. A Reply of the Holy
Catholic and Apostolical Orthodox Church of the East to the Ency-
clical of Pope Leo XIII. on Reunion, p. 6.
472 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
more formidable perils. The question tm-ns in the
last analysis on the intention of the compilers of the
Prayer Book and of the Anglican clergy as a body
from the Reformation downwards. A heterodox
intention is gratuitously imputed to them, and all
their acts are thus presumed to be tainted by theo-
logical pravity.
There is, of course, a true doctrine of intention.
The minister of a Sacrament must intend to do what
the Church does. It follows that a minister who is
insane, or drunk, or in a fit of somnambulism, or
.otherwise mentally incompetent, cannot perform a
valid Sacrament. But if he knows what he is about,
and intends to discharge with ceremonial exactness
the function which the Church has committed to
him, then his Sacrament is valid, whatever his own
private belief may be. For the real Consecrator in
all Sacraments is Christ Himself, and His will is
effectual independently of the belief or unbelief of
His visible minister. The Church of England
insists on this merciful and equitable doctrine in the
Twenty-sixth Article. It would indeed be a cruel
case if the devout and worthy recipient were
defrauded of a divine gift through the will or wicked-
ness of the minister. But let us take the doctrine
of intention which is now prevalent in the Church
of Home, and let us see how that Church will fare
under its application. The Catholic Church of
Spain under the Moorish domination offers a crucial
test. One of the classical works on Moorish Spain
is that of Professor Dozy, himself a Eoman Catholic.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OKDEES 473
'The Church,' he says, 'was subject to a hard and
cruel servitude.' The right of convoking councils as
well as nominating bishops, which had belonged to
the Visigoth Kings, was now claimed and exercised
by the Arab Sultans ; * and that fatal right, confided
to an enemy of the Christian religion, was for the
Church a source of inexhaustible evil, of opprobrium,
and of scandal.' Whenever a Moorish Prince wished
to squeeze money out of the Christians, or to make
use of them in any other way, he put the ecclesias-
tical machinery in motion by calling a council. At
first the bishops refused to give the sanction of their
presence to these synods. But the Sultans had
another string to their bow ; the sovereign sent Jews
and Musulmans to take the place of the bishops,
and do his bidding. This did not work well, and
the next device on the part of the Mohamedan
rulers was to put pliant tools into each see as the
bishop died or was deposed. The bishopric was
knocked down to the highest bidder, who often did
not go even through the form of making a profession
of Christianity. Benegade Christians, professed
Jews, and bom Musulmans thus came to occupy
the sees of Moorish Spain, many of them unbaptized,
but all having gone through the sacrilegious farce of
consecration, which was thus entirely null and void.
*In this way,' Dozy tells us, 'the Christians saw
their dearest and most sacred interests entrusted to
heretics ; to libertines, who took part in the orgies
of Arab courtesans, even during the solemnities of
Church festivals ; to unbelievers who publicly
474 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
denied a future life ; to wretches who, not satisfied
with seUing their own souls, sold their flocks into
the bargain.' *
This state of things lasted for centuries. What
will Cardinal Vaughan say about the Sacraments,
including Orders, administered by men like these?
Can he guarantee that any of them was validly
ordained, or administered the Sacraments in their
turn with the right intention and the right matter
and form ? Yet the priesthood of Spain is largely
descended from the episcopate of the Moorish
domination. Blanco White too makes revelations
which, though not quite so damaging, suffice to
involve the sacramental system of Spain, at least
during the period which he describes, in an atmo-
sphere of doubt. He tells us of clergy who were not
only immoral, but unbelievers in addition ; unbe-
lievers of an aggressive type, who, revolting against
the state of things which they saw around them, were
animated by an energetic hatred of Christianity.
Believing that they were forced by circumstances to
take part in a mischievous imposture, would not
their temptation be to invalidate deliberately the
Sacraments they administered by perpetrating a
flaw either in the matter or form ?
Then there is the case of the ecclesiastics,
bishops and priests, who threw off the mask at the
French Kevolution, and avowed that they had been
acting a farce all the time they were going through
the form of conferring and administering Sacra-
' Histovre des Musulmans d^Espagne, par K. Dozy, ii. 47.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDERS 475
ments. Who will guarantee their good faith and due
observance of the essentials of valid Sacraments ?
Consider also the prevalence of lay baptism
administered in Continental and South American
countries by ignorant midwives and nurses. There
is a story told of a distinguished English Eoman
Catholic priest who visited his old nurse on her
deathbed. * I am deeply indebted to you,' he said,
* for you made me a Christian.' ' Oh, yes, your
Riverence,' she said, ' and I made many other
Christians also.' ' I suppose you always used the
right form of word's ? ' continued the priest. ' Faith,
and I did,' was the unexpected reply. * I baptized
ye all in the name of Jesus and Mary.' The priest,
horror-struck, went and had himself baptized and
re-ordained. Such is the story, and even if it be only
ben trovato, it ought to warn the Pope and Cardinal
Vaughan that in their mode of attack on the validity
of Anglican Orders they are indeed playing with
edged tools.
But I must give a more flagrant instance of the
way in which the extreme development of the doc-
trine of intention in the Church of Rome has under-
mined the whole sacramental system of that Church.
By an arbitrary rule of the Roman Catholic
Episcopate of South America no one was eligible for
Holy Orders who had a strain of native blood in
him down to the fourth generation. But persons
thus disqualified often got ordained, and doubt was
thrown on the validity of their orders, owing to the
negative intentions of the bishops. In the year
476 THE KEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
1865, one of the bishops determined to bring the
matter to a test. He announced pubHcly that
henceforward, in the event of his unwittingly
ordaining any man within the prohibited degree of
native blood, the ordination would be null and void,
inasmuch as his intention would be absent. Never-
theless several men who were descendants of native
Indians or Mulattos were ordained by the bishop
unwittingly at his next ordination. When the fact
came to his knowledge he declared that those
ordinations were null and void. There was an appeal
to the Holy See, which, after careful consideration,
ruled that the ordinations were nullified by the with-
drawal of the Episcopal intention. This decision
appears to have been arrived at without hesitation.
But while the Holy See sustained the decision of
the South American bishops, and ordered them to
warn the persons thus ordained that their orders were
invalid, it ' sharply reproved ' the bishop for having
such ' negative intentions,' which were illegal, and
must no longer be cherished.^
' Extrait de VAnalecta Juris Pontificii, S'"^ Serie, col. 1681,
Eome, 1866 :
hitention du ministre. — Un 6veque de rAm6rique du Sud publia
un edit avant I'ordination, protestant que nul descendant des Indiens
jusqu'a la quatrieme generation ne devrait se presenter parce que le
pr61at n'aurait pas I'intention de leur conf6rer les ordres. Cette pro-
testation fut renouvelee plus expressement au moment de I'ordina-
tion, car le pr^lat d^clara qu'il n'aurait aucune intention actuelle ou
virtuelle a I'egard de tous ceux qui n'6taient pas espagnols purs.
Malgr6 cela, plusieurs descendants d'Indiens ou de mulatres reyurent
les ordres et les exercerent. Le Saint- Siege fut consults sur la validity
de ces ordinations.
Quoique le Cardinal Casanatc reconnut la nullit6 des ordinations,
ANGLICAN AND ROMAN ORDERS 477
This decision throws a cloud of doubt over all the
Sacraments of the Koman Church. It is no longer
a question of doing what the Church does, or
intending what the Church intends. The bishop or
priest may at the moment be doing what the Church
does, and be intending sincerely what the Church
intends ; yet the Sacrament which he thus confers is
nullified by the fact that he has a prejudice against
a certain class of persons. In the case before us the
bishop did all that the Church required of him ; but
his negative intention in the abstract nullified his
positive intention in the concrete. And Kome
sanctions this, while condemning the negative in-
tention and abolishing the illegal disability ! But,
il exprima nettement I'avis que ces intentions negatives 6taient
gravement illicites. Voici son votum :
Ad 1 et 2. Negative.— Qvi'iB, explicita intentio episcopi de non
conferendis ordinibus restitit validae collationi, ut ex Sacro Concilio
Tridentino, sess. 7, de Sacramentis in genere, can. 11 nota Bonacina
(oper. moral, torn. i. disp. 6, q. 3, punct. 2 § .3), Hurtad. de Sacram.
(disput, 4, difficult. 6 §. Sed quamvis ; rursus difficult. 7, § 1,
pag. 36), P. Diana {in coordinatis, torn. 2, tract. 5, resol. 106, § 1,
alias p. 5, tract. 13, Miscell. p. resol. 66 et fuit resp. in Fesulana con-
firmat. sub die 8 mensis Augusti 1681.
Ad 3. — Acriter corrigendum episcopum ut abstineat ab hujus-
modi negativis intentionibus de jure illicitis, sed tamen caute inquirat
de personis, et insuper monendos invalide promotos, ut curent se
iterum ordinari sub conditione, quatenus non sint valide ordinati, ut
advertunt iidem auctores specialius Diana ibidem sub § 1.
La S. Congregation du Concile jugea que I'ordination avait 6te
nuUe, et qu'il fallait avertir tons les ev^ques d'Am6rique qu'ils
devraient s'abstenir desormais de ces intentions negatives, et qu'ils
n'avaient pas le droit d'6carter des Saints Ordres les Indiens et lea
n^gres, ni aucun de leurs descendants du cote paternel ou matemel,
suppose qu'ils eussent les qualites exigees par les canons^
478 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
on the other hand, it is laid down in * A Catholic
Dictionary ' which bears the imprimatur of Cardinal
Manning and the nihil obstat of the * Censor
Deputatus,' that a negative intention, which is un-
authorised and illegitimate, is invalid, and conse-
quently does not nullify a sacrament.^ This is far
indeed, as we shall see, from being the only example
of Bome speaking with an uncertain voice, notwith-
standing its proud boast of being semper eadem.
Even on the question of intention a subsequent
decree seems hardly consistent with that on the
validity of the ordination of quadroons. * A certain
Vicar Apostolic ' consulted the Holy See on the
following point. * In certain localities some heretics
baptize with the right matter and form, but expressly
warn the persons to be baptized not to believe that
baptism has any effect on the soul ; for they say that
it is a mere external sign of adhesion to their sect.
And thus they often ridicule the Catholics about
their faith in the effect of baptism, which indeed
they call a superstition.' The question is therefore
put * whether baptism administered by heretics is
doubtful on account of a defective intention of doing
what the Church does, if it has been expressly
declared by the minister, before baptizing, that
baptism has no effect on the soul.' The answer —
which is the doctrine of the universal Church since
the Cyprianic controversy with the Pope — is in the
negative, 'because, notwithstanding the error in
' Pp. 738, 739.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 479
regard to the effect of baptism, there is no exclusion
of the intention to do what the Chnrch does.' ^
But the most conclusive of all replies to the
Eoman attack on the validity of Anglican Orders is
the terrible uncertainty in which the theory and
practice of the Papacy, culminating in the dogma of
Infallibility, has involved the Orders of the Church
of Eome. The personal infallibility of the Pope,
speaking ex cathedra on faith or morals, is now an
article of faith in the Church of Eome as imperative
and fundamental as the doctrine of the Trinity or
Incarnation. It is a learned Eoman Catholic who
writes as follows : —
It [dogma of Papal infallibility] means that although
a few months ago grave difficulties, arising from genuine
historical documents and from Catholic doctrine, rendered
it impossible to lay before Christian people such a dogma
as one revealed by God,^ yet, nevertheless, the definition
of it is so worded as to avoid them all, or otherwise
that in some way or other they have been completely
solved.
It means that we must acknowledge and distinctly
assert this new dogma to be no less certainly true than
(for example) the mysteries of the Trinity in Unity, or
of the Incarnation of the Son of God, or of the resurrec-
tion of the body.
It means that if we do not give to the doctrine the
* Negative ; quia, non obstante errore quoad effectus baptismi,
non excluditur intentio f aciendi quod facit Ecclesia.' — Analecta Juris
Pontificii, xx. 193, a.d. 1881.
2 The author is here quoting and making his own the words of
the petition of the Bishops of Germany and Hungary against any
definition of infallibility by the Council of the Vatican.
480 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
same interior and absolute assent with our whole mind
as we give to all the articles of the Apostles' Creed, wo
have no longer any right to be named Christians ; we
are to be deprived of the Sacraments; we make ship-
wreck of the whole faith, and willingly cast ourselves out
of the Church.
It means that whatever may be the grounds or
whatever the authority on which we have been accus-
tomed to rely, as evidence and proof of the certainty of
those old truths, we must place no less reliance upon the
undeniable certainty of the new dogma. All stand or
fall together. If the doctrine of the infallibility of the
Pope has not been divinely revealed, there never has
been any revelation, and there is no divine truth in any
one doctrine of the Christian Faith.
Put it how we may, this is a startling fact ; and we
are bound to inquire, ' Why must we so believe?' The
answer is, because it has been declared by a hurried
decision of the suspended Council of the Vatican, which
has been promulgated by the authority — not of the
Council, nor as a decree of the Council, but — of the
Pope alone, as an Apostolic Constitution, himself as it
were giving sentence in his own cause. ^
So much as to the place of the dogma of the
Pope's infallibility in the creed of the Koman Church
since July, 1870. Let us now test the doctrine by
the touchstone of history.
It is an undisputed doctrine of the Church of
Christ throughout the world, and in all ages, that
nothing can be an article of necessary faith now
which was not an article of necessary faith on the-
' What is the Meaning of the late Definition of the Infallibility of
the Pope? An Inquiry. By William Maskell, M.A. Published in 1871.
ANGLICAN AND KOMAN ORDEES 481
first Christian Pentecost. That is the authorised
doctrine of the Church of Eome, as of the rest of
Christendom. In a book pubHshed with the impri-
matur of Cardinal Manning, and the 7iihil ohstat
of the * Censor Deputatus,' I read : —
All that we know and believe now, the entire cycle of
Christian doctrine in all its circumstances, was known
and believed then by the Apostles on the Day of
Pentecost before the sun went down.*
Moreover, the Vatican decree itself declares that
the Pope's infallibility ' is a dogma divinely revealed '
*from the beginning.'
Now let us look at the facts. Keenan's Cate-
chism possessed at one time the largest circulation
among English-speaking Roman Catholics through-
out the world. My copy is the third edition and
twelfth thousand, bears the date of 1854, was pub-
lished in Edinburgh by Marsh and Beattie, and in
London by the well-known Dolman. Prefixed to it
are letters of strong recommendation from all the
Roman Catholic Bishops of Scotland. ' The rapid
and exten'sive sale of the book in this country,' says
Bishop Gillis, * besides a third edition printed in
America, is evidence sufficient of the favour with
which this Catechism has been received by the
Catholic public' In his Preface to the second
edition the author congratulates himself on
the approbation of the former edition by many clergy-
' The Divine Teacher, p. 20, 6th edition, a.d. 1885, by Father
Humphrey, S.J.
I I
482 THiB EEFOEMATlON SETTLEMENiP
men in Scotland, and by several in Ireland and England,
the fact of its appearing in a very elegant American
edition, approved by the Eight Eev. Dr. Hughes (Arch-
bishop) of New York, and by the American Catholic
clergy and Catholic press.
In his Preface to the third edition he says : —
The hard-working clergy and persecuted Catholics
of Great Britain have now given the Controversial
Catechism a decided approbation. The demand for it
in each of the three kingdoms has satisfied its author
that his labour has answered some good purpose.
An edition of the twenty-fourth thousand was pub-
lished during the sitting of the Vatican Council by
' the Cathohc Publishing and Bookselling Company,
Limited,' New Bond Street, and was strongly recom-
mended by the ' Tablet ' newspaper.
I believe that down to the Vatican Council it
was the most universally popular and authoritative
Catechism among the English-speaking members of
the Eoman Church, not only in Great Britain and
Ireland, but in America as well.
And now I place in parallel columns the Vatican
decree on Papal infallibility, and the same doctrine
as expounded in the highly accredited and widely
circulated ' Controversial Catechism ' of Father
Keenan : —
Keenan's Catechism Vatican Decree
'Must not Catholics believe 'Therefore, faithfully adher-
the Pope in himself to be infal- ing to the tradition received
lible ? That is a Protestant in- from the beginning of the Chris-
vention ; no decision of his can tian faith, for the glory of God
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OKDBES
483
oblige, under pain of heresy,
unless it be received and en-
forced by the teaching body;
that is by the Bishops,' whom
the author had previously
defined as ' the lawful judges
of Christian doctrine, who have
been appointed by Christ for
that purpose.'
our Saviour, the exaltation of
the Catholic religion, and the
salvation of Christian people,
with the approval of the Sacred
Council, We teach and define
that it is a dogma Divinely re-
vealed : that the Eoman Pontiff,
when he speaks ex cathedrd, that
is, when in discharge of his office
of pastor and teacher of all
Christians, by virtue of his su-
preme Apostolic authority, he
defines a doctrine regarding faith
or morals to be held by the
universal Church, is, by the
divine assistance promised to
him in blessed Peter, possessed
of that infallibility with which
the Divine Eedeemer willed that
His Church should be endowed
in defining doctrine regarding
faith or morals ; and that, there-
fore, such definitions are of them-
selves, and not from the consent
of the Church, irref ormable. And
if amy one presume to contradict
this our definition — which God
forbid — let him be anathema.'
The contradiction is absolute and complete, and
was felt to be so by the Eoman authorities. For,
instead of withdrawing Keenan's Catechism from
circulation after the Vatican Council — which would
have been a public acknowledgment of the contra-
diction — the incriminating leaf was cut out of the
existing edition, and another leaf inserted in its
place containing the Vatican doctrine, as if it had
been there always.
I I 2
484 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
The Vatican decree, moreover, extinguishes, in
the following words, the inherent rights and jurisdic-
tion of the entire episcopate : —
If any shall say that the Eoman Pontiff possesses only
an ofi&ce of inspection or direction, but not full and
supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church,
not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals,
but also to the discipline and government of the Church
dispersed throughout the world ; or that he has only the
more excellent parts, but not also the total plenitude of
this supreme authority; or that this authority of his
is not ordinary and immediate, whether over all and
singular Churches or over all and singular pastors and
laity — let him be anathema.
In a work against this dogma, before it was
passed, the Bishop of Mayence (Ketteler) said : —
Will it not seem to all nations that the authority of
all Bishops is suppressed and sentenced to death, only
in order to erect on su^ch vast and manifold ruins the
unlimited authority of the one Eoman Pope ?
Two days before the dogma of infallibility was
proclaimed the minority sent a deputation to the
Pope to implore him to agree that the consent of
the Church should be laid down as a condition of
infallible definitions. The deputation consisted of
Simor, Primate of Hungary, Archbishops Ginoulhiac,
Darboy, and Sherr (of Munich), Bishops Ketteler
(of Mayence), and Eivet of Dijon. The minority
offered this concession by way of compromise. But,
instead of accepting it, the Pope and the majority
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 485
explicitly rejected the consent of the Church as an
element in the case. It follows logically that if the
Pope alone were officially to proclaim as an article of
faith something which the Church collectively and
unanimously rejected, the Pope would be right and
all the rest of Christendom wrong. Cardinal Vaughan
may tell me that I am suggesting a contingency
which is not likely to happen. But that is not the
question. The fact is that the Vatican definition
has drawn a line of demarcation between the Pope
and the Church, and made him infallible apart from
the Church. The Vatican dogma is therefore a flat
contradiction of Keenan's Catechism, which teaches
that the doctrine of the Vatican dogma * is no article
of the Catholic faith,' since 'no decision of his
[Pope's] can oblige, under pain of heresy, unless it be
received and enforced by the teaching body ; that is,
by the Bishops of the Church.' Thus we see that
a doctrine, which down to 1870 was denounced by
the teaching body of the Church of Kome in the
British Isles and in America as ' a Protestant inven-
tion,' is now de fide under the sanction of anathema.
Well might the martyred Archbishop Darboy of
Paris say that Pio Nono had built for himself a throne
on the ruin of his brethren, and an unassailable
fortress on their annihilation.'
' * Les Papes du moyen 4ge avaient sans doute, plus d'une f ois,
exag6r6 leurs droits et leurs pretentions, mais cette exag^ration m^me
pouvait, a tout prendre, donner comma excuse le bien des peuples
qu'on se proposait, ou la gloire de I'Eglise qu'on voulait defendre.
Aujourd'hui nous sommes en face de la Papaut6 luttant, non pas
486 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
It may be worth while to elucidate the matter
a little further by showing tha,t the doctrine of
Keenan's Catechism was the traditional doctrine of
Eoman Catholics throughout the British Empire and
America until the Vatican dogma superseded and
anathematised it. In the year 1825 the Irish
Eoman Catholic Bishops were examined before a
committee of the House of Lords on the question of
the Pope's position in the ecclesiastical hierarchy.
I will quote the answers of the two most eminent
Bishops with the assent of the rest. Bishop Doyle
says : —
A particular Church, or the canons of a particular
Church, might define that the authority of a General
Council was superior to that of the Pope ; such canon
may be received, for instance, in Ireland or in France,
and might not be received in Italy or Spain.
Bishop Murray was asked : * Is a decree of the
contre les princes, mais contre l'6piscopat, comme si Pie IX pouvait
trouver sur la ruine de ses fibres un trone plus 61ev6, ou, dans leur
an^antissement, une forteresse plus inexpugnable. malheur des
temps et abus des plus saintes institutions ! on ne veut plus qu'un
seul 6veque veritable dans le monde, le Pape, un seul docteur infail-
lible et autoris6, le pape 1 Que toute voix se taise, si ce n'est poui
dire ce qu'il aura dit, que toute action ne s'exerce plus que sous sa
jurisdiction 6piscopale, universelle, immediate, qu'ils renient leurs
droits imprescriptibles, ceux qui ont 6t6 6tablis de Dieu pour
gouverner, qu'ils d^chirent les pages de I'Evangile ou ces droits sont
grav6s ; il ne faut plus qu'une bouche, une main, un monarque
absolu, alors, dit-on, alors seulement nous aurons I'ordre universel.
Ainsi il y a 40 ans, un ministre parut, k la tribune fran^aise, pour
dire : I'ordre r^gne a Varsovie. Oui, mais c'6tait I'ordre que cr6e la
mort ; on avait tu6 la Pologne. L'ordre qu'on veut, c'est la mort de
I'Eglise.' — La dernUre Heure du Concile, p. 6, 1870.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 487
Pope valid without the consent of the Council ? '
His answer is : —
A decree of the Pope in matters oi doctrine is not
considered binding on Catholics if it have not the consent
of the Church, either dispersed, or assembled by its
Bishops in council.
Archbishop Kenrick, of St. Louis in America,
writing from Bome to the Archbishop of Baltimore
during the Vatican Council, repudiates point blank
the doctrine afterwards proclaimed as an article of
Catholic faith, and adds : —
For if a Papal decree is per se infallible, there is no
need of the assent of the Bishops, or of taking votes in
the Council, or of subscriptions in their several Sees ;
much less is it lawful for any Bishop to resist such
decree.
Archbishop Hughes, of New York, in a disserta-
tion on the subject, says : —
Bellarmine maintained, as a matter of opinion, that
the Pope, in his official character, is infallible ; Bossuet,
as a matter of opinion, maintained the contrary.
But-
According to the Catholic rule of faith, the doctrines
of Christianity are not abstract speculations; they are
'positive truths or facts,' unchanged and unchangeable,
as they came from the lips of Jesus Christ and His
inspired Apostles. But being public truths or facts they
were taught by the pastors of the Church and believed
by the people in all countries and in every century since
the establishment of the Church. Consequently I can
488 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
verify them with the same certainty which I have that
such an event as the battle of Waterloo, the decapitation
of Charles I., or the Council of Nice took place in the
world. In 7ieithercase is a Divine or personal infallibility
necessary. . . . The doctrines of the Catholic Church are
fixed stars in the firmament of belief, and the transmutation
of an opinion into a doctrine would be the raising of a
new light, a species of religious reformation which
Protestants have taken into their own hands, and for
which Catholics have neither the talent, inclination, nor
authority}
Cardinal Wiseman says : —
But it must not be thought that Catholics believe
there is a certain mass of vague and floating opinions
which may, at the option of the Pope, or of a General'
Council, or of the whole Church, be turned into articles
of faith.2
Again : —
If the symbolical documents of a Church . . . decide,
or seem to decide, a belief, and the great body of its
pastors or teachers agree in one interpretation of that
definition, and allow none other to be taught, that we
hold to be the doctrine of that Church. If it allow two
most different, or even contradictory, sentiments to be
publicly taught, the holders of neither have a right to
call theirs more than opinions in the Church.^
In a manual of instruction by the Koman
Catholic Bishop Hay I find the following question
and answer : —
Q. — When the head of the Church publishes any
decree concerning faith or morals, to which he requires
» Pp. 49, 91, 92. 2 Lectures, iii. p. 63.
" Essays, ii. 122.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDERS 489
submission, to all the faithful, is he himself infallible in
what he there teaches ?
A. — This is not proposed as an article of Divine faith,
nor has the Church ever made any decision concerning it.*
In his 'Letter to Dr. Pusey on his Kecent
Eirenicon ' Cardinal Newman includes Dr. Lingard
and Dr. Husenbeth among 'the chief (Eoman
Catholic) authors of the passing generation in
England.' Let us see what those two distinguished
divines have to say on the subject before us. .
I happen to possess a volume of pamphlets which
belonged to Dr. Husenbeth. Among them is Car-
dinal Manning's 'Vatican Council and its Defini-
tions : a Pastoral Letter to the Clergy,' published
immediately after the Council. This pamphlet is
full of marginal and interleaved notes in Dr. Husen-
beth's handwriting, disputing Manning's principal
points, and confronting them with the opinions of
Eoman Catholic authorities. He quotes as follows
from Dr. Lingard's ' Letter to a Clergyman in the
Diocese of Durham : ' — ' To your question, where the
infallibility of the Catholic Church resides, I answer,
in the Episcopal College united to the Pope.' But
the Vatican decree says in the Pope, ' without the
consent of the Church.'
Dr. Husenbeth quotes Bishop Baines as fol-
lows : —
"When I say that the infallibility of the Pope is not an
article of the Catholic faith, I mean that no Catholic is
bound to beheve it, but that each one may think of it as
' Sincere Christian, p. 95.
490 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
he pleases, just as much as a Protestant may do. Bellar-
mine and some other divines, chiefly Italian, have
believed the Pope infallible, when proposing ex cathedrd
an article of faith. But in England or Ireland I do not
believe that any Catholic maintains the infallibility of the
Pope.»
On page 354 of his Pastoral on the Vatican
dogma, Cardinal Manning affirms of the Roman
Catholics of England and Ireland that 'what the
Council has defined they have alv^ays believed.' On
this Dr. Husenbeth makes the follov^ing note : —
The belief in the Pope's infallibility was by no means
so general among English Catholics as Dr. Manning
appears to think. For instance, the famous ' Protesta-
tion ' in 1788 was signed by all the four Vicars Apostohc,
most of the priests with their flocks, and altogether by
1,525 Catholics ; and yet it contained these words : —
*We acknowledge no infallibility in the Pope.' And
though this document was censured on other grounds,
that part of it met with no censure.
So much as to Dr. Husenbeth. It is evident
from his annotations on Cardinal Manning's pastoral
that he did not accept the Vatican decree ex animo
even after its proclamation.
Soon after the close of the Vatican Council Lord
Acton published in German, in the form of a letter to
a friend, a pamphlet, w^hich I reviewed in the ' Times '
in the autumn of 1870. Lord Acton was in Rome
during the whole sitting of the Council, and was on
terms of confidential intimacy with the Bishops of
* Defence against Dr. Moysey, p. 230.
ANGLICAN AND ROMAN ORDEES 491
the minority. His account of what happened in the
Council may, therefore, be accepted as accurate.
Indeed, some of the Bishops of the minority, among
them Archbishop Kenrick, pubHshed their speeches
afterwards. Here is an extract from Kenrick's : —
The doctrine is not de fide, and cannot be made so
even by the definition of an (Ecumenical Council. We
are the guardians of the deposit of faith, not its lords.
The following are passages quoted by Lord Acton
from other speeches delivered in the Vatican
Council. One said : * Foreseeing the grievous ruin
which threatened souls he would rather die than
sanction the synodal clause.' Another said that
* the definition of infallibihty would be the ruin of
the Church.' Another declared that even
the faithful, who acknowledged in the Eoman Pontiff
a primacy of magistracy and jurisdiction, and whose
affection and obedience to the Holy See had never been
more manifest, were troubled in heart rather than
encouraged, as if now for the first time the foundation of
the Church and of the true doctrine were established.
On the other hand, the decree would afford food for
calumnies and derision of infidels ; and even some among
the faithful did not hesitate to say that such a definition
would be logically impossible.
Another
trembled, foreseeing that very many of the faithful
would not be able to endure the great scandal of the new
dogma, and would consequently be exposed to the danger
of making shipwreck of their faith altogether.
Another called it * an unheard-of novelty,' imply-
492 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
ing that ' the doctrine of the Church had been
changed and therefore depraved.' Other Bishops
dwelt on the absence of such a doctrine from the
catechisms and symboHcal books of the Church.
American Bishops declared that it would be almost
impossible for them to return to their dioceses with
such a doctrine in their pockets.
These are only samples of a number of passages
which Lord Acton culled from the speeches and
publications of the minority in the Vatican Council.
To quote his own words : —
This is the picture of the Vatican Council and of its
work which we get from men like Schwarzenberg,
Rauscher, Haynald, Ketteler, Clifford, Purcell, Conolly,
Dupanloup, Darboy, Hefele, Strossmayer, and Kenrick.
And so the Council stands self -condemned by the mouths
of its ablest members. They represent it as a conspiracy
against Divine truth and right. They declare that the
new dogmas were neither taught by the Apostles nor
believed by the Fathers ; that they are soul-destroying
errors, contrary to the true doctrines of the Church, based
on deceit, and are a scandal to Catholics. Surely no
judgment could be less ambiguous, no language more
open, no testimony more sufficient or decisive for the
consciences of the faithful.
These are the words of a loyal member of the
Eoman Church, one of the most learned men, too,
in her communion ; and he is, in the main, merely
reporting the opinions and strong convictions of the
most eminent Bishops in his Church for learning,
rank, and the importance of their sees.
I will add to this catena an extract from an
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 493
interesting volume of letters from Dr. Dollinger
published by his niece after his death. The extract
is from a letter addressed to Monsignor Euffo Scilla,
Papal Nuncio at Muiiich : —
I refused to change my faith. I refused to believe
and teach a new dogma, the contrary of which I had been
taught in my youth, and the falsity of which I had learnt
by the study and research of fifty-six years. . . . During
this long period I always taught the contrary of what
was decided by Pius IX. in 1870.
The Nuncio does not dispute this in his friendly
reply ; nor was it disputed, as far as I know, by any
Infallibilist who wrote in public against Dr. Dollinger
at the time of his excommunication. Cardinal
Newman, it is known, while having no difficulty
about the dogma himself, strongly disapproved of
the manoeuvres by which the decision was obtained,
and the hurry with which it was attempted to be
forced upon Dr. DolHnger, to whom, according to
him, *it was practically a new article of faith.'
Archbishop Darboy, in a brief analysis of the
Bishops of the majority in the Vatican Council,
divides them into three groups : (1) the timid, who
seek for safety in force and numbers, floating supinely
with the stream because they think this less dan-
gerous than a struggle against the current which
leads to the abyss. (2) Episc-opal clerks — a multi-
tude of prelates without dioceses, offspring simply
of the Pontifical will, elevated by the Pope alone to
their revocable dignities, simple officials, liegemen
494 THE EEFOEMATION, SETTLEMENT
of the Papacy. (3) Ardent and exaggerating spirits,
cherishing the aspirations of another epoch, un-
reaHsable desires, illusions, for the most part preju-
dices which are impervious to theological reasoning.^
The Bishops of the minority, on the other hand,
possessed not only an overwhelming preponderance
of intellectual eminence and learning ; they presided,
in addition, over the most important sees and cities,
and over the most educated populations in the Latin
Church. But they were swamped by numbers,
many of whom had no flocks. To give these merely
titular Bishops an equal voice with the occupants of
ancient sees, or any sees, was an encroachment on
the constitution of a Council claiming (however
illegitimately) to be QEcumenical. For the raison
d'etre of an (Ecumenical Council was to gather from
each diocese in Christendom its traditional teaching
on the question in dispute. The Christian Creed
* * Cette majority, en effet, se compose surtout d'eveques timides,
d'hommes en sous-ordre, d'esprits ardents et exag6r6s. Les premiers
aiment a etre avec la force et le grand nombre, afin de ne pas courir
de dangers ; ils suivent ais6ment le fleuve qui les emporte et trouvent
moins dangereux de descendre toujours que de lutter pour remonter
le courant qui m^ne aux abimes. Les seconds sont tous ces prelats
sans diocese, issus de la seule volont6 pontificale, relevant du pape
et du pape seul, r^vocables ad nutum pour la plupart, simples
officiates, comme disent les canonistes romains, ou, si vous I'aimez
mieux, dans notre langue franpaise, hommes liges de la Papaut6.
Enfin les derniers ne sont ni indiff6rents, ni timides, ni victimes de
leur position subalterne, ni flatteurs par temperament, mais, dans
une nature bouillante, ils portent des aspirations d'une autre 6poque,
des d6sirs irr6alisables, des illusions, le plus souvent des pr6jug6s
pieux que les raisonnements th6ologiques n'ont jamais dissip6s. De
ces categories, la premiere ne d6sire pas se convertir, la seconde ne
peut pas, la troisi^me ne doit pas,' — LadernUre Heure du Concile,-p. 3.
ANGLICAN AND ROMAN OEDERS 495
being a Divine revelation, it was held to be a question
of historical evidence, not of speculation. If the
evidence was so much on one side as to amount to
moral unanimity, it was held to be conclusive. Yet
even then the decree of the Council was not con-
sidered de fide, a part, that is, of the creed of
Christendom, the deposit of faith once for all com-
mitted to the Church. Not till the Church dis-
persed throughout the world, its faithful laity as
well as clergy, recognised the decree as part of the
creed which it had always held, was it considered
binding. It is obvious that Bishops without sees
had no tradition to deliver, and therefore were not
witnesses at all : in other words, were not legitimate
members of the Council. What they delivered was
but their ovTn private opinions, not the testimony of
a diocese traceable back to its origin. It is in this
sense that the decision of a truly CEcumenical Council
has been recognised as infallible ; not by special
inspiration or endowment on the part of the Bishops,
but by conclusive historical evidence. The dissent of
the eighty-eight Bishops who composed the minority
of the Vatican Council, representing moreover, as
they did, the vast majority of the educated laity of
the Latin Church, destroyed the necessary condition
of moral unanimity ; and Cardinal Newman intimates,
in his Letter to the Duke of Norfolk, that if the
minority had held out the Vatican dogma would
not have been binding. But the point to which I
wish now to direct special attention is that the com-
position of the majority, as Archbishop Darboy and
496 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
others have shown, was such as to vitiate, apart
from other reasons, the claim of the Council to be
considered (Ecumenical.
The defenders of the Vatican dogma try to
reconcile its novelty with the rule of faith, recognised
even by the Roman Church, that there can be no new
article of faith since the Day of Pentecost, by com-
paring it with the Homoousion of the Nicene Creed.
But there is an essential difference. The Homoou-
sion is a definition having for its object the protec-
tion of a truth always accepted as a part of the
Creed of Christendom. The dogma of Infallibility
is the creation of a new article of faith, not the
definition of an old one. Any Christian who asserted
at any time between Pentecost and the Council of
Nicsea that Jesus of Nazareth was personally a
creature would have been condemned as a heretic.
But the fertile ingenuity and dialectical dexterity of
Arius succeeded for a time in baffling the Fathers of
the Council. He acknowledged Christ's pre-existence
before His virgin birth. He admitted that He was
the Creator of the world, and had existed before the
angels. In short, there was scarcely a title belonging
to God which Arius did not concede to Christ. Not
until the keen spear of a dialectician more subtle
than himself pierced his sophisms by pinning him
to the declaration that Christ was * a creature,
though the highest of the creatures,' was it made
manifest to the minds of all that Arius denied the
Divinity of Christ. The Homoousion (of the same
substance) was inserted in the Creed to guard a truth
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 497
already held, namely, that Christ is a Divine Person
co-existing eternally with the Father.
This is altogether different from the dogma of
Papal infallibility. It is a matter of historical
demonstration that the doctrine therein defined was
not so much as even heard of, certainly for the first
eight centuries of Christianity. That date will
suffice for my purpose, though I might, in matter of
fact, bring it much farther down. Until July 18,
1870, any member of the Church of Eome might
deny, write against, denounce — as in truth many
did — not any particular view or definition of Papal
infallibility, but Papal infallibility itself in any sense
reconcilable with the Vatican dogma. The Church
of Home is therefore in this inevitable dilemma.
Either the Vatican dogma of Papal infallibility is a
fiction and a fraud, an undeniable historical falsehood ;
or the Church of Kome has for more than eighteen
centuries allowed an article of faith, as binding on
the conscience as belief in the existence of Almighty
God, to be an open question, the avowed impugners
of which were not even liable to censure, still less
to the refusal of Sacraments. The upholders of
Papal infallibility may make their choice ; but the
choice lies between the two horns of the dilemma :
there is no third. Semper eadem indeed ! What
is there in the history of the Church of England at
any period since the Keformation comparable to this
theological cataclysm? "What mutual contradic-
tions can be produced from Anglican divines that
equal those which I have cited from Boman divines ?
K K
498 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
The truth is that history and the Ultramontane
Theory of the Papacy cannot stand together. They
are mutually destructive. And this is the view of a
distinguished Ultramontane writer. I have before
me as I write a revised edition of an elaborate
treatise in defence of the supremacy and infallibility
of the Pope, printed in Eome in 1875 ' ex Typographia
Vaticana,' and dedicated to Pio nono, Pontifici
Maximo Doctori et Judici inerranti a Christo Jesu i7i
Ecclesia constituto cum potestate in cunctos Epi-
scopos. The author's name is Aloisius Vincenzi, and
when he wrote the book he held the post of Professor
of Hebrew in Eome and the dignity of Prelate. He
won his spurs in the arena of controversy as an
accredited champion of the Papacy thirty-three
years before the publication of the goodly volume
from which I am about to quote. One of his
works, he tells us in his Prologus (p. viii), was
written * at the instance ' beatissimi Papce Pii IX.
feliciter regnantis. And he acknowledges ' the debt
of gratitude ' which he owes erga clarissimos viros
Petrum Ballerini et Joannem Perrone e Soc, Jesu. I
was in Eome when the book was published, and
learned from Monsignor Nardi, dean of the Eota,
who was a great favourite of Pius IX., that the
booli was written at the suggestion of the Pope, and
dedicated to him by special permission. A book
printed at the Vatican press, prompted by and
dedicated to the Pope, written by a prelate who was
a learned professor, and approved by the most
distinguished theologians in Eome, must be admitted
ANGLICAN AND ROMAN OEDERS 499
to possess the highest authority. The subject of the
book is * The Sacred Monarchy of the Hebrews and
Christians, and the Infahible Magisterium in each ; '
and the argument is a laboured attempt to prove that
as the Hebrew Church had {ex hypothesi) an infahible
head, first in Moses, and then in the High Priest, so
the Christian Church, its antitype, has its infalHble
head in the Pope.
This thesis Vincenzi estabhshed to his own
satisfaction on a pile of impregnable evidence, as he
deems it, from the Old Testament and the New, from
the history of the Church, and, above all, from the
necessity of the case. Just as men of science
assume the existence of a luminiferous ether, and
find its evidence in phenomena which they cannot
otherwise explain, so Vincenzi assumes the existence
of a supreme and infallible Papacy, and finds that it
fits all the facts except two, which however are
rather formidable impediments. I will describe the
first in the author's own words, after a careful and
minute survey of the first five centuries of the
Christian era, in which he finds ample proof of
Papal infallibility and universal supremacy : —
Nevertheless, as is patent from the preceding pages
we must not conceal the fact that in the ancient Acts of
the Church during the aforesaid period (i.e. the first
five centuries of Christianity) there are some four hundred
documents entitled Canons — Apostolic Canons, as they
are called; Canons of Ancyra, Elvira, Neo-Caesarea,
Gangra, Laodicea, Nicsea, Constantinople, Africa, Chal-
cedon — most of them written in Greek — where the pre-
K K 2
500 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
rogatives of the Eoman See are never once set forth ; or if
ever mentioned, only mentioned to be disowned.
* What are we to infer from this silence ? ' our
author asks in pathetic bewilderment. A writer who
had the faintest perception of the canons of historical
evidence would infer that his thesis was an edifice
built upon the sand, which collapsed the moment it
came in contact with the hard facts of history.
But that is an impossible inference to Vincenzi.
For him the Pope's infallibility is an axiom of
theological science : a dogma to be argued from, not
argued about. If history does not agree with the
dogma, so much the worse for history. It must be
thrown overboard. I am not exaggerating in the
least. The Pope's supreme Magisterium and infal-
lible authority being assumed as an article of ne-
cessary faith, it follows of course that 'the aforesaid
canons, erected against the sacred sovereignty of
Peter and his successors, must necessarily be repro-
bated ' as a gigantic fraud perpetrated by heretical
forgers and mutilators ! The heavens may fall, but
the personal infallibility of the Pope must stand.
And here we get a charming insight into the cal-
culus by means of which Ultramontane controver-
sialists surmount the facts of history : —
In fine, whatever is to be thought of the origin and
authority of the aforesaid countless Canons, nobody will
ever persuade me that Apostles, and Orthodox Fathers
of Nicaea, Constantinople, Africa, and Chalcedon, ever
sanctioned Canons of this sort ; in which both the Pri-
macy of Peter and his successors is discredited and
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 501
destroyed ; and at the same time the jurisdiction of the
Eoman Pontiff over all the Bishops of the Catholic
Church is repudiated.
Vincenzi accordingly undertakes to reconstruct
the Canons of the whole Catholic Church in so far
as they come into collision with the Papal theory.
The following may serve as a specimen. The sixth
Canon of Nicaea in its genuine form offers a complete
refutation of his theory. Its opening words are : —
Let the ancient customs be maintained, which are in
Egypt and Libya and Pentapolis, according to which the
Bishop of Alexandria has authority over all those places.
For this is also customary to the Bishop of Eome. In
like manner in Antioch and in the other Provinces their
privileges are to be preserved to the Churches.
This restricts the jurisdiction of the Bishop of
Bome to the Province of Italy ; and that was the
contemporaneous interpretation of the Canon. But
it would, of course, be fatal to Vincenzi' s argument.
So he calmly concludes that the Canon was garbled
by crafty heretics, and he ' restores it to its original
form ' as follows : —
Let the ancient customs be maintained — namely, that
the Eoman See should have the primacy of honour in the
first rank ; that Alexandria should have the primacy of
honour in the second rank ; Antioch in the third rank ;
and Csesarea in the fourth rank, with the attributes
belonging to these secondary Sees.
And then Vincenzi adds with charming nai-
vete : —
Although I do not suppose that I have rendered the
502 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
exact words of the Canon, yet I am confident that I havo
hit upon their meaning.^
And this is the kind of history which is now
taught with authority under the shadow of the
Vatican ! What is the use of appealing to history
against a system of which an authorised champion
can manipulate facts ad libitum ?
A startling confirmation indeed of Cardinal
Manning's declaration that ' the appeal to history is
a treason and a heresy.' Certainly it is for any
loyal believer in the present Papal system.
The second impediment which history puts in
the way of Vincenzi's thesis comes from the New
Testament. It consists of St. Paul's declaration
that he 'withstood Peter to the face,' on a question
of doctrine, 'because he was to be blamed; ' and
because St. Paul always refers to St. Peter as an
Apostle of coordinate authority with himself. It
would be too bold to say that this too is an inter-
polation by heretics. But Vincenzi is equal to the
occasion. The Pope's personal infallibility and
supreme magistracy over the whole episcopate being,
in Vincenzi's mind, a revealed truth to be beHeved
by all Christians on pain of deadly heresy, all facts
to the contrary must be got rid of somehow. He
frankly admits that the passages in question cannot
be reconciled with Papal supremacy and infallibility,
which must be upheld at any cost. So he devotes
' De HebrcBorum et Christianorum Sacra Monarchia et de Infal-
libili in TJtraque Magisterio, pp. 291-298, 305-371.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 503
sixty-six large quarto pages to the task of proving
that it was not Peter the Apostle to whom St. Paul
refers, but an unknown namesake.
On the whole, was there ever in any controversy
so complete an abandonment of the whole field of
historical evidence as this treatise in defence of the
Papacy ? And one of the most curious features of
the whole controversy is the intellectual, blindness
which prevents the defenders of Papal infallibility
from seeing that the Vatican Council is itself one
of the strongest arguments against, its own dogma.
For if, as the Vatican decree declares. Papal pro-
nouncements ex cathedra ' are infallible of themselves,
and not from the consent of the Church,' where was
the sense of having a council at all to decide, after
months of heated debate, a question which we are
told has been an article of faith since Pentecost?
Nay, more ; how is it that the Church was so stupid
as ever to have any councils at all if the Bishops of
Rome have always been infallible ? Why summon
all the Bishops of Christendom to one place to
deliver their testimony on some disputed question
of faith — and that too before the days of railways,
and steamers, and telegraphs, when travelling was
so slow and often perilous — if the Bishop of Rome
could all the while have decided the point infallibly,
and communicated his irreformable decision to his de-
legates, the Bishops of the whole Christian Church ?
The one historical fact of General Councils is alone
sufficient to overthrow the imposing structure of the
Papacy. Truly ' the appeal to history is a treason
604 THE BEFOBMATION SETTLEMENT
and a heresy ' on the part of a believer in an infalHble
Papacy. What the late Father Ejiox of the London
Oratory says of the dogma of the Immaculate Con-
ception of the Virgin is equally true of Papal
infallibility and all ex cathedra utterances of the
Pope : —
The moment before Pius IX. spoke these words,
interior assent to the doctrine of the Immaculate Con-
ception was not obligatory on the faithful. The moment
after he had spoken them, none who heard him could
doubt interiorly the truth of the dogma without com-
mitting a formal sin of heresy and incurring the forfeiture
of their salvation.^
This is nothing less than a complete subversion
of the received doctrine of the whole Christian
Church of the General Councils. To afhrm that the
mere fiat of the Pope can in a moment change a
doubtful or discredited opinion into an eternal truth,
instantly demanding unquestioning interior assent
on pain of ' heresy incurring the forfeiture of salva-
tion,' is not only a monstrous contradiction of the
faith of Christendom; it is in addition a deadly
blow at truth itself as a fact existing outside and
independently of the human mind. Truth thus
becomes an opinion instead of an eternal verity, and
a vista is opened out of an indefinite expansion of
the creed of the Church, the doubtful opinions or
proved falsehoods of to-day becoming the divine truths
of to-morrow, claiming the instant submission of heart
and intellect.
* Wlien does the Church speak infallibly ? p. 46
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDERS 505
It is a fallacy to suppose that the qualification of
ex cathedra limits the pronouncements of the Pope
on questions of faith or morals ; nor, indeed, are his
infallible utterances limited even by the area of faith
and morals. For Koman Catholic authorities are
irreconcilably divided in their explanations of the
exact meaning both of ex cathedra and of what con-
stitutes faith and morals. Let us take a few
examples.
Cardinal Newman declares that to constitute an
ex cathedra utterance there must be a solemn cere-
monial. The Pope must be surrounded by his Court
and Council, and deliver his infallible decree explicitly
to the whole Church with proper pomp and Pontifical
formalities, so that there can be no mistake as to
the character of the decree. According to this
explanation, the number of ex cathedra Pontifical
decrees, Newman says, is still under twenty.^
On the other hand, Dr. Ward asserts that there
is practically no limit to the Pope's infallible utter-
ances. According to him the phrase ex cathedra
embraces not only the utterances of the Pope at the
head of a General Council, but Encyclicals, Allo-
cutions, Apostolic Letters, * and various letters to
this or that individual pastor,' or even to laymen,
such as Pius IX.'s * letter to that spiritual rebel,
the ICing of Sardinia,' or Gregory XVI. 's * confi-
dential communication ' to Lamennais. Nay,
whenever it shall please the Pope to order the
publication of a decree put forth by any of the
* Historical Sketches, p. 340.
506 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Pontifical congregations, that decree at once 'be-
comes absolutely infallible.' The most distinguished
Ultramontane writers are in fact at sixes and sevens
among themselves as to what constitutes an ex
cathedra decree. * It is necessary,' says Dom Gue-
ranger, ' that the terms of the decree should indicate
the intention of imposing an obligation.' ' For our-
selves, on the contrary,' says Dr. Ward, ' we regard
a different doctrine as absolutely certain ; and
indeed, as one which cannot be denied without most
serious results.' Take, by way of example. Pope
Nicholas Third's ' Exiit qui seminat.' * As to this
Bull,' says Dr. Ward, ' Ultramontane controversial-
ists have hitherto almost universally denied that it
was ex cathedra' But Dr. Ward, in his 'Brief
Summary,' takes the opposite side ; and Dr. Ward
turns out to be infallibly right, for a reason which I
shall presently mention. Again, says Dr. Ward,
' many Pontifical pronouncements which Dom
Gueranger admits to be ex cathedra do not neverthe-
less express, either indirectly or equivalently, the
obligation of interior assent which the respective
Popes have by them intended to impose.' And he
cites as an instance ' St. Leo's letter to St. Flavian.'
* This letter is not only accounted ex cathedra by
every individual Ultramontane theologian, with the
singular exception of Bellarmine, but is ordinarily
used by Ultramontane controversialists as the one
typical instance of an ex cathedra pronouncement.
Yet this letter contains no syllable implying ever so
distantly that St. Leo was intending to oblige the
ANGLICAN AND ROMAN ORDEES 507
whole Church to accept its teaching. But, in truth,
among the various ex cathedra acts recited by Dom
Gueranger, there are several others which entirely
fail to fulfil his conditions.' ^
It comes to this therefore : The Pope is infallible
only when he speaks ex cathedra ; but ' Ultramon-
tane controversialists ' may be for centuries ' almost
universally ' in error as to the ex cathedra character
of any Papal pronouncement in particular. Ages
after the pronouncement was uttered by the organ
of infallibility Dom Gueranger discovers that it was
an ex cathedra decision. Dr. Ward agrees with
Dom Gueranger as to this particular case, but
dissents at the same time from the doctrine laid
down by that eminent theologian as to the tests by
which the ex cathedra character of any Papal utter-
ance may be known, and ' regards a different doctrine
as absolutely certain.'
Again, a certain Papal 'letter is not only ac-
counted ex cathedra by every individual Ultramon-
tane,' with one ' singular exception,' ' but is ordi-
narily used by Ultramontane controversialists as the
one typical instance of an ex cathedra pronounce-
ment ; ' the * singular exception ' being Bellarmine,
the greatest of Ultramontane controversialists.
Both Dr. Ward and Dom Gueranger assert that
the insertion of any Papal utterance, even of * letters
to individuals,' in the ' Corpus Juris,' impresses an
ex cathedra character on such utterances, * their in-
sertion in that official collection ' being ' equivalent
' See Dublin Review, New Series, No. XXIX., pp. 204-206.
508 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
to a complete promulgation.' Nor is even this
formality always necessary. * Dom Gueranger,' says
Dr. Ward, ' lays very great and deserved weight on
the formula prescribed by Pope S. Hormisdas to the
Eastern Church. But this formula recognises as
ex cathedra ' all the letters of Pope Leo which he
wrote concerning the Christian religion.' But no
one will maintain that all these letters express,
either directly or equivalently, an intention of
obliging the universal Church.'
It is a complete fallacy, therefore, to suppose that
Papal infallibility is restricted to formal decisions.
On the contrary, it would be the grossest presump-
tion for any Koman Catholic to deny infallibility to
any single one of the numerous sayings of Pius IX.
during his long Pontificate. * Some Catholics,' says
Dr. Ward, ' really seem to speak as though he (Pius
IX.) had never defined ex cathedra any verity
except the Immaculate Conception.' ^ On the con-
trary, he expressly declares that he has ^ never
ceased' {jiunquam intermissus) from condemning
ex cathedra ' perverse doctrines,' and he has made
a similar declaration in the ' Quanta Cura.' 'If for
more than twenty-three years,' adds Dr. Ward,
naively, * he has never ceased from such condemna-
tions, the number of his ex cathedra Acts must by
this time be considerable.'
I have quoted Dr. Ward in preference to any
other exponent of Papal infallibility because the
Pope has expressly sanctioned his doctrine on the
' This was written before the Vatican Council.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 509
subject in an Apostolic Letter which was published
at the time in the ' Dublin Keview.* To doubt the
soundness of Dr. Ward's doctrine is, therefore, to
impugn the dogma of Papal infallibility itself. It is
consequently useless to quote any Eoman authorities
on the other side, since their difference from Dr.
Ward must be the measure of their error. Now the
upshot of Dr. Ward's teaching is that it is practically
impossible to put any limits on the Pope's infalli-
bility. With remorseless logic he has demolished
every attempt to do so, and the Pope himself has
covered Dr. Ward's irresistible logic with the awful
authority of his infallible shield.^
Nor is the restriction of the Pope's infallibility
to questions of faith and morals of the smallest
practical utility. All recent Ultramontane writers
teach that the object of the Pope's infallibility is
practically unlimited, since there is no branch of
human knowledge which does not, directly or in-
directly, impinge on faith or morals. Even ques-
tions of fact, which Ultramontanes themselves
formerly excluded from the sphere of Papal infalli-
bility, are now declared by Dr. Ward to be embraced
within its scope. The five propositions attributed
to Jansenius, he argues, are not only heretical, but*
are actually to be found in the ' Augustinus.'
This is now infallibly certain because the Church
decrees those to be implicated in the Jansenistic heresy
* See Dr. Ward's Authority of Doctrinal Decisions, pp. 52, 55,
75, 76 ; and the Dublin Review of July, 1870, p. 206.
610 THE REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
who were wrong on the question of fact no less than
those who were wrong on the question of doctrine.^
Pather Knox teaches the same doctrine as fol-
lows : —
In compelling the Bishops and clergy to swear that
they sincerely beheved the five condemned propositions
to be contained in the * Augustinus/ the Church showed
most clearly that she had not the slightest doabt about
her power to determine infalhbly this fact, and that her
children had no right in conscience to doubt her power.
For if a doubt had been admissible, she could not lawfully
have exacted the oath, since she would have exposed the
Bishops and clergy to the danger of perjuring themselves
by swearing that they were absolutely certain of a fact
for which they had no sufficient ground of certainty
except her (on the hypothesis) falhble authority. But
she knew, and with good reason, that though she had no
direct power to judge this fact, in so far as it was a
purely human one, indirectly she had power to decide
concerning it because of its close connection with re-
vealed dogma.^
Almost any fact relating to human conduct, or
having any bearing on religion, may thus be brought
under the denomination of faith and morals. So that
the sphere of the Pope's infallibility is in reaHty un-
limited, and the ex cathedra limitation is no limita-
tion at all. It is almost enough to make one despair
of the triumph of truth over error to find that the pro-
position which the keen wit and remorseless logic of
Pascal laughed out of the court of reason should
' Authority of Doctrinal Decisions, p. 38.
'^ When does the Church speak infallibly ? p. 61.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 611
appear again under the shield of an ecclesiastical
authority which claims to be infallible even in the
domain of facts. If the Pope is to be believed
implicitly when he affirms that a certain book con-
tains five propositions which no human being has
ever been able to find there, it is obvious that he
wields an infallible sceptre over the whole realm
of human life and thought.
There is another fatal flaw in the Papal theory.
It is not only disproved by history ; it is in addition
an entire inversion of the original idea of the Church.
According to that idea the clergy were elected from
below, but ordained from above. As a rule, the
faithful laity chose their chief pastors ; but these
received their commission from a superior officer.
First the Apostles, then the Episcopate, exercised
the power of ordination.^ The unit of the Church
was in the Bishop. Its whole potentiality was
summed up in him, and thus the gates of hell could
not prevail against it except by the destruction of
the entire Episcopate, and thereby of the power of
reproduction. But according to the Papal theory
the Church becomes a corpse on the decease of the
* It is irrelevant to my present point whether the unit of the
Church was in the Episcopate or the Presbyterate. Episcopalians
and Presbyterians both believe that Orders are conferred by a power
superior to the persons to be ordained. And that is the point under
consideration. Baronius believed that the See of Eome was vacant
for three years before the election of Leo VII. ; in other words, that
the whole Christian Church was headless for three years. See the
anomalies in which the Church of Eome is involved by its assump-
tion — alone among Churches — that the Church on earth has one
visible head.
512 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
Pope, for he is its solitary head. A body deprived
of its head is dead.
Again, the Papal Bull against the validity of
Anglican Orders goes on the orthodox assumption
that the gift of Orders is from above — bestowed by a
higher grade on a lower. But what about the Pope,
from whom, according to the Papal theory, the whole
life of the Church flows? How is he ordained?
Originally the Bishop of Eome was elected by the
Cardinal Archdeacons of Eome and the suburbicarian
districts, and was then consecrated to the episcopal
office in the same way as other Bishops. All that is
changed. The original system has been revolutionised.
The College of Cardinals ceased long ago to represent
the Roman clergy and laity. Most of them are
Bishops ; but they need not be. The Cardinalate is
open to deacons, and even to subdeacons and laymen.
This becomes a matter of capital importance when
we consider in what the essence of making a Pope
consists. Its essence is in election by ballot. Qui
eligitur Bom. Pontifex, says Bellarmine, eo ipso fit
Pontifex Summus EcclesicB totius etsi forte non ex-
primant elector es.^ ' Moroni, who enters at length
upon the question, and must be considered the
organ of the Court of Rome, declares that a Pope
must necesarily be in possession of all his powers
from the instant of election, although he admits that
this opinion has prevailed in the Church only since
the days of Adrian V., who died a layman.' ^
' De Rom. Pontifice, lib. ii. cap. 22.
* Cartwright, On Papal Conclaves, p. 168.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN OEDEES 513
The case of Pope Adrian V. is one of the multi-
tude of mediaeval irregularities which touch the
essence of the Eoman claims. There is nothing in
canon law to limit the choice of a Pope to the
College of Cardinals, and as a matter of fact Popes
have been elected from outside the Sacred College —
John XIX. for example, who was a layman, as was
also Adrian V., who died a layman a month after
his election, but exercised the full prerogatives of his
office in the interval, abolishing inter alia the im-
portant Bull of his predecessor, Gregory X. This
changed fundamentally the constitution which regu-
lated elections to the Papacy, and was in force during
six subsequent elections, when Clementine V. restored
Gregory's constitution. Leo VIII. was also elected
as a layman. By Baronius he was considered as a
usurper, but by Pleury and others as a legitimate
Pontiff. How trivial the pettifogging objections of
the Papal Bull against the validity of Anglican Orders
appear when compared with these serious flaws
which affect the very core of the Papacy ! If the
essence of the validity of the Papacy lies in the act
of election, independently of the previous status of the
person elected, as eminent Koman authorities affirm,
and the crucial instance of Adrian V. illustrates, it is
patent that the original constitution of the Christian
Church has been abrogated throughout the Roman
Obedience. Matter and form are alike concentrated
in a two-thirds majority of votes by ballot,
And when our Eoman friends taunt us with the
L L
514 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
conge d'elire ^ in the election of our bishops, they
forget that it existed when the Pope's supremacy
was acknowledged in England, and existed also
in its essence, and still exists, in some foreign
countries, where the sovereign has enjoyed a right
of veto on Papal nominations to the episcopate.
But a still more formidable retort on our Koman
assailants is the veto on Papal elections possessed
by France, Austria, and Spain, and never disputed by
the Holy See. Nor is this veto an obsolete privilege.
It is in full force still, and has been exercised more
than once in recent times ; the last time in 1831 by
Spain, which vetoed the election of Cardinal Giusti-
niani after he had secured the requisite majority.
Giustiniani had been Nuncio in Madrid, and had made
himself unpopular at Court. And it was by an
accident that Cardinal Mastai-Ferretti (Pius IX.)
was not excluded from the Papal throne. Austria,
disturbed by the liberal aspirations imputed to him,
instructed its agent to lodge the formal veto in the
name of the Emperor. Private information of the
Imperial intention reached the Conclave ; the election
was hurried forward, and the Austrian veto arrived
the day after the election, when it was of no avail.
' I have never been able to see the ' farce ' of the cong4 d'4lire.
The civil power cannot impose a bishop on the Church without the
Church's own consent. The chapter can reject the nominee of the
Government, and the Episcopate can checkmate any attempt at
coercion by refusing consecration, without which the rejected
nominee cannot take possession of his See. The congd^ d'Hire is
thus a valuable check on the nomination of unworthy persons.
Prsemunire may make martyrs, but cannot force the will.
ANGLICAN AND KOMAN OEDEES 515
It is true that the unworthiness of the minister
does not affect the vaHdity of his official acts ; but
there are scandals in the history of the Papacy so
shocking as to suggest considerable scepticism if we
are to adopt — I will not say the hypercriticism of
the Papal Bull against Ajiglican Orders, but — the
sober rules of historical criticism. Take the case of
Pope John XII., who was raised to the Papal throne
at the uncanonical age of eighteen. This youth made
the Papal Court so infamous by his licentiousness
that the citizens of Kome at last appealed to the
German Emperor to rid them of the scandal. Otho
arrived in Eome and summoned a council of twenty
cardinals, and all the principal members of the
Eoman clergy, to investigate the charges against the
Pope. The conclusion arrived at by the Council
was summed up by the Emperor in a letter to the
Pope, of which the purport may be gathered from
the following extract : —
Having arrived in Eome for the service of God, we
demanded of the bishops and cardinals what was the
cause of your absence, and they asserted against you
things so disgraceful as to be unworthy of comedians.
All, as well clerics as laics, have accused you of
homicide, perjury, sacrilege, of incest with your relatives
and with two sisters, of having drunk wine to the honour
of the devil, and having invoked in gambling Jupiter,
Venus, and other Demons. We therefore request you to
return immediately in order to justify yourself from these
charges ; and if you fear the insolence of the people, we
promise to you upon our oath that nothing shall be done
contrary to the canons.
L L 2
516 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
A learned Eoman Catholic, writing of this episode,
says : —
In that extraordinary Council voices had been raised,
from ecclesiastics and laics, with strange protests against
John XII. ' The very Iberians, Babylonians, and Indians
have heard of the monstrous crimes of the Pope ! *
Cardinals deposed that he had been seen to celebrate
Mass without communicating; that he had consecrated
a bishop in a stable ; had bestowed the bishopric of Todi
on a boy ten years old ! It was stated also, in reply to
Otho's demand for specific charges, that he had caused
ecclesiastics to be blinded and . . . with cruelty fatal to
life. The reply made by John to the prelates sent with
the Emperor's letter was laconical : ' We have heard it
said that you intend to make another Pope. If you do,
I will excommunicate you in the name of the Omnipotent
God, so that you shall be no more able to confer Holy
Orders or to celebrate Mass.' ^
So that in addition to his scandalous life this Pope
was so ignorant as to believe that the Sacrament was
complete without the communion of the priest. How
will Eome's modern doctrine of intention bear that
test ? Well might Dollinger say to me, as he did in
1874, that 'if one chose to be critical, Anglican Orders,
the validity of which he had carefully examined, were
much safer than Roman Orders.' John XII. was
deposed, after an infamous Pontificate of eight years,
and the layman Leo VIII. was chosen in his stead.
All Churches, alas ! have scandals to deplore, and
must trust to the Divine mercy to make good, for
the sake of the innocent people, any defect caused by
* MedicBval Christianity and Sacred Art by C. J. Hemans, p. 21.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN ORDEES 617
sins of commission or omission on the part of their
rulers ; but no Church is in such sore need of the
mercy of God and the charity of man as the Church
of Kome. Boccaccio has illustrated by a humorous
story the impression made on thinking men at the
time by the scandals of the Papacy. A Jew in
France, who had for a long time resisted all the
arguments and solicitations of a Catholic friend to
become a Christian, said one day, * I'll tell you what
I will do — I will go to Eome and be guided by what
I see at the fountain-head of your religion.' The
Christian tried to dissuade him. For he too had
been in Eome, and believed it to be the last place in
the world to incline a man to Christianity. But the
Jew went, and called on his friend on his return,
after an absence of some months, with the news that
he had become a Christian. * God be praised,'
exclaimed his friend, ' but what did you see in Eome
to make a Christian of you ? ' * I saw iniquity and
immorality prevailing everywhere in the Church,'
he replied, ' from the Pope downwards. So I reflected
and came to the conclusion that a religion which has
survived all that for centuries must be indeed divine,
and I became a Christian.'
I do not mean to impugn the validity of Eoman
Orders on account of the confusions, irregularities,
and scandals which disfigured much of the history of
the Papacy during the Middle Ages ; but I venture
to question the prudence of Eoman Catholic contro-
versialists in provoking English Churchmen to
retaliate in self-defence. No one can read dispassio-
518 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
nately the history of the early years of Elizabeth's
reign without being forced to the conclusion that,
if the Queen had only acknowledged the Pope's
Supremacy, nothing would ever have been heard
against the validity of Anglican Orders. Bonner,
who knew the facts better than either Leo XIII. or
Cardinal Vaughan, questioned the legal authority of
Edward's Ordinal because of its lack of Parliamentary
and Convocational authority ; but he made no ob-
jection to it on the ground of defect in matter or
form : a proof that he recognised no such defect.^
And how is the Pope's invitation to the Eliza-
bethan Bishops to the Council of Trent to be recon-
ciled with the view that he held them to be no
bishops at all ? I prefer to quote the fact from the
treatise on ' The Anglican Schism ' by a bitter Eoman
Catholic contemporary, Sanders. In 1560, he teUs
us, the Pope ' sent a Nuncio ' to England, who was
to say on behalf of the Pope that * if on account of
her doubtful birth Elizabeth was afraid that her
title to the throne might, on the part of the Church
or the Pope, be questioned, the matter could be
easily settled, for the Apostolic See is indulgent.'
But, so far from being conciliated by those blandish-
ments, ' the Queen would neither listen to the Nuncio
nor allow him even to land.' ' Some time afterwards
(1561-2), the Pontiff, to leave no means untried,
sent another legate to persuade the Queen to allow
some, at least, of her own bishops to attend the
Council [of Trent], and to enter into conference
» Collier, vi. 428, 431.
ANGLICAN AND EOMAN ORDBES 519
with the Cathohcs, promising them Hberty of speech
and the safety of their persons.' The legate was the
Abbot Martinengo.^
In fine, if it be a question of the vaHdity of
Boman Orders as against Anghcan, certainly the
Church of England has no reason to ' be ashamed
to speak with her enemies in the gate.'
* Sanders's Anglican Schism, pp. 290-1.
520 THE EEFORMATION SETTLEMENT
CHAPTEK XII
THE PETSONEE OF THE VATICAN : A CHAPTEE OF
SECEET HISTOEY
Aftee the death of Pius IX., the more long-headed
among the Vatican ecclesiastics felt that if un-
exampled misfortune was to be averted from the
Papacy and the Koman Catholic Church, a complete
break must be made with the policy of the late Pope.
It was true indeed that Pius had provided his suc-
cessor, in the event of his death, with a political
testament which pledged him to an irreconcilable
attitude towards Italy, but nevertheless the party of
reconciliation worked hard to push their candidate
forward ' in the Conclave. This candidate was
Cardinal Pecci, who had been banished, through
Antonelli's jealousy, since 1846 to the unimportant
diocese of Perugia. At the head of the party of
reconciliation stood Cardinal Franchi, and his best
adjutant was Monsignor Galimberti, afterwards
Nuncio in Vienna. Galimberti succeeded in
convincing his distinguished patron that Pecci's
only hope of election lay in winning the foreign
Cardinals. This again was only possible through
the friendly co-operation of the foreign Powers ; and
THE PRISONEE OF THE VATICAN 521
in order to accomplish this the action of the Press was
necessary. It all turned on representing Pecci to
the governments, with which Pius IX. had embroiled
himself, as the opponent of his policy. Already
before 1878 the quiet campaign of the Press had
begun, Louis Teste having written a book on the
next Conclave in which he extolled the qualifications
of Cardinal Pecci, and recommended him as the
future Pope. On the day of Pius IX. 's death, the
campaign of the Press, Italian and foreign, in favour
of a conciliating Pope began, and with such success
that all the twenty-four Cardinals who took part in
the Conclave voted for Cardinal Pecci.
Leo, as Pope, did not disappoint the hopes which
the party of reconciliation had placed in him, for
he at once nominated their leader, Cardinal Franchi,
as Secretary of State, though he knew how displeas-
ing this would be to the supporters of the policy of
his predecessor. He was indeed, as a diplomatist
and opportunist, much too cautious to issue at once
a Frcniunziamento on the lines of Franchi and
Galimberti ; for the party of the Intransigeants was
still too powerful at the Vatican, and it was neces-
sary to gain time and, meanwhile, prepare the right
milieu. Only in one point did the new Pope break
at once with the tradition of Pius IX. As the
late Pope had quarrelled with almost every foreign
Sovereign, so Leo sought to reconcile himself with
all the crowned heads, and he therefore made use of
the announcement of his succession to the Throne
to begin friendly relations with the monarchs and
522 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
governments. That he wrote even to the Protestant
Kaiser, Wilhelm I., roused the anger of the Intran-
sigeants to the highest degree, and silent opposition
was not wanting. Leo XIII., with his Secretary of
State, had hardly taken the first steps towards
reconciliation with Germany when the latter died
suddenly, on June 30, 1878, only four months after
his appointment. The circumstances were peculiar
and dramatic, and public opinion in Kome spoke of
poisoning, which the Komans ever since the days
of the Kenaissance have been quick to suggest when
a man in high position has died suddenly ; but the
sinister suggestion must be dismissed as idle gossip.
The deceased Cardinal's relatives suspected no foul
play, in spite of the Cardinal's body turning black im-
mediately after death, although they did not forget that
Franchi's death could only be welcome to the Intran-
sigeant party. We may add parenthetically that Zola •
has preserved the legend of the Vatican poisoning
casein his novel 'Eome,' which is strongly anti-papal.
Leo XIII., who had just founded two journals on
Franchi's principles, 'Le Journal de Rome,' edited
by Monsignor Galimberti, and ' L' Aurora,' edited by
Monsignor Schiaffino, a Benedictine, both of whom
afterwards became Cardinals, was thrown into great
embarrassment by the sudden death of his prime
minister. His difficulties were increased when he
learnt that, contrary to all precedent, the Intran-
sigeant Cardinals had called a meeting in the house
of Cardinal Monaco della Valetta, for the purpose of
forcing their candidate on the Pope as the new
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 523
Secretary of State. Again the Pope showed his
independence by appointing a * Eeconciliationist ' in
the place of Franchi, the leader of that party, in the
person of Cardinal Nina.
Immediately the Intransigeant storm, was directed
against him, and this was all the easier as Nina dis-
dained to defend himself against his enemies. The
Cabal next tried to destroy their adversary socially.
The Neri — i.e. the clerical aristocracy — received
orders to boycott Nina, not only outside the walls of
the Vatican, but also in the very presence of the Pope.
WTien that didnot succeed his recreations were twisted
into a scandal, into the details of which it is un-
necessary to enter. He went straight to the Pope and
offered his resignation, and at the same time cleared
his character so completely that the Pope refused to
accept his resignation. But the honest man was so
sick of the intrigues directed against him, that he
insisted on being released from office. His successor
was Jacobini, then Nuncio at Vienna, and but lately
a recipient of the purple. He belonged to neither
party, but was a wise man who knew how to get on
with both, being possessed of an elastic conscience
which enabled him to please every one. Being all
things to all men, he succeeded for a time in lulling
the suspicions of the Intransigeants, whom Tosti's
pamphlet in favour of a reconciliation with the Vati-
can had enraged. Padre Tosti was abbot of Monte
Casino, the famous Benedictine Monastery, which
the traveller between Rome and Naples sees perched
against the sky. The traditions of the Benedictines
524 THE KEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
have been liberal, and Monte Casino has afforded an
asylum and encouragement to those who laboured,
and often jeoparded their lives, for the regeneration
and freedom of Italy. To this, and also partly to
the intercession of Mr. Gladstone, it is due that the
monastery of Monte Casino was spared when most
of the other religious houses were suppressed.
Ever since the accession of Leo XIII. to the
Papal throne the Benedictines of Monte Casino, and
Padre Tosti in particular, laboured for a reconcilia-
tion between the Vatican and Quirinal. The Jesuits,
on the other hand, conducted the campaign of the
Intransigeants, though seldom showing their hand
openly. And they won at last. Jacobini's ambi-
dextrous tactics did not suit them, and he died
suddenly at the age of forty-five. Insinuations of
poisoning again floated in Eoman society, doubtless
with as little foundation in fact as in the case of
Franchi. The Pope, wearied out with the machi-
nations of the Jesuits to get an Intransigeant
appointed Secretary of State, yielded on that point,
and, to the surprise of the uninitiated, appointed the
Nuncio at Madrid, a young Sicilian : a man of ability ;
adroit, scheming, ardent, and of strong will. He is not
a Jesuit. That society was far too astute to get a
professed member of their order appointed. But
Eampolla was under their influence, and is still.
Eampolla and his patrons were too prudent to show
their hands at once. They kept a vigilant watch
over the development of events, determined to nip in
the bud any scheme for promoting a modus vivendi
THE PEISONEK OF THE VATICAN 525
between the Papacy and the Monarchy. The party
in favour of reconcihation was still strongly repre-
sented at the Vatican. The Pope was at the head
of it, though not ostensibly ; and Cardinal Schiaffino
and Padre Tosti, together with Galimberti, who were
all in the Pope's confidence, worked energetically
for the cause which they had so much at heart.
A few weeks after Rampolla's appointment,
Crispi was again Minister of the Interior, and he
was more than ready to meet Tosti halfway in any
practical arrangement for putting an end to the
quarrel betwen Church and State. The relations
between the Italian Government and the Vatican
became more friendly, and it really looked as if a
reconciliation was at last in sight. The inter-
mediary in these negotiations was Tosti, who threw
himself heart and soul into the business. An
idealist and an ardent patriot, the eventful '48 found
him. in the front line of the liberal movement, with
Gioberti, Rosmini, and Ventura ; priests all, and all
labouring in their several ways to realise the national
idea, then represented by Pius IX., in whom the
hopes of Young Italy were centred, and who eclipsed,
during his short-lived enthusiasm for Italian unity,
the fame and influence of Mazzini, Balbo, Gioberti,
and other leaders of the national movement. Tosti
was at that time the poet of the movement. He
wrote, among other things, * The Soldier's Psalter '
and 'The Lombard League,' two martial hymns in
praise of the liberation of Italy. * The Lombard
League ' he dedicated to Pius IX. in a fine lyrical
526 THE RBFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
poem. He was then in his thirty-eighth year,
and had already made his mark in the repubKc of
letters with his * History of Monte Casino.' But
he sacrificed his brilliant worldly prospects to his
patriotism. Indeed, he ran no small risk when the
reaction set in and he saw some of his intimate
friends, leaders in the movement, exiled or cast into
prison. Eegarding the cause as lost, he found a
warm friend and admirer in Don Pedro, the accom-
plished Emperor of Brazil, who offered him an
asylum at his court. While waiting for the vessel
that was to carry him across the ocean, he found a
safe retreat in Naples under the protection of the
British Consul. But the fear of the sea overcame
that of a Neapolitan dungeon, and he determined to
remain in Italy. An influential personage persuaded
the King (Bomba) to allow Tosti to return to
Monte Casino after a severe warning from the Com-
missary of Police. There he gave himself up to
literature, and published a ' Life of Abelard ' and
other works.
In 1860 Tosti reappeared in the world of politics
with an eloquent brochure : * San Benedetto al
Parlamento Italiano.' It is a forcible appeal on
behalf of his famous monastery. Pepoli and Valerio
had suppressed the rehgious orders in Umbria and
the Marches, and Tosti feared, with good reason, the
Hke fate for Monte Casino. His story of Monte Casino
records, with persuasive eloquence, the services which
the monastery had rendered to Italy in the civil as
well as in the religious sphere, and he declared with
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 527
prophetic insight, that the rehgious orders, suppressed
with such undiscriminating ruthlessness, would
flourish again in a few years, and avenge themselves
on their persecutors. How slow politicians are to
learn the impotence of physical force and parlia-
mentary decrees against spiritual ideas ! ' We shall
not go to Canossa,' exclaimed Bismarck when he
was passing his ' Falk Laws ' with overwhelming
majorities. In a few years he went to Canossa, and
was fain to court the party whom he had persecuted.
Jules Ferry, heedless of the warning, banished a
crowd of religious orders, suppressed the teaching
and the symbols of Christianity in the schools, and
passed an army of seminarists through the barracks
of France, hoping thus to annihilate clericalism.
To-day France is paying the penalty of Jules Ferry's
folly. Clericalism, instead of being destroyed by the
conscription, has converted the army, and crime has
so increased meanwhile that there is a reaction in
favour of restoring religious teaching in the schools.
The same thing happened in Italy. Many of
the monks in the various orders were liberals ; and
a wise policy might have enlisted them into the ser-
vice of the monarchy, and disarmed, to a large extent,
the hostility of the remainder. Instead of this they
were driven out into the world in a state of beggary,
and thus needlessly forced into the camp of the
enemies of Italian unity.
Tosti foresaw this. But his defence of his con-
vent seemed to make no impression on the Govern-
ment. Yet it prevailed. Mr. Gladstone interested
528 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
himself in Monte Casino, and used his great influence
with Itahan statesmen to save the doomed monastery.
He found powerful auxiliaries among patriotic
Italians, Count Gabrio Casati in particular. But it
was Tosti's powerful appeal that enabled the friends
of Monte Casino to make out an irresistible case.^
The liberation and unity of Italy, with Church
and State reconciled, was the dream and passion of
Tosti's life. But he was doomed to a rude awaken-
ing. Such was the charm of the man that, in spite
of his political heresies, he kept on good terms to the
' The music of Tosti's style cannot be translated ; but the ear
may catch something of it, as of a beautiful song, even without
following the sense. His volume concludes with the following
pathetic appeal : —
'Lasciateci monaci, se ci volete cittadini benefici. II tristo
monaco nel mondo d una contraddizione in veste grottesca ; e questi
non son tempi da ridere. Tutto vi lasciamo alle soglie delle nostra
badie ; fin la polvere delle passate ricchezze ci scrolliamo dal sajo :
tutto prendete, ma non toccate al sagramento della nostra fede
monastica. E troppo cara ai nostri cuori ; ^ troppo cara alia
nostra Italia. Questa d cattolica e non protestante ; nella via che
essa viaggia per la citta di Dio, vuol trovare uomini che parlino con
Dio ; la solitudine le farebbe paura. Questa patria di Dante e di
Kaffaello, innamorata di Dio, che discese per la via delle sensibili
bellezze del firmamento, della terra, e della mare,a creare 1' uomo, per
questa via vuole ascendere a lui ; vuole 1' arte della religione ; vuole
il culto. Lasciate un rifugio all' Italia, vedovata, per carcere, per
esigli, per guerre, di tanti figli ; lasciatele posare il capo nel seno delle
nostre salmodie. Con questi canti 'noi la cullammo fanciulla.
L' uomo d' armi, 1' uomo del lavoro, 1' uomo dei negozi, tutti hanno
cittadinanza nella vostra compagnia ;.possibile, che solo il uomo
della preghiera sia f orestiero nella terra dei cattolici ? Lasciateci
salmeggiare, perch^ la preghiera e il vincolo del nostro sodalizio e
della nostra fatica : e il nostro mestiere. Per lei siamo monaci, per
lei saremo sempre con voi, per lei san Benedetto vuole starsene con
la sua Italia.' — See De Cesari's II Padre Tosti nella Politica, p. 9.
THE PRISONER OF THE VATICAN 529
last with Pius IX. From his successor he had great
hopes. He had made the acquaintance of Monsignor
Gioacchino Pecci forty years before, when Pecci
visited Monte Casino on his way to Benevento as
ApostoHc delegate. The young monk and the young
prelate felt each other's attraction and became friends.
Tosti rejoiced when the choice of the Conclave fell
on Cardinal Pecci, whom he welcomed as an ideal
Pope, marked out by Providence for reconciling the
Monarchy and the Papacy. Leo XIII., on his part,
hastened to honour the Abbot of Monte Casino.*
Tosti's antecedents, politics, and intimacy with
the Pope qualified him in an eminent degree to act
the part of intermediary between the Pope and
Crispi, who was, like Tosti, an idealist, and apt to
dream dreams and see visions. The jubilee of the
Pope's priesthood was to be celebrated on Decem-
ber 31, 1887, and this was considered an auspicious
moment for proclaiming the reconciliation of the
Quirinal and the Vatican. To prepare the public
mind for the advent of peace Tosti published in May
of that year a pamphlet, which was approved and
revised — some say inspired — by the Pope,. It is in
the form of a dialogue between a simple priest, Don
Pacifico by name, and his bishop. Don Pacifico is
Tosti himself, who expounds under this thin veil his
• The Abbot of Monte Casino was in former days the first baron of
the Kingdom of Naples, and ruled over a vast diocese, which reached
the dimensions of a considerable State. In modern times this feudal
abbacy was merged in a triumvirate of three abbots, one of whom is
• President of the Congregation.' Tosti was one of the triumvirate
when Leo XIII. became Pope.
M M
530 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
own and the Pope's views on the situation. After a
passing reference to the events of 1848 and the fair
promise of Pio Nono's outburst of hberahsm, Tosti
says : ' But times are changed ; and in the mind of
the Monsignore there sprouted a new dogma —
the identification of the throne and the altar.' ^
Tosti opposes this pohcy vigorously, and the pamphlet
assumes, all through, the acquiescence of the Pope
in Tosti's views. The bishop's mild objections act as a
foil to Tosti's argument. For example, Tosti says : —
The breach at Porta Pia was an ugly affair, through
which Eome, the Pope's patrimony, was forcibly seized
by other hands. The breach was made by a definite
number of soldiers, commanded by a definite number of
men called the Government. But the Power which really
took possession of Eome was a moral, a universal in-
dividual, a nation — in a word, Italy.
Say rather, Don Pacifico, that it was the Eevolution—
that is to say, a minority of sectaries with a few Catho-
lics led astray by the idea of a united and powerful Italy.
True, Monsignore ; it was a minority ; nor do I say that
all the thirty millions of Italians conspired with Cavour and
fired the cannon with Cadorna at Porta Pia. But when
a minority, approved or tolerated through failure to
oppose it, becomes a Government de facto and administers
social justice, it becomes a majority, not merely by reason
of its numerical superiority, but through the principle of
authority which it represents. Our most holy religion
started from a minority of a do^en fishermen. . . . When
people lived under an absolute monarchy, princes reigned
' La Conciliazione, p. 6 : * . . . e nella mente di Monsignore
rampoll6 un nuovo dogma : la identificazione del trono e dell' altare.*
Evidently an oblique reference to the reactionary Eampolla in the
play on the word ravipoUd.
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 631
and governed at the same time, and if there was any
encroachment on the property or rights of the Church
the Popes knew where to look for restitution. But to-
day princes reign and do not govern. The depositary of
the laws is the multitude, and the Government is the
nation ; so that if there has been any usurpation, the
Pope may grieve over the usurper, but he cannot turn to
the Prince for restitution. It follows that the King of
Italy cannot restore Eome to the Pope, since it is not his.
It would be necessary to restore it with force to the
Pope, to wrest it away by the hands of the nation, and
to accompany this with the sword of the parricide and of
the foreigner. What slaughter ! what rapine ! what
shipwreck of authority in a period of universal rebellion !
The non possumus of the Pope and of the Prince thus
finds its equilibrium in the balance of divine justice.^
Leo was encouraged to hope great things and had
Crispi sounded, through Tosti, as to whether the State
would be willing to make over to the Vatican the
administration of the wealthy Basilica of San Paolo
fuori le mura. Tosti went most days to Crispi's
house in the Via Gregoriana, and the Prime
Minister showed himself amenable to the wishes of
the Pope. Tosti assured the Minister that the Pope
would, on the first opportunity, make an announce-
ment in favour of a rapprochement with Italy, and
in fact the celebrated Allocution of May 23, 1887, at
least made no points against Italy. Both sides
cherished great illusions. Leo XIII., influenced by
the Eeconcilables, specially by Galimberti and his
intimate friend Monsignor Bocali, entertained the
' La Conciliazione, pp. 16-17.
H u 2
532 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
most extravagant hopes. He perhaps beHeved the
ItaHans would, even if they did not leave Eome
altogether, at least find a modus vivendi whereby
the Eternal City could enclose both Sovereigns
within its walls. But, being an experienced diplo-
matist, the Pope was careful to take no hasty step,
for he had still to reckon with EampoUa and the
Intransigeants who were watching his dealings with
Crispi. Tosti's pamphlet gave them their opportu-
nity. It made a great sensation, and passed rapidly
through three editions. Eampolla immediately
struck his blow. A letter from the Pope to the
Cardinal appeared in the Osservatore Bomano (the
official organ of Rampolla) which put a summary end
to the Tosti-Crispi negotiations. It was then the
policy of France to cultivate friendly relations with
the Jesuit party, and to prevent a friendly under-
standing between the King of Italy and the Pope.
The French ambassador accordingly made common
cause with the Intransigeants. Thus reinforced, the
Intra7isigeants were not satisfied with the rupture
of the negotiations ; they determined to ruin Tosti.
Under pressure the Pope asked Tosti to retract the
sentiments expressed in his Conciliazione. To
oblige the Pope, but very reluctantly, he wrote a
letter which, after revision by the Pope himself, was
published in the newspapers. But the retractation
was not humiliating enough for the Intransigeants,
and they demanded a more complete expiation. The
Pope seemed to be ashamed of the part which he
was made to play, and instead of this time appealing
THE PEISONER OF THE VATICAN 533
to Tosti in a personal interview, he sent for Don
Michele Morcaldi, one of the abbatial triumvirate,
and, as President of the Congregation of Monte
Casino, Tosti's superior, and begged him to obtain
Tosti's retractation. Tosti refused to make a second
retractation. But the Pope, anticipating this, author-
ised Morcaldi to assure Tosti, on the Pope's official
and private v^ord of honour, that the retractation would
be kept strictly secret, and was only asked for by the
Pope as a weapon of defence against the fury of
Eampolla's party. Thus reassured, and in full
reliance on the Papal promise, Tosti wrote his
second retractation without measuring his words or
calculating the consequences, wishing only to oblige
the Pope and get him out of a difficulty.
On July 27, a fortnight after it was written,
Tosti's second retractation appeared in large type in
the Osservatore Bomano. On the following morning
he read it at Monte Casino. The blow was terrible,
and his emotion was for some time uncontrollable ;
not so much by reason of the humiliation inflicted
on himself as on account of the Pope's violation of
his pledged word. On recovering from his fit of
nervous agitation, Tosti wrote a touching and
dignified letter to Monsignor Angeli, recapitulating
the facts given above, and complaining of the Papal
breach of faith.^ * Nothing remains to me ' — so he
' To prevent any mistake I give the letter literally in the
original : —
'Keverendo Monsignore, — Ai primi giorni di questo mese il
nostro P. Abate, presidente, mi communico V ordine del S. Padre di
umiliajgli una seconda lettera di sottomissione, piu esplicita dell'
534 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
concludes, 'but to bow my head humbly to the
supreme desire of his Holiness, and to say from my
heart : Thy will he done.'
He wrote at the same time to the Abbot Morcaldi,
demanding an explanation. Morcaldi assured him,
in reply, that he was charged categorically by the
Pope to assure Tosti that his retractation would be
guarded by the formal seal of the Papal secret.^
Receiving no answer from Monsignor Angeli,
Tosti wrote to the Pope direct, on August 1, a letter
full of dignity, but also of the bitterness of a man
betrayed by a friend, who was, moreover, the Chief
Pastor of his Church. In that letter, after reminding
his Holiness that his retractation was asked for
merely as a means of stopping the truculent rage of
his enemies {ad arcendam truculentam rabiemdei suoi
nemici), he resigned his posts of Vicearchivist of the
Holy See and Superintendent of the sacred monu-
altra, gia publicata nell' Osservatore Botnano, a cagione del mio
opuscolo : La Conciliazione. Mi diceva che questo documento
resterebbe nelle mani di S. Santita, sotto segreto papale. Subito mi
affrettai a compiere ciecamente la volonta dell' Augusto Pontefice, che
per mezzo dello stesso P. Abate, presidente, si degno manifestarmi
il suo benplacito, dicendomi che il S. Padre era contento della mia
docilita, che fossi stato tranquillo e che mi benediceva, vietando che
piu si parlasse del mio opuscolo. Posso attestare coram Deo di non
avere io in alcun modo violato il segreto papale, che mi fu imposto
dal P. Abate, presidente, per ordine del S. Padre. Ora mia lettera ^
di publica ragione, ed a me non rimane che chinare umilmente il
capo ai supremi voleri di S. Santita, e dire col cuore : Fiat voluntas
tmi ! '
' 'Fu categorico il precetto datomi dal Papa, ed a voi da
ingiunto, del segreto papale, in cui doveva rimanere involta la vostra
lettera.'
THE PKISONEE OF THE VATICAN 535
ments under the State, and stopped at the same
time the pubhcation of the ' Eegesta Pontificum,' a
valuable work which he had edited for years, and
had brought down to Clement V. The letter con-
cludes : * Take all from me, and leave me only the
habit of my Saint Benedict in which he lived so well,
and died so excellently.' The Pope made no reply,
and Tosti never again entered the Vatican. He
returned to his studies, beginning with a translation
of Sallust into Italian.
But the victory of the Intransigeants was not yet
complete. Tosti was suppressed, but the Pope still
cherished the hope of celebrating his sacerdotal
jubilee with a message of reconciliation and peace
to Italy ; and the Intransigeants encouraged his
aspirations in order the more completely to frustrate
them. The negotiations with Crispi were resumed,
this time under the auspices of the librarian of the
Vatican, Monsignor Carini, a son of Garibaldi's
General of that name. He had been an officer in
the Koyal army, and while quartered at Perugia had
become intimate with the Cardinal Archbishop,
afterwards Leo XIII. The negotiations went on
prosperously for a time. Friendly messages were
exchanged between King Umberto and Leo XIII.
The former offered to present the Pope with a hand-
some golden chalice as a jubilee gift. The gift was
graciously accepted, provided a slight change were
made in the proposed inscription, namely, that it
should be a gift from * Umberto, Prince of Savoy,'
not from ' Umberto, King of Italy.' It was a
536 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
masterstroke of diplomacy on the part of Kampolla
and the Jesuits. The breach between Crispi and
the Pope was now even more complete than that
between the Pope and Tosti. The Sindaco of Kome
too, the royalist Prince Torlonia, was involved in
the quarrel. Hoping to help on the negotiations,
he went, without consulting Crispi, to the Cardinal
Vicar, Parochi, and conveyed to him the congratula-
tions of the city of Eome. For this indiscretion he
was promptly dismissed from office.
Crispi, recognising at last the hopelessness of
negotiating with a Pope who was evidently not his
own master, determined to strike a blow from his
side. He patronised the Giordano Bruno memorial
and ostentatiously encouraged its development into
an anti-papal demonstration. The breach with the
Vatican was now complete, and Eampolla's star was
in the ascendant. The fates were singularly unkind
to Leo Xin. Cardinal Schiaf&no died in 1889, and
Cardinal Galimberti in 1896 ; both with startling
suddenness. Galimberti was the last of the Beconcil-
ables; and his death was important on another
ground, for he held the influential office of Teller at
the next Papal Conclave.
Deprived of all his supporters in the Sacred
College, the venerable and well-meaning Leo seems
to have given up the struggle and abandoned the
field to the manoeuvres of Cardinal Eampolla.
I am forcibly reminded by this episode in the
annals of the Vatican of a conversation which I
had with Dr. Dollinger at Munich during the sitting
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 537
of the Vatican Council. I suggested that Pio
Nono's successor, if a man of strong will and
liberal ideas, might — on the abolition of the Tem-
poral Power which seemed then impending — avail
himself of the new prerogative of infallibility to
reform the Papacy, and restore the Bishop of Eome
to his legitimate position in the hierarchy of the
Church. DoUinger shook his head. ' My friend,'
he said, ' the Papacy is the growth of centuries, and
it will take generations, if not centuries, to reduce
it to its proper proportions. It makes very little
difference how able and well-disposed a new Pope
may be. Once elected, he becomes powerless. He
will find himself inside a system, wheel within wheel,
fetter upon fetter ; and struggle as he may, he must
eventually succumb.' The history of Leo XIII.'s
pontificate is a striking confirmation of Dollinger's
forecast. Truly, the Pope is ' the prisoner of the
Vatican.' But his jailers are those of his own
household. In matters which do not encroach on
the traditional policy of the Vatican or the domina-
tion of the Jesuits the Pope has a free hand. Out-
side those limits he is not a free agent : he is but
the organ of a system and a party which have with
marvellous skill, begotten of ages of experience,
bound the Koman Church in fetters as impossible
to break as the withes with which Delilah bound
Samson when the locks of his strength were shorn.
I never cherished the faintest illusion as to the
verdict of the Vatican on the validity of Anglican
Orders. To have admitted that they were valid, or
538 THE KEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
even doubtful, would have broken the tradition of
Eome since the excommunication of Queen Eliza-
beth, and would have made the ecclesiastical position
of Cardinal Vaughan and his colleagues awkward
if not untenable. The decision was a foregone con-
clusion, and no amount of evidence would have
made the slightest difference. This is not to say
that the majority of the Pope's experts did not act
in good faith. I have no doubt that they acted as
conscientiously as the members of the Judicial
Committee are wont to act when they sit in judg-
ment on a Eitualist. Their minds were simply
impervious to the force of any evidence that told in
favour of Anglican Orders. The most learned of
the Pope's Commissioners, the Abbe Duchesne, had
no doubt of the validity of Anglican Orders; and
although he hardly ventured to expect that the
Pope would admit their validity, he believed, as he
told Mr. Gladstone in my presence, that the evi-
dence was too strong for the Pope to do more, at
the worst, than to leave the question undecided. I
did not share his conviction. I never doubted that
Anglican Orders would be condemned on grounds of
policy quite irrespective of the merits of the question.
That the Pope himself was as sincere, as he was
in initiating negotiations with Crispi and encoura-
ging Tosti's plea for ' Conciliation,' I do not ques-
tion. Mr. Gladstone's * Soliloquium ' was written on
a private intimation from the Vatican that his
intervention would help the Pope to take up a
benevolent attitude ; and Mr. Gladstone showed me
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 539
a letter from Tosti (who was a friend of his) ex-
pressing his admiration of the ' Soliloquium ' which,
he said, the Pope had sent him, through a friend,
with expressions of great gratification and hopeful-
ness. All in vain ! ' The prisoner of the Vatican'
cannot emancipate himself from the traditional
policy of the Eoman Curia. While that endures
Eome will seek, not union, but domination.
For myself, I am inclined to think that the Bull
against Anglican Orders was a blessing in disguise,
and will eventually make for the reunion of
Christendom by banishing all illusions. It is now
manifest to all that what Kome seeks is not union,
but unconditional submission. This, I believe, will
prove a salutary lesson for any Romanisers among
ns, and will hinder instead of promoting the
harvest of secessions which Cardinal Vaughan hoped
to reap from the Papal Bull.
English Churchmen will now turn their faces in
another direction. They will strive for union
among themselves in the first place. I am per-
suaded that the main differences between the great
bulk of the Evangelical party and the High Church
party, including even the extreme wings, are chiefly
due to misunderstandings, and are more on the
surface than in the essence of our controversies. The
great body of orthodox Nonconformists, too, are
surely much nearer the Church of England than
they were forty years ago, and have a much truer
conception of the Christian Church than the Puritan
clergy of Elizabeth's day had. The Catechism
5d0 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
lately adopted by the various Nonconformist bodies
is a remarkable proof of this. The Church is there
recognised as a divine institution, and the figment
of an invisible church is discarded. The Presby-
terianism of Scotland affords a still more striking
illustration of approximation towards the Church of
England. The predjudice against prelacy, as such,
is dead; and if Presbyterians hesitate to adopt
Episcopacy it is not because they think that form of
government unlawful, but because they do not doubt
the lawfulness of Presbyterian ism, and have a
patriotic pride in the services — which I, for one,
freely acknowledge — that it has rendered to Scotland.
Its doctrines as to the Church and Sacraments are
distinctly high ; and its standard of public worship
is being gradually brought into harmony with its
standard of doctrine. I witnessed lately, on the
occasion of my receiving an honorary degree from
the University of Edinburgh, a sight strange to my
experience of Presbyterianism in my boyhood. After
receiving our degrees, a throng of graduates, under-
graduates, and spectators, went in procession, arrayed
in a variety of gorgeous vestments, from the
McEwan Hall — a splendid gift from a citizen and
parliamentary representative of Edinburgh — to St.
Giles's Cathedral, to listen to an address delivered by
a distinguished minister. The address was preceded
by a short devotional service, more in accordance
with an Anglican service than with the Presby-
terianism of my youth. And the congregation con-
sisted of Presbyterians, Established and Free, and
THE PRISONEE OF THE VATICAN 541
also of Anglican Churchmen and Scottish Episco-
palians, High and Broad. It was enough to make
Jeanie Geddes turn in her grave.
To this must be added the remarkable Patri-
archal and Synodical Encyclical Letter, already
mentioned, in which the Eastern Church has replied
to the Pope's invitation to submission. The Eastern
bishops have in this document placed themselves in
line with our own Church, as evidenced by our
representative divines and by the two Primates in
their recent ' Answer ' to the Pope's Bull. The Eastern
bishops reject the Pope's Supremacy and Infallibility,
the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the
Virgin, the Komish doctrines of Purgatory, In-
dulgences, Transubstantiation, and also Commu-
nion in one kind. Repudiating the idea of any
human head of the Church, the Eastern bishops
declare that * the only everlasting Chief and immortal
Head of the Church is our Lord Jesus Christ,' and
that ' the divine Fathers . . . had, and could have
had, no idea of an absolutist supremacy in the Apostle
Peter, or in the bishops of Eome. . . . They could
not invent, arbitrarily and of their own w'U, a novel
dogma, erecting upon a pretended succession from
Peter an overbearing supremacy of the Roman
bishop.' And they make the pertinent observation
that *the Church of Rome was founded, not by
Peter, of whose Apostolic work at Rome history
knows nothing, but mainly through the disciples of
the heaven-soaring Apostle of the Gentiles, Paul,
whose Apostolic ministry in Rome is clear to all
542 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
men.' It is indeed inconceivable that Peter should
have been Bishop of Eome, yet that there should be
no allusion to him in the Acts of the Apostles or in
St. Paul's Epistle to the Eomans, or letters written
by him in Rome, considering St. Paul's punctilious
deference to St. James as Bishop of Jerusalem. The
fact is, diocesan episcopacy, in the modern sense of
the word, did not exist during St. Peter's life — at
least outside Jerusalem — and the story of Peter's
Roman Episcopate is an invention of the Pseudo-
Clementines.
This common ground of opposition to Roman
pretensions on the part of the Anglican and Oriental
Churches, and their general rapprochement towards
each other, have naturally alarmed Cardinal Vaughan,
and he has privately sent to the Holy Governing
Synod of the Russian Church, on behalf of himself
and his brethren, an elaborate impeachment of the
Church of England. The Intransigeants of the
Church Association are his best alhes. The con-
tinuity of the English Church up to the beginning
of Christianity in this kingdom is the only effectual
argument against Rome. I deprecate, therefore,
any ruling, by whatever authority, which would
have the effect of suggesting a visible break between
the Church of England before and after the Refor-
mation. Just as the vestments of our judges and
the ritual of our Court and Parliament take us back
to the reigns of our Edwards, Richards, and Henrys,
so the vestments and ritual sanctioned by the Or-
naments Rubric— the Judicial Committee notwith-
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 543
standing — take us back to the dawn of Christianity
in these isles. I repudiate the idea of a Eoman
Church in this land which was abolished at the
Keformation. What was abolished was a system of
usurpations on the part of the Bishop of Eome, and
with that system a number of corruptions which
had gradually grown up in parts of the doctrine and
worship of the Church. * Where was your Church
before Henry VIII. ? ' asked a Eoman Catholic of
Dr. Hook of Leeds. * Where was your face before
it was washed ? ' answered the old vicar. The retort
may have been a bit rough, but it was as just as
it was witty.
Let the two Aj-chbishops admit in principle this
unbroken continuity of the English Church in its
ritual as well as in its doctrine, and I believe that
the mass of Churchmen, lay and clerical, will support
them in checking illegitimate developments, and
even the forcing of legitimate ceremonial on unwilling
congregations. I believe also that they will have
the support of public opinion. Gorgeous vestments,
incense, and the ceremonial commonly objected to,
will appear innocent, if not attractive, when disso-
ciated from disloyalty to the Church of England.
No one objects to that ritual in the churches of that
admirable body of Christians who call themselves
* the Catholic and Apostolic Church.' Ajid this
tolerance is not due to their not being an established
religion, but to the absence of suspicion as to their
loyalty to their engagements. Convince the British
public that the ritual which rouses the hostility of
544 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
some persons is part of the legal heritage of the
Church of England, and is no more Popish than
shoes and stockings are Popish, and all prejudice will
vanish as speedily as the prejudice against chanting
the Psalms and preaching in the surplice.
And there is another consideration which the
opponents of Eitualism would do well to bear in
mind. It is much to the credit of the working
classes of this country that they have never shown
any disposition to combine in their own interest
against the owners of property and privilege.
Who can doubt that this is largely due to their being
still under the influence, ideals, and sentiments of
Christianity, even when they sit loosely towards the
Christian Creed? The influence of the Church
extends far beyond the formal acknowledgment of
her Creed. But let the masses lose hold of their
instinctive belief in a future world where the destiny
of man is dependent on his conduct here, why should
they, in that case, acquiesce in social and political
systems from which many of them seem to them-
selves to derive but little benefit ? Let them lose
their faith in a heaven beyond the grave, and the
temptation will be irresistible to seek their heaven
here. And they are the majority and have a potent
voice in the making of our laws. Let them be
convinced that there is no heaven, and they will
claim the earth. This is so well put by a powerful
writer that I am tempted to quote him : —
What will be the result, what the possible catastrophe,
when this doctrine [of a future life] is no longer ac-
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 545
credited ; — when it is discarded as a delusion — when it
is resented as a convenient deception and instrument of
oppression ; — when the poor man is convinced that there
is no wealth of gold and jewels awaiting him in the
spiritual kingdom — that if he is wretched here he is
wretched altogether — that what he lacks now will never
hereafter be made good to him — that the promises and
hopes dangled before him to keep him quiet have been
mere moonshine, and that in very truth the bank in
which he had insured his fortune, in which he had in-
vested all his savings, to have a provision in which he
had toiled with indefatigable industry and endured with
exemplary patience, is a fraudulent insolvent ; — when, in
fine, he wakes up with a start to the bewildering con-
viction that if he is to rest, to be happy, to enjoy his fair
share of the sunshine and the warmth of life, he mtist do
it now, here, at once, without a day's delay ? Will there
not come upon him that sort of feverish haste to be in
luxury and at peace, to immediatize all that earth can
yield him, to sink the uncertain future in the passing
present, which has been depicted in such vivid colours as
pervading and maddening the daily thought and talk of
the Socialists and Communists of the French metro-
poHs ? '
The salutary and restraining influences thus
vividly depicted by Mr. Greg are rapidly on the v^ane,
he tells us, among the working classes of this
country. * Among working men it is for the most
part absolute atheism, and is complicated by a
marked feeling of antagonism towards the teachers
of Religion, a kind of resentment growing out of the
conviction that they have been systematically
deluded by those who ought to have enlightened
them.' And then he adds in a note, ' I am assured,
N N
546 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
however, that this can scarcely be stated as broadly
as a few years Sbgo— considerably oioing to the
Bitualists.' *
Is it prudent to wage war against a reHgious
movement which won this acknowledgment, a
quarter of a century ago, from a very able public
writer who had, as a Unitarian, no sympathy with
Ritualism ? The influence of the Eitualists among
the masses is much greater now than it was when
Mr. Greg bore this testimony. The severest censors
of the Ritualists generally admit their self-denial and
labours of love among the poor, but add that this is
not the question. I submit that it is very largely
the question. The very purpose of Religion is to
elevate humanity ; to make human beings better
parents, better children, better servants and masters,
better wives and husbands — in a word, better
citizens ; and I venture to suggest that it would be
as stupid as it would be criminal to suppress any
mode of worship which bears so good a fruit.
And let it further be considered whether the
kind of worship which goes under the name of
Ritualism does not minister -to some craving in the
nature of man, and bear witness at the same time to
some aspect of the character of Almighty God which
it would be well for us to realise. Believers in the
Bible must admit that when God condescended to
ordain a style of worship it was of a kind that
appealed to the whole of man — his understanding,
his imagination, his bodily senses.
' Bocks Ahead, pp. 131, 141-143.
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 547
Now if it be true, as Dean Lyall has said,^ that
* when God created this lower world, He created it
according to the pattern of the world above,' we see
at once why all the ritual arrangements of His
worship should be designed 'for glory and for
beauty.' He is emphatically ' the King in His beauty,'
and this earth, though the trail of the Serpent be
over it all, and strewn though it be with moral
ruins, still bears manifold witness to His love for all
that delights the eye and charms the ear. To my
mind the wealth of beauty expended on the plumage
of a humming-bird, or on the gauzy wings of some
ephemeral insects, is almost more wonderful than
the creation of an archangel. Ransack the whole
kingdom of nature and you will find no organic
existence, from the minutest to the most stupendous,
which does not give evidence of a love of beauty for
its own sake. The tiniest atom of organised matter,
insects which can only be seen under the microscope,
are each and all formed on a distinct type, and
fashioned after some pattern of exquisite beauty.
This proves that beauty of form and colour was not
created merely in order that men might see and
admire it. Grod's love of beauty for its own sake is
written on the imperishable rocks and on the ever-
lasting hills. Long before man was created the
world was full of beauties which gladdened no
human eye, though they have left their records on
the rocks. And even now man sees but a small
portion of the beauties of nature. Look at the
' Propcedia Frophctica, p. 264.
M K 2
548 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
ocean alone, and think of the world of wonders,
buried in its bosom, which eye of man has never
seen. There is not a shell in all its depths or along
its innumerable shores which does not bear witness
to a love of beauty on the part of Him who made it.
And to this love of beauty, which is inherent in
the nature of God, the soul of man instinctively
responds. Why does the uncultivated savage carve
the handle of his war club and the prow of his canoe
on lines of artistic beauty ? Why do the untutored
women of the South Sea Islands make pottery in
forms of exquisite beauty, with no other materials
than mud, and sunshine, and their own bare hands ?
Why do the poor in the slums of our towns love to
have a few bright flowers in their windows, and a
singing bird to cheer with its music the dull monotony
of their lives ? Is it not because the love of beauty
is so natural to man that it shows itself in the most
unexpected ways and under the most discouraging
conditions ? And is it not because men have
recognised this double aspect of beauty — its origin
in the divine nature, and its reflection in the nature
of man — that they have in all ages worshipped Him,
when circumstances permitted, in splendid temples
and with stately ceremonial? God needs no
splendour of worship, and He accepts the homage
of the heart without any ceremonial when circum-
stances make it impossible or unadvisable. He
heard the cries of the oppressed Israelites in the
house of bondage. But when they departed laden
with the spoils of Egypt, He would accept nothing
THE PEISONEE OF THE VATICAN 549
short of their costliest gifts. And when He appeared
in human form in Judea, He rebuked the false
disciple, who, with hypocritical solicitude for the
poor, would forbid the ' woman who was a sinner '
to poar out her costly spikenard on her Saviour.
He loves to be worshipped ' in the beauty of holiness,'
where that is possible, because He is a lover of
beauty, but chiefly because such worship, when the
expression of the heart's devotion, is a proof of the
gratitude and love of the worshippers.
But it is sometimes said that splendour and
stateliness of worship were abolished when the
Gospel superseded the law. Yet our Lord has told
us that He * came not to destroy the law, but to ful-
fil it.' And He attended the gorgeous worship of
the Temple without dropping a hint that it was
displeasing to Him. Euskin, in one of the most
eloquent passages in the English language, has ex-
posed the fallacy of the objection.^ It is too long for
quotation, but the following extract will indicate
his argument :
It is a most secure truth that although the particular
ordinances divinely appointed for special purposes at any
given period of man's history may be by the same au-
thority abrogated at another, it is impossible that any
character of God, appealed to or described in any
ordinance past or present, can ever be changed. God is
one and the same, and is pleased or displeased at the
same things for ever, although one part of His pleasure
may be expressed at one time rather than another, and
» • The Lamp of Sacrifice,' in The Seven Lamps of Architecture,
550 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
although the mode in which His pleasure is to be con-
sulted may be by Him graciously modified to the circum-
stances of men.
Equally pertinent is his answer to the cry of
superstition, idolatry, and Komanism :
The probability, in our times, of fellowship with
the feelings of the idolatrous Eomanist is absolutel^^ as
nothing compared with the danger to the Israelite of a
sympathy with the idolatrous Egyptian ; no speculation,
no unproved danger ; but proved fatally by their fall
during a month's abandonment to their own will ; a fall
into the most servile idolatry; yet marked by such
offerings to their idol as their leader was, in the close
sequel, instructed to bid them offer to God.
And now I appeal to history, to reason, to Holy
Scripture, and to common sense against a repetition
of the folly which drove from the English Church,
to her great loss, men like Wesley, and Newman,
and others, yet without checking the movements of
which they were leaders. The movement against
which the present agitation is directed may be dis-
figured — like most movements inspired by enthu-
siasm and zeal — by extravagances and eccentricities ;
but it appeals at bottom to instincts in our nature
which cannot be forcibly suppressed with impunity.
The extravagances will drop off under skilful treat-
ment, and all that is good in the movement will
remain as a solid gain to the Church. Let us
tolerate each other. Let us have no Procrustean
system of worship which shall reduce all things to a
dull monotony of uniformity. Tastes and feelings
THE PEISONEK OF THE VATICAN 551
differ even in matters of public worship, and all
tastes should have scope, within reasonable limits,
in a national Church. Let therefore a wide latitude
be conceded where clergy and congregations are of
one mind. Above all, let us have charity; let us
mutually seek points of agreement rather than of
difference ; let us try to understand one another's
meaning and aims, and let us cease to call each
other names and impute dishonourable motives.
And then, perhaps, we may see, even on the near
horizon, the foregleams of the day when •' Ephraim
shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex
Ephraim.' For indeed I believe that there is far
more real unity among us than appears on the sur-
face ; that under varying phraseology we often mean
the same thing. A terrible responsibility lies on
any who deliberately or heedlessly help to widen
instead of closing the breach. It seems to me im-
possible to follow carefully the history of the Church
of England through all its vicissitudes without
recognising the hand of a guiding Providence lead-
ing it by devious ways towards a predestined end.
The striking passage in which the Ultramontane De
Maistre gave expression to that feeling has often been
quoted. ' If Christians,' he said, ' are ever to be
drawn towards each other, it seems that the initia-
tive must come from the Church of England.
Presbyterianism was French in its origin, and was
consequently marked by exaggeration,' and lacking
in adaptability. ' But the Anglican Church touches
us with one hand, and with the other touches
552 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
those whom we cannot reach/ And therefore this
uncompromising PapaHst saw, and had the candour
to avow, that the Church of England 'is very
precious ' as a mediator in the reunion of Christen-
dom ; and he compares her to ' one of those chemical
intermediaries capable of uniting elements which
are mutually repellent.' ^
Let us beware then of putting obstacles in the
way of God's purposes. Little as they know it,
those who would sever the Church of England of
our day from the Church which, with all its faults
and shortcomings, has played so great a part in the
development of our nation from its origin till now,
are doing their best to defeat that destiny which an
alien and opponent discerned among the omens of
her future. ' The English language and the Anglo-
Saxon race are overrunning the world,' says Cardinal
Newman in one of his charming Essays. Let us
then be patient meanwhile and try to ' bear one
another's burdens.' ' He that believeth shall not
make haste,' Sparta?^ nactus es, limic exorna.
* Considerations sur la France, ch. ii.
553
CHAPTEE XIII
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS'
The high personal character and ability of each of
our Primates, not less than their exalted position,
claim for their recent decisions the most filial and
dutiful consideration on the part of their clergy.
Those immediately affected by the decisions are
only the few who pleaded before their Graces at
Lambeth, and in a secondary degree those who
practise the usages which their Graces have pro-
nounced illegal. But the whole Church is affected
by the reasons on which the Archbishops have
based their decisions. Out of various courses which
were open to them it seems to me — if I may
presume to say so — that they have chosen the one
which makes the duty of obedience unnecessarily
hard. If, declining the task of legal and historical
criticism, they had entreated the clergy, in view of
the present distress and for the sake of peace and
the welfare of the Church, to discontinue the
liturgical use of incense,^ till a more propitious
' I use the word ' decisions ' here and elsewhere in the popular,
not technical, sense. The Lambeth decisions have not, and do not
profess to have, any legal value.
- 1 say nothing about lights in processions, which stand on quite a
different basis from incense and reservation.
554 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
season, and left the diocesan in each case to regulate
the practice of reservation for the communion of the
sick, it is probable that such an appeal would have
secured universal submission. Obedience might
have been unpalatable and painful to some, but it
would have presented no difficulty to conscience, nor
raised any question of principle or conflicting duties.
As it is, the Archbishops have entangled them-
selves unnecessarily in the meshes of an argument
which is entire] y historical and legal, and entitled
on that ground to no more authority than belongs
to its intrinsic value. The appeal which they make
to the clergy is addressed less to the conscience than
to the understanding, and thus claims the assent of
the intellect to the validity of an historical conclusion
rather than the submission of the will to a godly
admonition from those who are entitled to give it.
To obey a godly admonition is one thing ; to admit
the accuracy of an historical conclusion is quite
another. Submission may be a duty in the one
case, and a betrayal of duty in the other. It is
of course the duty of the clergy to receive with all
deference and dutifulness the appeal which the
Archbishops have made to them at the close of their
historico-legal arguments ; but those arguments
challenge the honest criticism of all loyal Churchmen,
for they make assumptions and lay down principles
and canons of interpretation which go far beyond
the usages in debate, and may, if we silently
acquiesce in them, seriously damage the historical
position and Providential mission of the Church of
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 555
England. I propose, therefore, to examine, with all
respect and reverence, the grounds on which their
Graces have based their decisions. And I begin
with some preliminary observations.
1. The Archbishops have not condemned the
liturgical use of incense or reservation of the
Sacrament for the communion of the sick as things
evil in themselves ; on the contrary, they commend
both usages in the following words : —
We are far from saying that incense in itself is an
unsuitable or undesirable accompaniment to Divine
worship. The injunction for its use by Divine authority
in the Jewish Church would alone forbid such a conclu-
sion.^
Similarly as to the question of reservation. The
Primate, after admitting that the practice had the
full sanction of the Primitive Church, says : —
This shows that such a practice was quite consistent
with the Christian faith, and there was nothing in it that
was wrong in itself. In addition to this the Canon of
Nicaea is quoted which requires that care should be
taken that the dying shall not be deprived of the Com-
munion before death. And it may justly be said that
this puts an emphasis on the importance of a practice
which facilitates the communion of the sick.^
The Primate indeed thinks that there were, and
are, ' other modes by which the canon could be
observed,' which of course is true in general, but
does not invalidate his Grace's admission that the
' The Archbishops on the Liturgical Use of Incense, p. 13.
^ The Primate on Keservation, Times report, May 2.
556 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
practice itself is primitive and in harmony with the
Christian faith. Are we then to resign ourselves to
the melancholy belief that the Church of England
is so tied and bound by a Procrustean system of
Eubrics and Canons and Acts of Uniformity — some
centuries old — that when her dying children cry for
the Bread of Life her clergy dare not give it them with-
out going through a series of formalities which are
in no way necessary to the validity of the Sacrament,
but which, if strictly enforced, may drive the parish
priest to the alternative of profaning the Sacrament,
or refusing it to a hungry soul for whom Christ
died ? That is an alternative which the clergy are
often obliged to face under the law laid down by the
Archbishops. Before he consents to administer the
Communion at all to the sick person the parish
priest must have * timely notice,' ' signif5dng also
how many there are to communicate with him
(which shall be three, or two at the least).' The
priest must next ascertain whether there is *a
convenient place in the sick man's house, with all
things necessary so prepared, that the curate may
reverently minister.' Having observed all these
preliminaries, *he shall celebrate the Holy Com-
munion ' according to the prescribed form. Obviously
this rubric does not contemplate a case of emergency
at all. It supposes leisure, a decent home, an
invalid with relatives or servants who, having
provided the proper number of communicants, and
the ' convenient place with all things necessary ' for
a reverent celebration, then sends ' timely notice to
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 557
the curate.' The rubric does sanction the absence
of assistant communicants in the case of a contagious
epidemic, but apparently in no other case. Is it not
plain that this does not apply at all to modern life
and large towns ? I have more than once been
called upon to administer the Holy Communion
when there was no time to provide any fit person to
communicate with the sick man, and I was thus
reduced to the alternative of allowing the man to
die without the Sacrament for which he longed,
or inviting a relative or neighbour (whom I knew to
be unfit) to profane the Sacrament and injure his
own soul by an unworthy communion. In such an
emergency I have never hesitated to dispense with
the rubrical communicants. Perish the rubric !
sooner than that Christ's Sacrament of love should
either be denied to any of His flock who desire it,
or profaned by being forced on those who do not
desire it, or are unworthy to receive it. Like the
Sabbath, which our Lord observed better than His
censors, while seeming to break it, the rubric was
made for man, not man for the rubric. And I refuse
to believe that the Church of which I am an un-
worthy minister is so bound by old rubrical directions,
intended for other circumstances, that neither the
clergy, nor even her chief pastors, are at liberty to
go beyond any of those directions in the minutest
details. The right of administering the Sacrament
to the sick is inherent in the Christian priesthood,
and it would require a very explicit prohibition indeed
to convince me that the Church of England ever
.558 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
intended to deprive its clergy of that right. There
were rubrical directions in pre-Eeformation Service
Books ; but the bishop of the diocese always
possessed, and sometimes exercised, the power to
modify those directions as occasion required. There
is no evidence to show that our episcopate has ever
surrendered or been deprived of that power since
the .Keformation. It is necessary to insist on this
because if once we admit that things which are in
themselves good and edifying, and Scriptural and
primitive, are forbidden in our Church by reason of
some phrase in an old canon, or rubric, or Act of
Parliament, that is an admission that the Church
of England is no longer a living organism, but a
petrified institution, which has lost the power of
adapting herself to fresh needs as they arise.
The Archbishops advise those who are dissatisfied
with that state of things to strive for a change in the
law. That is, in fact, though probably not in their
Graces' intention, a recommendation to agitate in
favour of disestablishment, for in no other way is
there any reasonable hope of getting the law altered.
But what is needed is not a change in the law, but a
recognition on the part of our bishops that they have
ceitain powers which the law did not give them,
and which no law can take away. And this, indeed,
the Archbishops recognise when they apply their
minds to the interpretation of the rubrics in the
light of reason and common sense pure and simple.
* But there are no doubt cases,' says the Primate, ' in
which the sick person is fully conscious, and is able
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 559
to follow a short service not exceeding a few minutes,
and to make an act of faith, and yet is not really fit
for more. In dealing with such cases the minister
may plead necessitas non habet leges . . . and shorten
the service ... by using what is essential to having
any communion at all — i.e. the Prayer of Consecra-
tion and the words of administration.' '
I believe, and shall presently endeavour to show,
that the communion of the sick by the reserved
Sacrament is perfectly legal. Now the opponents of
the usage must at least admit that it is arguable ;
and the Archbishops have in fact admitted this both
by inviting argument upon it and by arguing it out
in their * Opinions.' But the legality of what they
recommend is not arguable. It is a distinct violation
of the rubric, which draws the line explicitly at what
is to be omitted and what retained. And the Arch-
bishops allow the illegality of their recommendation
by pleading necessitas non habet leges. Now I ask
in all humility and with all filial deference, where is
the reason or equity of forbidding a practice which
is confessedly ' quite consistent- with the Christian
faith,' is sanctioned by the unanimous voice of
Christian antiquity, meets an undoubted need, and is
not demonstrably illegal, while sanctioning -a prac-
tice which is admittedly illegal ? They condemn
* Is there not a slip here ? The words of administration are not
* eseential.' The communion is quite valid without them, and to a
railful of deaf persons they would be as unreal as the Sacrament
itself to a ' half-conscious communicant.' The Primate does not seem
to be aware that what he calls ' a charm ' was forbidden in Pre-
R'eformation canons, e.g. iElfric's Can. 3. (Wilkins, i. 251.) '
560 THE EEFOKMATION SETTLEMENT
reservation on the ground of illegality alone, and
then propose to put in its place what themselves allov^
to be a greater illegality. Is not this a concession,
however unconsciously, to popular clamour rather
than to the letter of a rubric or the spirit of law?
I am all for Jiecessitas non habet leges, but I do not
understand their Graces' application of the aphorism.
It is a comfort, however, in the midst of much that
is uncomfortable, that the two Primates claim for
the Church a living power not only to interpret, but
to adapt, within reasonable limits, rubrics and canons
where these come in conflict with modern needs.
And our bishops have always, as a rule, adopted this
view of rubrical obligation, as one or two examples
out of many will show. The following rubric pre-
cedes the service for adult baptism : —
When any such persons, as are of riper years, are to be
baptised, timely notice shall be given to the bishop, or whom
he shall appoint for that purpose, a week before at the
least, by the parents, or some other discreet persons ; that
so due care may be taken for their examination, whether
they be sufficiently instructed in the principles of the
Christian religion ; and that they may be exhorted to
prepare themselves with prayers and fasting for the
receiving of this Holy Sacrament.
I have baptised several adults and witnessed the
baptism of others, but never once have I known this
rubric obeyed, and I doubt if any bishop or priest in
England has knowledge of a single case. Yet the
rubric is perfectly plain and unambiguous. Will it
be said that it applies to a state of things which has
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 5G1
passed away ? that there are sundry parishes now in
England more populous than some dioceses in the
seventeenth century, and that the required ' timely
notice to the bishop ' would in some cases be im-
practicable ? I admit the plea, but it applies with
much greater force to the requirements of the rubric
for private communion.
Again. In all the editions of the Prayer Book,
from the first to the present, the officiating minister
is ordered by the rubric to ' dip ' the child ' in the
water discreetly and warily,' unless the godparents
* certify that the child is weak,' in which case 'it
shall suffice to pour water upon it.' Yet, says
Waterland, —
Churchmen have sprinkled in Baptism now a hundred
years, or it may be more, without ever inquiring whether
the child be weak, and the rubric in that case is obso-
lete : does it follow from thence that sprinkling without
necessity is according to the sense and judgment of the
Church of England ? The like may be said of the clerk's
placing bread and wine on the Communion table, and
perhaps of reading the Communion Service in the desk ;
all practised by public allowance, and yet nowhere
warranted by the public acts or voice of the Church.^
Then there is the deliberate omission of the
Athanasian Creed, of the daily service of the Church,
of the observance of saints' days, of the Office for
the Visitation of the Sick, &c. Now if illegality is
* Works, vol. X. p. 188. The rule in Elizabeth's reign was to dip.
See a letter from Bishop Horn to Bullinger, Zurich Lett. Second
Series, vol. i. p. 356,
O O
562 THE EEFOEMATTON SETTLEMENT
the crying sin which needs suppressing, is it not a
greater offence to violate openly and deliberately a
law, which prescribes the discharge of important
duties and obligations towards the laity, than to carry
out, in an emergency, the spirit of the law by trans-
gression (if it be a transgression) of its letter ? Is it
not more venial to administer the Holy Communion
even irregularly to a sick parishioner now and then
than to withhold it from all parishioners for weeks,
and in some parishes for months, together? The
more one looks at it the plainer it appears, that to
give the communion to the sick by means of reserva-
tion is a trivial offence, if an offence at all, as com-
pared with the flagrant violations of rubrics which
are week by week perpetrated without rebuke by
multitudes of our clergy, and sometimes even by
certain of our bishops. It will never do to insist on
the letter of a doubtful law against an unpopular
party while condoning on the other hand the breach
of an undoubted law on the plea that necessitas non
habet leges. To enforce the law rigidly against
usages which are admitted to be not only innocent
but Scriptural, and edifying in addition, and to relax
it in favour of clergy who refuse to their people the
privileges which the Church provides for them,
would be an injustice which I am sure our revered
Primates would not sanction.
2. It must be frankly admitted, however, that
some of our clergy, though I believe only a few, have
given just cause of offence, partly through well-
intentioned indiscretion, and partly (I fear) through
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 563
real though unconscious disloyalty to the Church
of England. I have in the previous editions of this
book ventured to deprecate the introduction, espe-
cially without episcopal permission, of ceremonies
and devotions which are fairly outside the frontier
of the Ornaments Rubric ; and, still more, cere-
monies which may have a local history and signi-
ficance that make them edifying in the place of
their birth, but meaningless, or even ridiculous,
elsewhere. An amusing instance came to my know-
ledge not long ago. A gentleman on his holiday
chanced to make his Sunday communion in a church
where he observed a strange ceremony. After the
Consecration Prayer the celebrant went to the
credence table and finished the rest of the service
there. The visitor's curiosity impelled him to go
into the vestry after service and ask for an explana-
tion. He was told that it was * a beautiful piece of
symbolism ' ; but what the symbolism meant he
could not learn. He did learn, however, that the
ceremony was practised in a certain church in
Strasburg, and finding himself in that town not long
afterwards he called on the cure and received the
following explanation. During the siege of Strasburg
in the Franco-German war a cannon ball came
through the window while the cure was saying
Mass, and nearly took off his head. He immediately
moved to the credence table and finished the rest of
the service there. And to keep alive the memory of
his providential escape he repeated the ceremony on
each recurring anniversary of it. For that priest
o o 2
664 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
and parish, therefore, it was truly a beautiful piece of
symbolism. But transplanted to England, it became
what the Preface to our Prayer Book calls a ' dark
and dumb ceremony.' There has been far too much
of this fancy ritual.
I fear also that the accusation of * Romanising,'
made against some of our clergy cannot be refuted.
There are clergy who hold and privately inculcate
the Eoman doctrines of the immaculate conception
of the Blessed Virgin ; ^ of Purgatory ; of the Papal
claims as defined by the Vatican Council : doctrines
which are repudiated not only by the Church of
England, but by the whole Eastern Church. I have
observed also in some quarters a slavish and senseless
imitation of Roman worship for no other reason
apparently than that it is Roman. There is some
sense, for example, in a Roman priest saying Mass
inaudibly. If there are any hearers, he says it in a
tongue unknown to them, and they may be more
profitably engaged in their own private devotions
than in listening to sounds which convey no
meaning to their ears. But the Anglican priest
is under a solemn obligation to consecrate the
Eucharist in English and in the hearing of the con-
gregation, and if he says any part of the service
secretly he is not only acting disloyally ; he is per-
petrating a piece of folly in addition, being without
the excuse which the Roman priest may plead.
Another illegitimate development is the imitation
of the Roman Office of Benediction. It is, I grant,
' For the full import of that doctrine see ante, p. 504.
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 565
an attractive Office, possibly helpful to devotion,
and certainly popular in the Koman Communion.
But for an Anglican there are fatal objections to it.
By no possibility can it be brought within the area
of devotions permissible to an Anglican clergyman in
public worship, even if were harmless and desirable
in itself. It cannot in any sense be called a Catholic
devotion. It was unknown to the Primitive Church.
It is unknown to the Eastern Church, and is a
modern development even in the Roman. It is
therefore, apart from its intrinsic character, one of
those devotions which a national Church may adopt
or reject. Our Church certainly has not adopted it,
and none of her clergy can do so without a breach
of duty. This would be true if the adoption of
Benediction by our Church were in itself desir-
able. But is it ? The essence of the devotion is
the adoration of and benediction by the reserved
Sacrament apart from communion. The Article is
right which says that ' the Sacrament of the Lord's
Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved ' foi
that purpose. It was reserved for the communion
of the unavoidably absent, and for no other purpose,
and to divert so great a Sacrament from its primary
and only declared intention is surely a perilous thing.
It was instituted in order to be the nutriment of our
spiritual nature and to act as the nexus between
our regenerate humanity and the sinless Humanity
of our Incarnate Lord, placing us thus en rapport
with His sustaining Life and atoning Sacrifice.
Doubtless adoration is due to Him in the Sacrament,
566 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
as all our great divines teach, and even the Judicial
Committee allow. But all this is quite different
from reservation of the Sacrament for the mere
purpose of adoration. Even in the Church of Eome
the Office of Benediction and solitary Masses are
allowed rather than dogmatically enjoined. Indeed
the Council of Trent expressed its disapproval of
Masses without communicants.
3. Those who feel aggrieved by the Lambeth
Opinions ought therefore in fairness to remember
that there was an urgent cause for intervention on
the part of our ecclesiastical authorities. The pity
is that these did not condemn what is truly censur-
able and unlawful instead of usages which are
confessedly primitive, edifying, * consistent with the
Christian faith,' and co-extensive if not coeval with
Christendom. It would indeed be lamentable if any
rite or ceremony of which all this can truly be said
were placed under ban of the Church of England.
It would, moreover, be a direct contradiction of the
general principle affirmed by herself in her defence
of the use of the sign of the cross in Baptism,
namely, that the abuse of a thing in itself good is
no sufficient reason for abolishing its right use ; and
that she had not departed from any of the Churches
of Christendom except in things in which they had
departed from the undivided Church of Catholic
antiquity. Now this is, I submit, an objection to
the Lambeth ' Hearing ' which vitiates the whole
proceedings. When the Archbishops announced
their intention to invite opposing parties to plead
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 567
before them it was generally understood that they
would eschew the region of dry law, and decide as
Fathers in God what was expedient in particular
cases and localities, not what was legally and
inflexibly binding everywhere. The Primates en-
couraged this inference by repudiating all legal
pretensions and disclaiming the character of a court
for what purported to be only a ' Hearing.' In con-
sequence of this explanation there was no disposition
to scan closely the credentials of the eminent and
Most Reverend prelates who offered their aid in an
extra-judicial capacity in the interest of peace. The
surprise was great when the Ai'chiepiscopal decision
on the use of Incense was found to rest exclusively
on a legal basis of the narrowest and most technical
character. The decision on Eeservation is of the
same kind. The Fathers in God have thus disap-
peared, and in their place we have amateurs in law
delivering legal judgments. This is serious. For,
whatever confidence we may have in the orthodoxy
and judicial impartiality of our present Primates,
we have no sort of security for the qualifications of
their successors. So that the doctrine and cere-
monial of our Church may be gradually undermined
and eventually overthrown before the Church has
fully realised the peril. Or there may be a periodical
revision and reversal of ceremonial and ritual law at
each recurring change in the occupancy of the
Primatial Sees. Two Primates of Bishop Prince
Lee's opinions would fifty years ago have pronounced
the use of the surplice in the pulpit illegal. So
568 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
illegal indeed did that able and scholarly prelate
consider the surplice in preaching that he gave
public notice that he would not license any curate
in his diocese who did not give a formal promise
never to use the surplice in the pulpit. Surely it is
incredible that our Church should have endowed our
two Archbishops with such plenary powers. And
yet that is the view which most of our bishops
appear to have taken. On the strictest legal ground
the Lambeth decisions affected those clergy only
who pleaded before the Archbishops. Yet many of
our bishops hastened to enforce the decision on
Incense as if it were an infallible Pontifical decree
binding the whole Church. The high character
and conspicuous piety of our Archbishops naturally
tend to conceal the seeds of future mischief which
lurk in their recent proceedings. But the mistakes
of good and able men are far more dangerous than
those of other men, and therefore need more careful
watching.
The Archbishops sat at Lambeth under the
sa,nction of the following provision in the chapter
in the Preface to the Prayer Book ' Concerning the
Service of the Church ' : —
And forasmuch as nothing can be so plainly set forth
but doubts may arise in the use and practice of the same ;
to appease all such diversity (if any arise) and for the
resolution of all doubts concerning the manner how
to understand, do, and execute, the things ordained in
this Book ; the parties that so doubt, or diversly take
any thing, shall alway resort to the Bishop of the diocese,
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 569
who by his discretion shall take order for the quieting
and appeasing of the same ; so that the same order be
not contrary to any thing contained in this Book. And if
the Bishop of the diocese be in doubt, then he may send
for the resolution thereof to the Archbishop.
Any one who reads this passage with its context
can hardly help seeing that it refers to Matins and
Evensong alone, and to no other service in the Book
of Common Prayer. It now forms part of the
Preface to the Prayer Book. It formed the sole
Preface to the Prayer Book of 1549. Matins and
Evensong in that book superseded the Breviary,
which had practically ceased to provide congrega-
tional worship ; not merely because it was in the
Latin tongue, but also because a special training
was needed to follow its puzzling directions. It was
no exaggeration to say that ' the number and
hardness of the rules called the Fie, and the
manifold changes of the service, was the cause that
to turn the book only was so hard and intricate a
matter, that many times there was more business to
find out what should be read than to read it when it
was found out.' To remedy all these inconveniences
the Order for Morning and Evening Prayer was
compiled out of the old services.
So that here you have an Order for Prayer, and for the
reading of the Holy Scripture, much agreeable to the mind
and purpose of the old Fathers, and a great deal more
profitable and commodious than that which of late was
used.
570 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
In a later paragraph the meaning of the 1549
Preface is placed beyond a doubt : —
And if any would judge this way more painful because
that all things must be read upon the Book, whereas
before, by the reason of so often repetition, they could say
many things by heart : if those men will weigh their
labour, with the profit in knowledge which daily they
shall obtain by reading upon the Book, they will not
refuse the pain in consideration of the great profit that
shall ensue thereof.
This sentence obviously and unmistakably refers
to daily Matins and Evensong exclusively. It was
omitted in the revision of 1661-2, doubtless because
the reference to the old Breviary Offices no longer
appealed to living memories.
It appears evident therefore that the Archbishops
have made a serious mistake in their interpretation
of the passage under the authority of which they
invited an appeal on matters liturgical — i.e. per-
taining to the celebration of the Eucharist. Of such
matters the passage on which they relied takes no
cognisance and sanctions no appeal to bishop or
archbishop. The Lambeth * Hearing ' thus derives
no authority at all from the Prayer Book, and the
decisions based upon it are, as the Primate himself
has declared, no more than the private * opinions *
of two Most Eeverend and distinguished prelates.
4. Nor is this all. It is plain that the passage
under consideration, besides referring to Matins and
Evensong exclusively, does not contemplate the
meddling or intervention of an outsider at all. It
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 571
evidently has in view doubts among the clergy them-
selves ; not necessarily between differing clergy, but
arising in the minds of individual clergy ' in the use
and practice of ' the new Book. Such doubts were
to be referred to the diocesan, and if he failed to
solve them he was to refer the matter to the arch-
bishop. Some doubts were very likely to arise
immediately after the supplanting of the old ' Uses '
by the Book of Common Prayer. There is but little
occasion for them now within the meaning of the
chapter ' Concerning the Service of the Church.'
That chapter might cover doubts as to the use of the
black gown ; or as to the choice of Proper Lessons
on concurrence of a Sunday and Saints' days ; or
concerning the omission of the Litany at Matins.
But the liturgical use of incense and the reservation
of the Sacrament for the sick are altogether beyond
its purview. That my interpretation of the import
of the reference to the bishop and archbishop for
the resolution of doubts is correct is proved conclu-
sively by the translation of the passage in Elizabeth's
Latin Book : —
Quia vero nulla ordinatio tarn perspicue proponi
potest de quo non oriantur interdum disputationes in
quotidiano usu, constitutum est, ut quoties dubia occurrunt
aut incidunt inter ministros, deferatur res ad Episcopum
Dioeceseos, cujus judicio in hac re acquiescent, modo nihil
constituat quod palam cum hac ordinatione pugnet.
The words ' inter ministros ' clearly limit the
reference to doubts among the clergy themselves ;
and that is undoubtedly the meaning of the English
572 THE REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
version, although it is not quite so plainly expressed.
It is not a matter of controversy that is contemplated,
but scruples on the part of some of the clergy. A
clergyman v^ho has any doubts is bidden to consult
his bishop, and if the bishop doubts he must resort
to the archbishop. The question of legality does not
come in at all. So far from it, bishops are v^arned
av^ay from confusing fatherly counsel or direction
v^ith a legal decision. This confusion, I respectfully
submit, pervades the Lambeth decisions. The Arch-
bishops speak of them variously as ' decisions,' * judg-
ments,' 'opinions.' Decisions or judgments they
certainly are not in any legal sense. They lack all
the attributes of judicial prcnouncements. They
issue from no legal tribunal, for the '' Hearing ' v^as
emphatically declared by the Primate to be ' not a
court.' The Archbishops appeared in a private
capacity without any of the formalities or insignia
of official responsibility ; and one of them v^as out-
side his own province, and had not even a colourable
locus standi. Nevertheless, such was the desire for
emancipation from the dry bones of legal controversy,
and so deep the respect for the office and character of
the Primates, that if, avoiding legal discussion, they
had claimed to control and regulate the use of incense
and reservation, almost any direction which they
might have given would have been obeyed, however
painful the sacrifice might have been, and however
anomalous and ultra vires the whole proceeding might
have appeared from a legal point of view.
5. Such was the mental attitude, and such were
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 573
the hopes with which the whole High Church party,
and I beheve the Eituahst party also, awaited the
deliverances of the Archbishops on the questions
submitted to them. When their Graces, abdicating
for the nonce their spiritual office and their fatherly
relations to the clergy, delivered quasi-judicial
decisions in the character of legal experts, it is not
too much to say that the feeling of those who had
hoped so much was one of profound dismay. The
Archbishops said in effect : —
There is nothing wrong in these things. They are
consistent with the Christian faith and with the practice
of undivided Christendom long before the rise of ' Popery.'
But there is that cast-iron Act of Uniformity, with its
'none other or otherwise,' and we are powerless; our
hands are tied ; and our sole business, when any of the
clergy resort to us to resolve their doubts, is to remand
them to the Act of Unformity and bid them govern them-
selves accordingly. Nor is this Erastianism, for the Church,
in 1661-2, adopted the Uniformity Act of 1559 as an inte-
gral part of the Prayer Book. If therefore you wish to
practise the things which are called in question you must
get the law altered. We have no power to give you permis-
sion.
But -the compilers of Edward's First Prayer Book,
and presumably the revisers of 1661, did not intend
to send clergy who had doubts 'in the use and
practice ' of some detail in a rubric to the bishop or
archbishop for a legal decision, but for instruction
and direction. Doubts about the use and practice
of a rite or ceremony are a confession of ignorance,
implying a desire to learn from those w^ho have
574 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
authority to teach, and is altogether inapplicable to
persons who have no doubts. And the bishop is to
' take order ' outside the sphere of law, with which
he is forbidden to meddle. It is most important to
bear this in mind, and in the interest of the Church
to resist a precedent which might enable some future
Primates, of a different stamp from those who now
adorn the Primatial Sees, to revolutionise the doc-
trine and ritual of our Church. The Archbishop of
Canterbury indeed claims 'for the Sovereign with
the advice of the Primate ' the right to change ad
libitum the Church's mode of worship.* There is,
I believe, no doubt that the power, granted to the
Sovereign by the Act of 1559, perished with Eliza-
beth. But that the claim should now be made in
all good faith and with the best intention proves the
need of narrowly scrutinising the initial stages of
unintended usurpations. The Papacy itself grew as
much out of well-meaning errors as out of deliberate
calculation or intentional fraud. I repeat that we
are bound to have in view, not the present Primates,
but their successors in perpetuity ; and we place the
doctrine and worship of the Church of England in
jeopardy if we surrender them to the manipulation
of all future Primates sitting in an informal tribunal
unknown alike to the Church and Constitution.
This objection would be equally valid if the Lambeth
decisions were sound expositions of the law. I now
proceed in all humility to show cause why they
cannot be so regarded.
* The Archbishops on the TAtnrgical Use of Incense dx. p. 12.
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS ^ 575
The key of the position in this controversy is the
right interpretation of the Ornaments Eubric, which
is itself a repetition, in a shghtly altered form, of a
clause in the Act of Uniformity of 1559. As that
clause is known to have been insisted on by Elizabeth
as a condition of her assent to the revised Prayer
Book of 1552,^ her opinions and her political environ-
ment at the time are of capital importance in the
legal construction of the rubric. Mr. Errington,
one of Mr. Dibdin's coadjutors at the Lambeth
' Hearing,' said : —
Elizabeth had to fight a long diplomatic battle against
Spain, and in that battle she used every weapon she could
dispose of. Her chapel did not at all represent her own
religious convictions, but merely her political necessities.^
Mr. Errington offers no evidence, and I believe
him to be altogether in error. But he errs in some
good company. Professor Maitland of Cambridge
has expressed a similar opinion, and also without
^ ' First, I said, as her Highness talked with me once or twice on
that point, and signified that there was one proviso in the Act of the
Uniformity of Common Prayer, that by law is granted unto her,
that if there be any contempt or irreverence used in the ceremonies
or rites of the Church by the misusing of the orders appointed in the
Book, the Queen's Majesty may, by the advice of her Commissioners,
or Metropolitan, ordain and publish such further ceremonies, or rites,
as may be most for the reverence of Christ's holy mysteries and
sacraments, and but for which law her Highness would not have
agreed to divers orders of the Book. And by virtue of which law
she published further order in her Injunctions both for the Com-
munion bread, and for the placing of the Tables within the quire.'
(Archbishop Parker to Sir William Cecil. Correspondence of Arch-
bisJwp Parker, p. 375.) - TJie Case against Incense, p. 124.
676 THE REFORMATION SETTLEMENT
offering any other evidence than the Queen's pro-
hibition of the elevation of the Host in her presence
on Christmas Day after her accession.^ That is no
evidence at all. Elevation is of comparatively
modern date in the Church of Eome, and has never
been practised in the Eastern Church. It was
forbidden in Edward's ' Order of the Communion '
(A.D. 1548) and in the Prayer Book of 1549, which
was an expansion of it. Elizabeth was at that
time set on restoring the first Liturgy of Edward,
and she naturally forbade the only ceremony of the
Mass which was forbidden in both the abridged and
full edition of that Liturgy. An accusation of
religious hypocrisy is a serious thing, and ought not
to be made against any one without clear proof, and
least of all against a Sovereign to whom, with all
her faults, the Church of England owes so much.
Her prohibition of elevation is not the only indica-
tion we have of * her own religious convictions.'
As to theology, she accepted the doctrine of the
Keal Presence rn the fullest sense, apart from the
gross superstitions that clustered round the dogma
of transubstantiation. Barring the elevation of the
Host, she had no objection to the ceremonies of the
Mass as it was ritually rendered in Edward's Eirst
Liturgy. A few references to authorities will make
this plain. ColHer writes : —
She was of opinion the service of God in her brother's
reign wanted something of beauty and magnificence to
recommend it. In short, her aim was to settle both
' Article in Fortnightly Review of December 1899, p. 935.
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS. 577
ceremonies and doctrine upon a temper that there might
be a due latitude for general approbation and belief.
This she apprehended the best expedient to unite the
natioQ and preserve a great part of her subjects from going
off to the Church of Eome.^
In a letter to Peter Martyr dated April 1, 1560,
Bishop Sandys writes : —
The Queen's Majesty considered it not contrary to the
Word of God, nay, rather for the advantage of the Church,
that the image of Christ crucified, together with Mary and
John, should be placed, as heretofore, in some conspicuous
part of the church, where they might more easily be
seen by all the people.^
The Simancas documents throw^ much light both
on the religious and political opinions of Elizabeth.
To find out the exact truth on this point Philip of
Spain sent a very astute agent to London, Don
Alvaro de la Cuadra, v^ith secret instructions to get
at the Queen's real opinions and intentions. Before
this the Queen had refused Philip's proposal of
marriage, and she gave her reasons confidentially to
his emissary, v^ho duly reported them to his master.
Those which weighed with her most were, first, that
' being a heretic (siendo heretica),' in his opinion,
' she could not marry him • ' secondly, ' that she was
resolved to restore religion precisely as it had been left
by her father ; that although she would not assume
the title of Head of the Church, she would not con-
sent that money should be withdrawn for Eome, and
that she would have the Act of Parliament sworn to
' Hist. vi. 300. - Zurich Lett. a.d. 1558-9, p. 74.
P P
678 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
(on the Supremacy) by all who held public employ-
ments, although they might be ecclesiastics, and by
the graduates of the universities. To this all the
Members of Parhament, except the Earl of Shrews-
bury, Lord Montague, the Bishops, and the Abbot of
Westminster, agreed.' ^
This is important for more reasons than one. It
shows, in the first place, that Elizabeth indulged in
no diplomatic fencing with Philip about ' her own
religious convictions ' and political intentions. She
made a clean breast of them to his agent with a
frankness which left nothing to be desired, and
' Documents from Simancas relating to Elizabeth (1558-68),
edited by Spencer Hall, p. 55.
Sanders, in his De Schismate Anglicano, says that ' when all was
done,' the Act of Supremacy ' was carried in the House of Lords but
by three voices.' This is denounced by Fuller as ' a loud untruth ;
for the Act, having easily passed the House of Commons, found none
of the temporal nobility in the House of Lords to oppose it save
only the Earl of Shrewsbury and Anthony Brown, Viscount
Mountacute. ... As for the Bishops, there were but fourteen, and
the Abbot of Westminster, alive ; of whom, four being absent
(whether voluntarily or out of sickness, uncertain), the rest could not
make any considerable opposition.' Hist. ii. 443.
According to D'Ewes (p. 28) the dissentients in the division on
the third reading of the Act of Uniformity were the Archbishop
of York, the Marquis of Winchester, the Earl of Shrewsbury, the
Viscount Montague ; the Bishops of London, Ely, Worcester, Llandatf ,
Coventry, Exeter, and Chester ; the Lords Morley, Stafford, Dudley,
Wharton, Rich, and North. Camden says that the Act of Supre-
macy ' was vigorously opposed in the House of Lords by nine
bishops (who were all that of the Marian bishops then living were
present), viz. Heath (Archbishop of York) ; Brown (London) ; Pate
(Worcester) ; Anthony (Llandaff) ; Bryan (Coventry) ; Turbeville
(Exeter) ; Scot (Chester) ; Oglethorpe (Carlisle) ; and by the Abbot
of Westminster (Feckenham).' Camden's Elizabeth, p. 372.
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 579
which must have destroyed all illusions at the
Spanish Court. It is important to note, in the
second place, that De la Cuadra's despatch was
written just after the Supremacy Act had secured
the assent of Parliament and while the Act of Uni-
formity was still in debate. "We have thus Eliza-
beth's own authentic interpretation of the Ornaments
clause in that Act. Its purpose was * to restore
religion precisely as it had been left by her father '
— that is, minus the Headship and the elevation of
the Host. It is plain from this that Elizabeth con-
templated no breach with the ceremonial of 1547,
' and was resolved ' to engraft it on the English
Prayer Book. Here then is the meaning of the
' other Order ' which she had in view, the ' further
ceremonies ' which she obtained Parliamentary au-
thority to prescribe as occasion might arise, with
a view to invest *the service of God' with the
' beauty and magnificence ' which it ' wanted in her
brother's reign ' — not in law, but in practice, under
the regime of rapacious courtiers. Sandys therefore
knew what he was saying when he interpreted the
Act of 1559 as legalising the ceremonial of 'the
first and second year of King Edward.' But with
her usual astuteness the Queen made her brother
instead of her father the figurehead of her reli-
gious restoration. Henry VIII. had left unpleasant
memories as a religious reformer. His truculent
Six Articles, popularly nicknamed * The Whip with
Six Thongs,' were an odious exhibition of persecu-
tion. Edward VI., on the other hand, was the darlinof
p p 2
580 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
of the Puritans, whom they canonised in popular
parlance as 'the young Josiah.' Elizabeth there-
fore fixed on the ceremonial of Edward's second
regnal year as the goal of her reformation. In point
of fact this was precisely what she told, in other
phrase, to the Spanish confidential envoy. The
Eucharistic ceremonial of Edward's second year was
the same as that of Henry VIII. 's last year, with the
absence of the elevation. Edward's First Book, as
I shall prove later, was not a legal document in
Edward's second regnal year. The authorised
Eucharistic Service was the old Sarum Use sup-
plemented by the English * Order of the Com-
munion,' which forbade elevation, but 'without
the varying of any other rite or ceremony in the
Mass.'
This might suffice to show the baselessness of
Professor Maitland's suggestion and Mr. Erring-
ton's positive allegation. But it may be well to
accumulate proof, as the controversy in which we
are engaged revolves round Elizabeth and her Eubric
and Act of Uniformity.
Count de Eeria, the accredited Spanish Ambas-
sador, finding himself practically superseded by the
confidential envoy, begged to be recalled. Philip
agreed, and accredited De la Cuadra in De Eeria's
place. By command of Philip the retiring ambas-
sador * obtained a long and private conference ' with
the Queen ' at his audience of leave, . . . and coun-
selled her on the part of Phifip to leave religion as it
was settled at the death of Mary.' A vain advice.
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 581
for her mind was plainly made up. The standard
of worship in Edward's second year, not in Mary's
last, was her deliberate choice. Here is De Feria's
report of what she said to him privately : —
She said that she desired to establish in her kingdom
the Augustine Confession of Faith, or another but similar
form [il otracosacomo aquella]. That she, in fact, differed
but little from us, because she believed Christ [Dios] was
present in the Sacrifice of the Eucharist : and that in the
Mass she disapproved of only two or three parts [cosas].
That for herself, she thought to be saved quite as much as
the Bishop of Eome.-*^
On Easter Tuesday, 1565— more than six years
after her accession, and at the period of the Advertise-
ments by means of which she was supposed by the
now discredited Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council to be meditating the ' clean sweeping away '
of all high ceremonial — Elizabeth furnished by
anticipation the following practical refutation of
that theory : —
On Easter Tuesday [1565] Elizabeth herself in stiff
black velvet and with all solemnity and devotion publicly
washed the feet of a poor woman ; and the washing over,
with slow deliberation, she had a large crucifix brought to
her, which she piously kissed.^
The concessions which in matters of ceremonial
she made to the Puritans were obtained from her
' Doc. from Simancas, p. 59. Cf . Froude, Hist. vii. 82, and Strype,
Ann. vol. i. pt. i. 3. Strype gives a wrong date here.
"^ Froude, Hist. iii. 140 (quoting from De Silva in the Simancas
MS.).
582 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
.reluctantly by the importunities of rapacious cour-
tiers and politicians who were more intent on
ecclesiastical loot than on religious reforms. This
she acknowledged in a conversation with De Feria : —
Elizabeth now [October 3, 1559] ordered the cross and
candles to be replaced in her chapel as before. This
caused some disagreement with her Council. She said
they had caused her to adopt measures which met with
general disapprobation, and that the order to burn all
statues and pictures had created great discontent, especially
in Wales and the North. ^
In the autumn of 15G4 De Silva in a private
interview * assured her the adherents of the old
faith were more dutifully inclined towards her than
those of the new. This she admitted, and gave
orders to mitigate the confinement of the Bishop of
London [Bonner], and assured De Silva she did
not read libros Alemanes [the works of the Ee-
formers], but St. Jerome and St. Augustine.' She
also told him that * she had been compelled to
temporise at the beginning of her reign upon many
points repugnant to her, but that God only knew
her heart, and that she thought of restoring the
crucifixes to the churches.' ^
So much for the confident assertion in ' The Case
against Incense,' that 'her chapel did not at all
represent her religious convictions, but merely her
political necessities.' Words could not express a
more direct contradiction of the facts as furnished
* Doc. from Simancas, p. 64.
2 Ibid. p. 92.
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 583
by her own testimony. ' Her own religious con-
victions ' prompted her to make the ceremonial of
her own chapel a standard and model for all other
churches, and she confessed, after some years'
experience, that she had made a mistake in re-
luctantly allowing her advisers to persuade her that
* her pohtical necessities * pointed in an opposite
direction. Nor are we entirely dependent on the
Queen's own testimony. The Puritan Neale says of
the divines employed in reviewing the Prayer Book
in 1558-9 :—
Their instructions were to strike out all offensive
passages against the Pope, and to make people easy about
the belief of the corporal Presence of Christ in the Sacra-
ment ; but not a word in favour of the stricter Protestants.
Her Majesty was afraid of reforming too far ; she was
desirous to retain images in churches, crucifixes and
crosses, vocal and instrumental music, with all the old
Popish garments. It is not therefore to be wondered at
that in reviewing the Liturgy of King Edward no altera-
tions were made in favour of those who now began to be
called Puritans, from their attempting a purer form of
worship and discipline than had yet been established.
The Queen was more concerned for the Papists, and
therefore, in the Litany, this passage : From the tyranny of
the Bishop of Borne, and all his detestable enormities, good
Lord deliver us, was omitted. The Eubric that declared
that by kneeling at the Sacrament no adoration was in-
tended to any corporal presence of Christ wa>sexi^unged. . . .
In short, the service performed in the Queen's chapel,
and in sundry cathedrals, was so splendid and showy that
foreigners could not distinguish it from the Eoman, except
that it was performed in the English tongue. By this
584 THE EEFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
method the Popish laity were deceived into conformity,
and came regularly to church for nine or ten years, till
the Pope, being out of all hopes, forbid them, by excom-
municating the Queen and laying the whole kingdom
under an interdict.^
Mr. Dibdin and his learned coadjutors might
have escaped their blunder about Elizabeth's 're-
ligious convictions ' if they had consulted even so
accessible an authority as the cynical Hume, who
writes, under the date of 1568 : —
But the Princess herself, so far from being willing to
despoil religion of the few ornaments and ceremonies
which remained to it, was rather inclined to bring the
public worship nearer the Eomish ritual ; and she thought
that the Preformation had already gone too far in shaking
off those forms and observances which, without distracting
men of more refined apprehensions, tend in a very innocent
manner to allure and amuse the vulgar. She took care
to have a law for uniformity strictly enacted, wherein she
was empowered by the Parliament to add any new
ceremonies which she thought proper.^
At Elizabeth's coronation ' the Bishop sang . . .
the Mass from a missal which had been carried in
procession before the Queen.' She kissed the pax.^
She received the Eucharist, but only in one kind.
' Hist, of the Puritans, vol. i. pp. 129, 144.
2 Hist. vol. V. p. 12.
•■' The pax was a piece of wood or metal, having a representation
of our Lord's Passion or some other sacred emblem painted or
embossed upon it, with a handle at the back. When the ancient
kiss of peace fell into desuetude this was kissed as a substitute during
Mass by the priest at the words Pax vobiscum, and afterwards
handed round to be kissed by the congregation.
THE LAMBETH DECISIONS 585
And when the champion delivered the traditional
challenge it was addressed to all who should contest
her title as * Queen of England, France, Ireland,
Defender of the true ancient and Catholic faith,
most worthy Empress from the Orcades isles to the
mountains of Pyrenee.' ^
In a letter to Cardinal Loraine on November 3,
1559, M. de Noailles, the French Ambassador,
writes : —
Yesterday this Queen celebrated the festival of All
Saints [a mistake in the date, unless he meant All Souls]
in her great chapel at Westminster with much solemnity.
She had the wax tapers lighted during the services on the
high altar, which she has made them replace against the
wall where it formerly stood, with the cross and crucifix
of silver thereon.^
Froude sums up the situation pretty fairly when
he says : —
She would have been well contented with a tolerant
orthodoxy, which would have left to Catholics their
ritual, deprived of its extravagances, and to the more
moderate of their opponents would have allowed scope
to feel their way towards a larger creed. ^
And speaking of the Puritans he says : —
At the heart of the matter it was they who were giving
importance to what is of no importance. . . . They would
have erected with all their hearts a despotism as hard,
as remorseless, as blighting, as the Eomanist.
^ Miss Strickland's Lives of the Queens of England, iv. 151.
2 Ibid. 153. 3 Hist. v. 23, 80.
586 THE REFOEMATION SETTLEMENT
Farther on he describes the reign of lawlessness,
desolation, and irreverence which the fanaticism
of Puritanism produced, more than justifying the
misgivings and fears of Elizabeth in its initial
stages.^ Those who wish to see further evidence of
Elizabeth's views on Eucharistic doctrine and ritual
may turn back to chapter x. and to pp. 104, 435,
for confirmation of Froude's gloomy description of
the policy which won the day and ended in the
suppression of the Prayer Book and the overthrow
of the Church and monarchy.
This may suffice then as to Elizabeth's ' religious
convictions.' Let us now glance at the political situa-
tion which she had to face when she came to the
throne. It 
